NIU vs. W. Mich scuffle

[tnolan]

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=14584641&sf19004741=1

Well..... this was 5 minutes into the game.
End result was double flagrant on NIU #5, ejected.
NIU #0, #12, #32 ejected for leaving bench.
NIU #34 issued a technical, and WMU #42 issued a technical.

Watched it a lot...
The trail signals a defensive tip here on the steal but I'm pretty positive red #23 controls the ball in the front court after the tip and goes into the backcourt.
Obviously a "bang-bang" situation and there's a lot going on, but a case where Center needs to step up and help. Easy to say from watching the video and not actually reffing the game, but a close call here could have avoided a scrum and 4 ejections. (But I'm not excusing the hard foul, nor the players leaving their bench)

Discuss.....

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

[Nevadaref]

Why is the Lead moving away from the endline while calling this foul? It is also comical how he is standing there signaling while all hell is breaking loose behind him! The C actually responds to the melee first.

[Rich]

The call or no call at the division line had absolutely nothing to do with the hard foul and the subsequent scuffle.

I'm not sure what the lead is doing, though. The C saved his bacon.

[tnolan]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Why is the Lead moving away from the endline while calling this foul? It is also comical how he is standing there signaling while all hell is breaking loose behind him! The C actually responds to the melee first.

lol. was thinking the same!

Originally Posted by Rich

The call or no call at the division line had absolutely nothing to do with the hard foul and the subsequent scuffle.

I'm not sure what the lead is doing, though. The C saved his bacon.

but do you think a backcourt violation shoulda been called?
if you get the 1st, you avoid the 2nd. doesn't excuse the actions tho.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by tnolan

lol. was thinking the same!



but do you think a backcourt violation shoulda been called?
if you get the 1st, you avoid the 2nd. doesn't excuse the actions tho.

Only because one followed the other. Not because of the magic of preventive officiating.

Haven't really watched the first half of the play that closely. If there's doubt, they're going to let it play out -- after all, the ball went the other way.

[tnolan]

Originally Posted by Rich

Only because one followed the other. Not because of the magic of preventive officiating.

Haven't really watched the first half that closely. If there's doubt, they're going to let it play out -- after all, the ball went the other way.

yeah, i'm not saying they call the violation to prevent it. i'm saying they call the violation because it's a violation.
BUT, i agree...it's super close and did end up going for white. honestly, i miss this call too.

[ReffingAce]

Travel before the dunk attempt... not that that would have saved the hard foul from behind... haha! Agree that we could have had an over and back prior to the mugging. Rough way to start the 1st 5min. I wonder what the Monmouth bench would have been choreographing at this point?