mandatory pivot after a fake

[ivar vasara]

I've been putting together a 'test your knowledge' rules quiz and I
wrote the following question :
"Offensive player receives the disc while running at high speed, fakes
a throw then delivers a quick pass before his third step after
catching. Can travel legitimately be called ?" I had assumed that
yes, it was a travel as per II.M , but then in XV.C there is a list of
exemptions to mandatory pivots and as far as I can tell, throwing a
fake doesn't mandate a pivot as long as the third ground contact has
not been made. Am I reading that correctly ?

[gimp]

The real question is what made you think otherwise? The only rule
mandating a pivot after a fake I can think of is when you pick up the
disc after a turnover in the end zone. In that case, if you fake where
you pick it up you're stuck there.

[colinm...@gmail.com]

Especially running at high speed, this seems like an extremely
difficult maneuver to release a pass before the third ground contact.
Even if the player is able to release it in time, to first throw a
fake without changing direction or increasing speed seems really,
really tough. At best, such a fake would just not be very convincing.

I think the general language you saw in II.M probably refers to X.A.1
(endzone possession). XV.C.2 should supersede it. So yes, it is
possible that this maneuver would not be a travel. Likelihood of a
successful attempt seems fairly low (especially for me, at least).

On Sep 21, 6:39 pm, ivar vasara <i...@ultipedia.org> wrote:

[Gonzo]

I think you can, but your example doesn't have enough information.
The fake and throw would have to occur without a common ground
contact.

[Gonzo]

I don't think II.M is a general rule that is superseded by XV.C.2.
Why would fake attempts be included in the definition of pivot if it
only applied for one extremely specific situation (X.A.1)?

I do agree that this is highly unlikely to occur at high speeds, but I
could see someone trying to attempt this during a medium paced give
and go.

[colinm...@gmail.com]

At first glance, II.M covers not only X.A.1, but also to XVI.J.2.a).
Two extremely specific situations.

What do you think the effect of II.M is with respect to fakes and
throws, such that XV.C.2 need not supersede it? Is this discussion
taking us down the path of needing to define "establish a pivot"?

> > successful attempt seems fairly low (especially for me, at least)- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[Gonzo]

I'm not sure what XVI.J.2.a has to do with the act of faking and
creating a pivot, since it assumes you already have a pivot.

Based on II.M, I'm very confident that the definition of "establish a
pivot" is "creating and maintaining continuous contact with a single
spot on the field immediately after gaining possession and then either
stopping or attempting a fake or throw."

XV.C specifically applies when you don't set a pivot. From the
definition above, attempting a fake creates a pivot and therefore XV.C
no longer applies.

[Jon Bauman]

You could, by the same logic, say that throwing creates a pivot, but with the exception declared in XV.C, it's clearly legal to throw with no ground contact at all, so that is clearly absurd. It doesn't matter if the fake part of II.M applies in very few situations, it's still a perfectly reasonable place to put that language.

I agree with Colin that XV.C overrides II.M in, and that if someone were able to pull off such a maneuver without otherwise traveling, it would be legal. Perhaps the language could be clearer in XV.C, but I see no reason why it should be illegal.

[Gonzo]

According to the definition I gave, throwing would only create a pivot
if you had ground contact, because the definition includes "creating
and maintaining continuous contact with a single spot on the field."

This would be true for fakes as well. If you faked with no ground
contact, then threw before establishing a ground contact, you would
never have a pivot. If you faked with no ground contact, then
established a ground contact, the first ground contact would be your
pivot.

If this is not how II.M is meant to be interpreted, I would suggest
removing the references to throwing and faking. If it's not
necessarily true that attempting a fake or throw creates a pivot, why
keep that in the definition?

[Jon Bauman]

I think that attempting a fake or throw creates a pivot in general, just that XV.C is an exception.

[Gonzo]

So would it be legal to catch a disc while running, attempt a fake on
your first ground contact, then come to a stop as soon as you can
(which may require losing your first ground contact)? Essentially
following XV.B, but attempting a fake before the stop.

[Jon Bauman]

Yes, I see no reason why this should be illegal, so long as you come to a stop as soon as possible don't speed up or change directions. Do you think it should be illegal for some reason?

[colinm...@gmail.com]

On Sep 24, 6:47 pm, Gonzo <scott.gonza...@gmail.com> wrote:
> According to the definition I gave, throwing would only create a pivot
> if you had ground contact, because the definition includes "creating
> and maintaining continuous contact with a single spot on the field."

I think the critical aspect of the "three points of ground contact"
rule is that you needn't slow down. Would you agree that your reading
at least would limit give-and-gos well beyond how most rules-
understanding players currently see them?

Especially on the give-and-go, the "throwing attempt" is very quick
and very likely to occur with continuous ground contact. Thus, by
your reading, a pivot has been established, XV.C doesn't apply and the
thrower has traveled because he should have been attempting to slow
down during those previous steps. In effect, it would limit XV.C's
application to greatest-style throws or throws involving some
impossibly perfect timing to avoid contact or a very long, slow
throwing attempt such that continuous contact wouldn't occur.

Would it resolve your issue of XV.C read something like "...the
thrower may without being subject to pivot rules throw a pass before
the third point of ground contact..."? Just another possibility along
with adjusting the definition.

[Gonzo]

I was thinking the establishment of the pivot wouldn't occur until the
end of the attempt, which makes sense with faking, but doesn't seem to
make much sense with throwing (since the establishment of the pivot
wouldn't occur until immediately after you release the disc).

A slight modification to the wording of XV.C to specifically exclude
pivot rules might help, but if as Jon says faking doesn't matter even
for XV.B then that would need to be modified as well. This would in
essence make II.M be superseded by other rules 99% of the time. I
think it would make the most sense to just remove the faking/throwing
wording from II.M, since the only time it applies is for X.A.1 and
that already has clear, specific wording.

[ivar vasara]

Wow. I read gimp's initial reply and thought that was the end of the
discussion.. I don't feel silly for asking anymore now that there's 14
messages in this thread.

[gimp]

My question never got answered.
It was pretty straightforward. I didn't feel like reading the whole
rulebook to see what you might have been looking at to make you think
that.
Assuming you can actually do what you suggested - what rule appears to
prevent it to you?

[ultimatep...@gmail.com]

if you catch while taking
a slow jump (say a "bound")
towards the disc (one ground
contact after catch) then continue
to move in that direction,
(not speeding up), fake,
take a second SLOW bound,
continue to move forward,
then throw before
your third bound lands,
is that still allowed?
XV.C.

actually, you can drop out
that fake, because it isn't
relevant to the base question,
which is - does the speed
of the entire three ground
contacts matter?

technically, of course.

[colinm...@gmail.com]

This slow bounding sounds an awful lot like slowing down and speeding
up, rather than merely not attempting to slow down. Similarly,
someone traveling by bunny-hopping or completing consecutive standing
broadjumps is almost certainly slowing down and speeding up.

[Jon Bauman]

"No bunny-hopping" will assuredly appear in 11.1.

[ivar vasara]

The reason I thought a fake mandated an immediate pivot was based on
incorrectly extrapolating the phrase from X.A.I "(to fake a throw or
pause after gaining possession commits the player to put the disc into
play at that spot);" to extend to all aspects of the game instead of
just bringing the disc to the goal line after a turn over. mea culpa.
That said, on my local league forum (the VUL) I posted a link to the
quiz this question appears in ( http://www.ultipedia.org/wiki/UPA_Rules_Quiz
) and someone else made the same mistake I did...

[gimp]

Thanks, now I understand.

On Nov 6, 5:40 pm, ivar vasara <i...@ultipedia.org> wrote:
> The reason I thought a fake mandated an immediate pivot was based on
> incorrectly extrapolating the phrase from X.A.I "(to fake a throw or
> pause after gaining possession commits the player to put the disc into
> play at that spot);" to extend to all aspects of the game instead of
> just bringing the disc to the goal line after a turn over. mea culpa.
> That said, on my local league forum (the VUL) I posted a link to the

> quiz this question appears in (http://www.ultipedia.org/wiki/UPA_Rules_Quiz

[ivar vasara]

Actually, now that I'm poring over the rules to justify the answers to
the quiz questions, I had to do another double take - II.M states
"Pivot: The particular part of the body in continuous contact with a
single spot on the field during a thrower's possession once the
thrower has come to a stop or has attempted a throw or fake." The key
phrase being ''... or has attempted a throw or fake...'' implying that
once a fake is thrown a pivot has been established.. That phrase is in
the definition section, so it can be assumed to be the general case,
its just that XV.C makes an explicit exception if there haven't been
three points of contact. Anyway...