Quote:
Originally Posted by dahoopref
The T does step-down (from the the first C to the second C on the ACC logo) but not enough. If anything, because he stepped down, his look became even more closed because the players moved in the same direction. I agree a step-down could help but he would need to go down to the FT line extended to see the play and with the speed of the play and the direction of the players, that just wasn't going to happen. The T could stay connected all he wants on this play, but from his position adjustment, he ended up looking through the UNC player's back when the contact happened.
The L, on the drive, widens out to get an open look the drive, which IMO, has the best look for a decision.
The term "man-up" is a term my conference supervisor used recently at our conference tournament. His philosophy is that the crew is a "team" with individual responsibilities. In a semi-final game, the crew should realize that each member is there because they can handle their business in their PCA and they can trust each other to make the right decision. If a high impact play happens in your PCA, you will have to "man-up" and explain your decision.
On this play, I can live with the L making a call or no call because I trust him. As long as he was in proper position to do so, which IMO, he was.
|
Ok, I can live with that. I concur with you sir an official should be able to handle their business in their PCA. The only opposition would be if the play developed outside his PCA but finished in his PCA. I would trust the official whom area it came from take it and live with the call or no call.
My opposition was to your position that if an evaluator came in and question the play the L better "man up" and explain it. It should, IMO come from the person who the play originated from.