
Fri Mar 03, 2017, 11:57am
|
 |
Get away from me, Steve.
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 15,794
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by VaTerp
I don't understand your confusion. Its a play that is in the C's primary. I'm suggesting the L have more of a patient whistle.
I think the C has a great unobstructed look at the time of contact and again just think the L should have been more patient in going into the C's primary for this. JMO.
I can live with that. I just have a different opinion.
Yes, if the C saw the L indicate 2 as they were about to administer the FT, he should have blown the whistle for a reset to get it right. Obviously, he didnt see it.
Yes, the calling official indicated very clearly that it was a non-shooting foul. So the new L just must have lost track. It happens.
But agree completely on the L's whistle. I don't mind him coming in later but he doesnt appear to give the C a chance to ref the play right in his lap.
Obviously, if the official blows their whistle and wipes off the shot then that's what we have.
I'm just offering my opinion from the couch that I don't agree with it. I think its the Cs play all the way and would prefer that the L be more patient. And on this type of play, I'd prefer to award 2 shots to the offense. Again, JMO.
|
Except they're being held to a much more strict standard in college men's -- no benefit of the doubt going to the shooter certainly.
Lead is king.
|