Iona @ Monmonth Plays

JRutledge

Play #1:

Play #2: Another Travel play

Peace

WhistlesAndStripes

First play -- Marginal in my opinion. I felt like as the player in red turned to go up court, he just didn't realize the player in white was that close and it kind of caught him by surprise. Did he extend his arms a little bit, yeah, but not enough to warrant a foul in my opinion. Player in white seemed to take a little exception at first, but even he seemed to move on immediately. I think this could have been left alone.

Second play -- Travel.

frezer11

I'm also good with passing on the first, but if you do have a foul, isn't that a T? Dead ball contact technical.

JRutledge

frezer11 wrote
I'm also good with passing on the first, but if you do have a foul, isn't that a T? Dead ball contact technical.

It should be and that is why I showed the play.

These teams also had some history and some kind of altercation in the previous game. I think that might have been why this was ultimately called, but not sure how this is just a regular foul?

Peace

BillyMac

Whistles & Stripes wrote
Travel.

Agree. Right foot is pivot foot and it returns to the floor before the ball is released. I actually thought that this was easy to call in real time (and this situation is the hardest for me to call in a game). I'm not blaming anyone, because I've certainly missed these in my high school games, but why did the officials miss it? What were they looking for here, a foul? Maybe, even with three guys, it was difficult to get back in transition and get set to make the correct call? Lead and center looked to be in a pretty good positions. Maybe the center got straightlined by the ball handler, and maybe the lead got straightlined by the defender? White #10 seems to be upset about the no travel call (but he had the worst seat in the house to see this properly).

What's the Pontius Pilate hand signal given by the lead after the play?

BryanV21

Play 1: Unless, like the announcer referred to, I know of a history and believe letting this go could lead to some type of retaliation and issue... I'm passing.

Play 2: At this angle, and in real speed, I couldn't pick up the pivot foot once the ball was gathered. It looked bad, though, but without knowing I'm passing on this. On replay, though, I saw the right foot was the pivot at the time the ball was gathered from the dribble, then picked up and put back down on the floor before the shot... travel.

Raymond

1) I could definitely see myself calling a T on this. I don't tolerate unnecessary crap in my games. Put a whistle on that and it let's everyone else know that bull---- won't be happening.

2) No commentary needed.

Camron Rust

BadNewsRef wrote
1) I could definitely see myself calling a T on this. I don't tolerate unnecessary crap in my games. Put a whistle on that and it let's everyone else know that bull---- won't be happening.

2) No commentary needed.

1. Agree. Collision was OK, the extra chuck after the collision is not.

2. Yep, Travel. Done.

johnny d

JRutledge wrote
.

I think that might have been why this was ultimately called, but not sure how this is just a regular foul?

Peace

If a regular foul is what they went with then it is clearly a mistake. If you are going to call a foul on this play it has to be a contact dead ball technical.

BillyMac

Camron Rust wrote
Agree. Collision was OK, the extra chuck after the collision is not.

JRutledge's question was, "Does this need to be addressed?".

In my high school game, yes, it does need to be addressed.

At the bare minimum, Red #23 needs to be told that his action was definitely not appreciated and that he would be on a very short least the rest of the game.

Most likely, it would be a dead ball contact technical foul. Just two shots, and the ball, not flagrant.

BryanV21

johnny d wrote
If a regular foul is what they went with then it is clearly a mistake. If you are going to call a foul on this play it has to be a contact dead ball technical.

Not saying I think this is right, just asking for the hell of it...

Would you say that you believe the ball, after the made basket, was at the disposal of Monmouth when the foul occurred? Meaning Monmouth had team control, therefore it was a live ball when the foul was made.

JRutledge

BillyMac wrote
JRutledge's question was, "Does this need to be addressed?".

In my high school game, yes, it does need to be addressed.

I would address this at any level. Either call a foul or stop everything. Actually at the college level this might be a bigger problem. High School kids tend to potentially have more control over them. At a JUCO game for example, this would start a fight. There is a reason plays are at the JUCO level and not the other levels. Usually it is because they are not so bright. At the D1 level, I think players know that everything is on TV and those officials are not to be messed with as a general rule.

Peace

BillyMac

johnny d wrote
If you are going to call a foul on this play it has to be a contact dead ball technical.

Maybe the center (who made the foul call), thought that the ball had already been inbounded, or was at the disposal (thus live), he appears to be looking at the two players involved, not the endline.

BillyMac

JRutledge wrote
I would address this at any level.

Anytime I post on a college thread, I like to add, "in my high school game", because I know that the penalties may be different in a college game. I know more about rocket science than I do about technical foul "levels" in the college game. I love high school basketball. I love high school basketball officiating. Other than taking in a few Connecticut mens, or womens, basketball games a season, and filling out my brackets every tournament, I'm just not a big college basketball fan. With my busy high school assignment schedule, and my day job (fans are always telling me, "Don't quit your day job."), I really don't have the time in the winter to follow college basketball, or pay attention to college basketball rules. But I do like to take advantage of breaking down video, even when it's a video of a college game.

JRutledge

BillyMac wrote
Anytime I post on a college thread, I like to add, "in my high school game", because I know that the penalties may be different in a college game. I know more about rocket science than I do about technical foul "levels" in the college game.

The only difference in this area from high school to college is the application of what you do with the ball after you shoot the FTs and on some level who shoots the FTs. All dead ball contact fouls are Ts by definition (at least in NCAA Men).

Peace

frezer11

JRutledge wrote
The only difference in this area from high school to college is the application of what you do with the ball after you shoot the FTs and on some level who shoots the FTs. All dead ball contact fouls are Ts by definition (at least in NCAA Men).

Peace

In general, yes, but the play we're referencing, administration would actually be identical.

JetMetFan

JRutledge wrote
I would address this at any level. Either call a foul or stop everything. Actually at the college level this might be a bigger problem. High School kids tend to potentially have more control over them. At a JUCO game for example, this would start a fight. There is a reason plays are at the JUCO level and not the other levels. Usually it is because they are not so bright. At the D1 level, I think players know that everything is on TV and those officials are not to be messed with as a general rule.

Peace

Jeff -

Do you know if they went to the monitor on this? That might have been my first move as opposed to just calling a foul right off the bat. Regardless of what happened on a review at least the players would know they're being watched.

frezer11

JetMetFan wrote
Jeff -

Do you know if they went to the monitor on this? That might have been my first move as opposed to just calling a foul right off the bat. Regardless of what happened on a review at least the players would know they're being watched.

I don't believe you're able to go to the monitor unless you call the initial foul? I'll have to look at that, but I think the foul has to be called initially, then the review could potentially change the severity of that call.

EDIT: Actually, I suppose they could claim that they are checking to see if a flagrant 2 occurred, which is the only foul that could be called after replay without an initial call on the play, but I think that's a stretch here.

JRutledge

JetMetFan wrote
Jeff -

Do you know if they went to the monitor on this? That might have been my first move as opposed to just calling a foul right off the bat. Regardless of what happened on a review at least the players would know they're being watched.

I will have to look again, but I do not believe this was a monitor review.

Peace

johnny d

BillyMac wrote
Maybe the center (who made the foul call), thought that the ball had already been inbounded, or was at the disposal (thus live), he appears to be looking at the two players involved, not the endline.

It wasn't even close to being at the disposal, the ball was bouncing on the floor when the foul occurred. Even if the calling official didn't know whether the ball was live or not, his partners need to bring him the information.