Ohio State v Iowa Couple play requests

[deecee]

Double foul with about 1 minute left in the 2nd half. I thought it should have been double T's.

Final 6 seconds Ohio player runs over screen no call.

[blindzebra]

Good chance that the Iowa player got hit in the head on the drive to the basket as well.

[JRutledge]

Here is the play in total.



Peace

[Camron Rust]

Great no-call on the screen. It was legally set and did what it was designed to do. The screened player doesn't have to avoid contact on a blind screen like that.

And on the final shot...he may have touched the hair, but that was a great blocked shot. No call from me on that.

[JRutledge]

Play 2:


Play 3:


Peace

[Adam]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Play 3:


Peace

I thought it should have been an F1 upgrade.

But I'm biased.

[deecee]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Great no-call on the screen. It was legally set and did what it was designed to do. The screened player doesn't have to avoid contact on a blind screen like that.

Where do you get that from?

--------

Rut how about the double foul at about 1 minute left in the second half during a dead ball that they didn't call double T's?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by deecee

Where do you get that from?

--------

Rut how about the double foul at about 1 minute left in the second half during a dead ball that they didn't call double T's?

The only foul would be on the Ohio player. I have no foul on a player that set the screen as he was there and gave time and distance IMO.

Peace

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by deecee

Where do you get that from?

Rule 4-40-7.

A player who is screened within his/her visual field is expected to avoid contact by going around the screener. In cases of screens outside the visual field, the opponent may make inadvertent contact with the screener and if the opponent is running rapidly, the contact may be severe. Such a case is to be ruled as incidental contact provided the opponent stops or attempts to stop on contact and moves around the screen, and provided the screener is not displaced if he/she has the ball.

[dahoopref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Great no-call on the screen. It was legally set and did what it was designed to do. The screened player doesn't have to avoid contact on a blind screen like that.

And on the final shot...he may have touched the hair, but that was a great blocked shot. No call from me on that.

From the 2015-16 NCAAM Rulebook pg. 54

Rule 4, Section 34 Art. 2. In establishing and maintaining legal screening tactics, the screener shall:
a. Stay within his vertical plane with a stance no wider than shoulder
width apart and shall not lean into the path of an opponent or extend
hips into that path, even though the feet are stationary.

It's clear that the Iowa player stood wider than his shoulder width apart but such a tough play to call being in transition with all the factors the T has to officiate; I can understand the no-call.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by dahoopref

From the 2015-16 NCAAM Rulebook pg. 54


It's clear that the Iowa player stood wider than his shoulder width apart but such a tough play to call being in transition with all the factors the T has to officiate; I can understand the no-call.

I don't care how wide the legs are if the contact is square in the torso -- I only care about the width of the legs when the screened player hits or goes over the outstretched leg.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Great no-call on the screen. It was legally set and did what it was designed to do. The screened player doesn't have to avoid contact on a blind screen like that.

And on the final shot...he may have touched the hair, but that was a great blocked shot. No call from me on that.

Huge Hawkeye fan, you're right on both counts.

I was watching at a restaurant while having a late lunch with my wife. I couldn't figure out why they stopped play right before this since I was watching the TV across the restaurant.

Can anyone tell me what happened on the play before this?