MAAC Title Game: Several Plays (Video)

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Nothing was missed near the basket. That is always such a weak argument.

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk

Exactly and slow motion clearly shows he was struck in the face. The angle we have from the video was rather far away and in a different direction. But he clearly was hit in the face and that is something I will call when seen as much as possible.

Peace

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by ballgame99

..
2. I do not think that is a good get. May have been a foul, but the T is right there and there are rebounders battling the L needs to be looking at.
...

Iona had just gotten an offensive rebound and kicked it out. There were no competitive matchups going on near the basket.

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk

[pfan1981]

First and foremost, THANK YOU JRut for clipping these plays. You provide more professional development than most associations single handily.

Play1: Defender was still coming towards the shooter and his arms were not in his vertical plane. Shooting foul.

Play2: As a high school official, I shouldn't even be looking at a three point shooter, but I assume the college mechanic is different. Contact to the head, foul.

Play3: Maybe yelling to the crowd behind the hoop? You cannot dispute he intentionally or inadvertently yelled in the opponents face. Technical foul. Players have to measure their actions in the heat of the moment. Similar to the player slamming the ball down. Players are expected to maintain a reasonable amount of composure while playing.

Play4: This is a foul before the shooting motion began.

Play5: In high school with no RA, this is a charge. Similar to the one that was called on Lebron years ago in the finals (He lead with his knee into an airborne defender who was entitled to his verticality). In college, do you have to be on the ground to take a charge in the RA?

Interested for any feedback on my responses.

pfan

[Multiple Sports]

Only situations where I have an opinion.....

3 - NO WAY in a conference championship is what King Rice is saying going to be a technical foul....he is hollering a DJ. When DJ has had enough he will address it and warn Coach Rice. There a bunch of you that want to call a T here and maybe that works in your hs game but in this game, call a T and you will be waiting all summer for your MAAC contract for next year.

5 - This is a philosophy in the northeast part of the country ( don't shoot the messenger). That is the correct call. It is a one possession game. Put MU at the line, go to the other end, contact put Iona at the line...In the last two minutes each team gets to the line 10 times. Team A makes their free throws, Team B misses their free throws, game ends and nobody has any complaints.

Let the bashing begin....

[BlueDevilRef]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

RA does not apply when the defender jumps. So it is judged as it would without the RA coming a factor.



Peace

Thanks for the info on that. I wasn't aware.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Multiple Sports

Only situations where I have an opinion.....

3 - NO WAY in a conference championship is what King Rice is saying going to be a technical foul....he is hollering a DJ. When DJ has had enough he will address it and warn Coach Rice. There a bunch of you that want to call a T here and maybe that works in your hs game but in this game, call a T and you will be waiting all summer for your MAAC contract for next year.

5 - This is a philosophy in the northeast part of the country ( don't shoot the messenger). That is the correct call. It is a one possession game. Put MU at the line, go to the other end, contact put Iona at the line...In the last two minutes each team gets to the line 10 times. Team A makes their free throws, Team B misses their free throws, game ends and nobody has any complaints.

Let the bashing begin....

Fine, I'll start. Both of your comments are complete BS.
They represent the mentality of a coach and fans. They articulate why there are problems with sporting behavior and what people deem "make-up calls."

For you to imply on #3 that an official should not properly penalize a misbehaving coach out of fear of losing his schedule next season lacks ethics and is downright cowardly. You might as well make the same argument about penalizing the player in this situation. I recall a few seasons ago when the NCAA directives stated to penalize any profanity from a coach with a technical foul. The reason that coaches get away with so much poor behavior is because of people who think like you.

On #5 that "philosophy" sucks. Why should a quality game be turned into a FT shooting contest down the stretch? The NCAA has advocated for years to call the game the same way in the first minute as in the last minute. If this wasn't a foul in minute 1, then it is not a foul in the last two minutes. This "northeast philosophy" equates to nothing more than screwing the defensive team. And don't tell me that it's fine because it's the same for both teams. What if one team attacks the rim and the other shoots lots of 3s while the opponent plays a zone defense? Why can't officials call the game per the rules instead of attempting to adhere to all of these stupid philosophies?

[JRutledge]

Well thanks but jpgc99 said it before I did. I did not realize that until afterwards. But that is why we are here to help use understand all other levels on some level so we can combat objections when needed.

Peace

[dahoopref]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Iona had just gotten an offensive rebound and kicked it out. There were no competitive matchups going on near the basket.

Respectfully disagree. Red #25 and White #33 are near the block. While they might not be engaged, it only takes a split second for any type of illegal contact to occur; while the ball is in the air is when players position themselves for the rebound. The practice of L taking his eyes off these two players during a shot is not an action I would subscribe to IMO.

[Multiple Sports]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Fine, I'll start. Both of your comments are complete BS.
They represent the mentality of a coach and fans. They articulate why there are problems with sporting behavior and what people deem "make-up calls."

For you to imply on #3 that an official should not properly penalize a misbehaving coach out of fear of losing his schedule next season lacks ethics and is downright cowardly. You might as well make the same argument about penalizing the player in this situation. I recall a few seasons ago when the NCAA directives stated to penalize any profanity from a coach with a technical foul. The reason that coaches get away with so much poor behavior is because of people who think like you.

On #5 that "philosophy" sucks. Why should a quality game be turned into a FT shooting contest down the stretch? The NCAA has advocated for years to call the game the same way in the first minute as in the last minute. If this wasn't a foul in minute 1, then it is not a foul in the last two minutes. This "northeast philosophy" equates to nothing more than screwing the defensive team. And don't tell me that it's fine because it's the same for both teams. What if one team attacks the rim and the other shoots lots of 3s while the opponent plays a zone defense? Why can't officials call the game per the rules instead of attempting to adhere to all of these stupid philosophies?

NV-

With all due respect, a friend of mine who posts on here as well called me after he read my post and said he thought you would most likely be the first to respond ( I owe him dinner).

We will agree to disagree. As far as the tech, these are two bubble teams ( MU more so than Iona ). Those three are there for just that reason alone. they will let him vent, yes curse a bit. It is nothing cowardly or lacking ethics.
All three ( I've worked with one ) are excellent game managers.

As far as "the philosophy" that you don't like...it worked for Burr, Higgins and Cahill...they didn't do to poorly in their careers.....

[Multiple Sports]

Originally Posted by dahoopref

Respectfully disagree. Red #25 and White #33 are near the block. While they might not be engaged, it only takes a split second for any type of illegal contact to occur; while the ball is in the air is when players position themselves for the rebound. The practice of L taking his eyes off these two players during a shot is not an action I would subscribe to IMO.

DHR -

I respectfully disagree with you and agree with BNR ( no you aren't getting my CCAC games ). The matchup you talk of in the post is not "engaged" or "hot", yes there are two players there....Now one can argue if the play in itself is a whistle but I don't mind four eyes on that play. Lead can quickly recover to the post...or a lead as good as BNR !!!!

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Multiple Sports

DHR -

I respectfully disagree with you and agree with BNR ( no you aren't getting my CCAC games ). The matchup you talk of in the post is not "engaged" or "hot", yes there are two players there....Now one can argue if the play in itself is a whistle but I don't mind four eyes on that play. Lead can quickly recover to the post...or a lead as good as BNR !!!!

And I respectfully agree with your position.

Peace

[Multiple Sports]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

And I respectfully agree with your position.

Peace

Rut -

I will most likely be working with BNR in May at an EYBL event, at that time I will let you know if he is still that strong in the lead !!!!!

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Multiple Sports

DHR -

I respectfully disagree with you and agree with BNR ( no you aren't getting my CCAC games ). The matchup you talk of in the post is not "engaged" or "hot", yes there are two players there....Now one can argue if the play in itself is a whistle but I don't mind four eyes on that play. Lead can quickly recover to the post...or a lead as good as BNR !!!!

Why do I get the feeling that several posters in this thread know the calling official on this play and are backing their buddy.

I have never had anyone characterize a 3pt jumpshooter with a single defender as a two-official play.

What the heck is the Trail supposed to be watching, if not these two players? The Lead is telling us that he doesn't think that the Trail can officiate 1v1 basketball. Perhaps he wants his game check too.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Multiple Sports

Rut -

I will most likely be working with BNR in May at an EYBL event, at that time I will let you know if he is still that strong in the lead !!!!!

Please post the pictures on FB.

Peace

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Why do I get the feeling that several posters in this thread know the calling official on this play and are backing their buddy.

I have never had anyone characterize a 3pt jumpshooter with a single defender as a two-official play.

What the heck is the Trail supposed to be watching, if not these two players? The Lead is telling us that he doesn't think that the Trail can officiate 1v1 basketball. Perhaps he wants his game check too.

I have never met the official in question and if someone does not think this guy can officiate, he would not have been on the title game. Something tells me these guys know each other and something also tells me after seeing the video the Trail is thanking the Lead and probably bought him a beverage of some kind or will as a result.

It is one play, if that is all we have to talk about then we are doing just fine.

Peace