Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevadaref
Case #1: The Gonzaga player was not pivoting nor had he begun his habitual throwing motion. The foul is definitely prior to the start of a try. However, the circumstances and manner of this foul would warrant an intentional foul at the nfhs level as the foul is clearly done to prevent an easy score.
*The collection of movements after the dribble ended were in association with a "try for goal" ergo, continuous motion principles apply exclusively at the NF level. Yet, with regard to calling that an intentional foul would be s bit zealous, after all there was the colloquial "play on the ball" that occurred in conjunction.
Case #2: The Lead cannot see this hook (by Timme) and either of the outside officials should have picked it up. There was a similar play about a minute or so prior when Arkansas had the ball which also went uncalled. Additionally, I will point out that Timme was called for a PC due to a much less egregious hook during the first half. It was his first foul of the game.
|
*Well, now given that observation of there must have been apparent inconsistency in application. Interesting.
**my other reply inadvertently embedded with Nevada Refs post, sry format.