Re: [乳摸]NBA May Approve LeBron’s Crab-Dribble

[celestial318 (強尼)]

原文恕刪

http://tinyurl.com/cr9p8y

嗯就挑一些比較重點的來跟大家討論

Sham on Fri Mar 13, 2009 2:45 pm

If you catch the ball with no feet off the ground, there is no reason

whatsoever why you can't put both feet down. If you do this on the move, where

you catch the ball/pick up a dribble when running and both feet are off the

ground, you must be allowed to put them down again. If you then go up in a two

footed jump, you haven't taken a step. You've just put your feet down and then

jumped again. That should not be outlawed, and has not been since we've all

been alive. What they're doing is re-writing the rulebook's confusing verbiage

to reflect that. That is all.


首先，當你接球時已經是兩腳著地的狀態，這很明顯沒什麼爭議，兩隻腳都黏在場上。但

你若是在行進間雙腳離地的情況下接到球的話，除非你能抗拒地心引力，否則讓你雙腳能

夠重新再著地是很合理的。若此時你又在原地利用雙腳起跳，當你重新著地時實際上並沒

有移動任何一步，只是離地後又被地心引力拉了回來，並沒有違反任何規則。NBA當局可

能只是要將這方面的規則附以更精確的解釋而已。


When you catch the ball and land, it always looks like it's two steps. But is

it? Or is just landing? You've taken no more steps than if you caught the ball

and stopped dead. You've taken the same number of steps. You've just used it to

gain more distance than if you only put one foot down and jumped off that.


很多人會覺得當你在空中接到球然後重新又落地後，這時你已經移動了兩步，但事實並非

如此。你只是無法滯空於是重新落回地面，就跟你接到球後站在原地不動一樣，實際上你

一步都還沒移動。這只是可以用來增加移動距離的一種方式。


下面則是另一位針對前一位的比喻的一些補充:


TB#1 on Fri Mar 13, 2009 3:08 pm

If you catch the ball with no feet on the ground and land that isn't a problem.

If you jump again and both feet leave the ground, you best not still have the

ball in your hands when you land, or its a travel.


當你在空中接到球後重新落地並沒有任何問題，但若是又在原地起跳的話在重新落地前球

一定要離手，否則照樣是走步。


If you catch the ball with no feet on the ground and land one foot then the

other, you've established your pivot foot, which you can't lift without a

dribble.


當你在空中接到球並在落地的途中其中一隻腳比另外一隻先到達地面，那麼先落地的那隻

變成了你的軸心腳，在沒有運球的情況下是不能隨意移動的。


第一位的回應:


Sham on Fri Mar 13, 2009 3:17 pm

Of course. But this doesn't happen. If you go up with the ball, and come down

still holding it, that's a travel, but it's not like we see millions of

occurences of this.


是的，你說的沒錯那樣的情況下確實是一個走步的違例。但我們平時並不會見到這樣的走

步違例。


Pick up your dribble on the run, left right, jump to take a shot. That's the

way it works, the way it's been allowed since basically forever, and the way

it should be.


在運球的途中收球後可以兩腳各踩一步(也就是兩步)，之後你就必須離地並且將球處理掉

。自籃球這個運動被發明以來一直都是這樣。


The problem with that is discerning whether any feet are on the ground at the

exact moment that the dribble is picked up. If one is, then it becomes a travel

, and because it's so hard to tell, that's where missed calls come in. But that

will happen anyway - rewriting the rule to reflect what it actually is, is

sensible and overdue.


主要的問題是在於判斷收球的當下以及那時球員腳步的計算，因為目力有限，目前聯盟中

大多數的誤判以及爭議都因此而發生。更加詳細的解釋規則是明智的，並且是件很久以前

就應該要做的事。


Sham on Fri Mar 13, 2009 3:26 pm


The crab dribble was a travel, as is switching pivot feet. But if you catch it,

plant, and then jump to shoot, that shouldn't be a travel. You're lifting your

pivot foot, but if you don't put it down again with the ball in your hand, that

shouldn't matter.


小皇帝的螃蟹步很明顯的是一個走步違例，在運球的途中軸心腳已經變換過了。但若是你

空中接到球後著地，接著再拔起跳投，那並不是一個違例。雖然你提起了你的軸心腳，但

只要你在軸心腳再度著地前將球離手，那就沒有關係。


dougthonus on Fri Mar 13, 2009 2:10 pm

They already allow two steps, that wouldn't be changing the rules any.


他們本來就被允許可以踩兩步，這樣對於規則並沒有任何的更動。


==============================================================================


所以基本上規則方面應該是沒有更動

個人認為就如文中提到的收球時機的腳步判斷

才是最難處理的地方

至於軸心腳的變動也很常見

但感覺NBA不太管這個

總之就是希望NBA不要太誇張

一些該吹的違例還是得吹

原文中提到的一步兩步問題

我在想或許是有沒有考慮收球時那一步的差別

--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 61.229.108.60
推 hllwolfkhan:洩洩原PO的翔說~~
推 larson:所以只是重新釋憲而不是修憲囉? 那LBJ在高興什麼呀?
推 doodoohow:對LBJ這種怪物來說根本只是爆扣跟挑籃的差別而已(抖)
※ 編輯: celestial318    來自: 61.229.108.60        (03/14 18:57)
推 hate2004:推^^
推 rainingdayz:推
推 szuta:接到球後的兩步跟crab是不一樣的,應該不會影響crab的判決
推 iscpupu:LBJ是高興規則被明確規定 酸他的人比較高興吧 我想
→ szuta:我想LeBron也只是依照過去的判決,累積經驗來打球,錯不在他
→ szuta:關鍵時刻的問題判決,導致長期被酸,他也蠻衰的其實
推 keneo:怎麼有種"不是本來就這樣嗎？"的感覺...
推 kaede0711:其實就是明確化而已...避免誤判啊 沒有多少人願意看真相