MAAC Title Game: Several Plays (Video)

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

#3. The body language sure looked like what would go along with taunting....I'm sure the official had it right.

I am convinced the official not only saw the body language, but heard him too. He did not hesitate one second to give out that T.

Peace

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I am convinced the official not only saw the body language, but heard him too. He did not hesitate one second to give out that T.

Peace

Agree.

[Nevadaref]

1. I don't have a whistle on this one. The offensive player is jumping into the defender. Of course, the defender isn't perfect either, but to penalize just the defense isn't fair.

2. I believe that there is a slight touch to the face. Strangely the shooter doesn't even react to it. As Lead, I'm letting the Trail make this decision. What is being missed near the basket, if the Lead is looking out there?

3. That's definitely taunting by the player and a partner should have whacked the coach for his tirade afterwards.

4. The foul was WAY before the player began going up. In fact, he is actually bending downward when fouled and then comes back up after the foul. The official got this correct.

5. The defender does a great job and nothing wrong. I have no whistle at all on this play.

[HokiePaul]

1) After watching the replay, the defender is still moving into the shooting when contact occurs, so I guess by rule the call is correct. That said, in real time, I would have passed on this as the contact appeared to be initiated by the offensive player.

2. Given that he was looking there (which seemed odd but I know college may be different), it's a good call as the player does take a shot to the face. Good mechanics also to communicate what happened.

3. Seems like the official was already on alert for something here -- probably not the first time in this game that player had done something to catch the officials attention. Good call. Assuming the coach isn't out of the floor making a scene, I'd tend do do what the officials here did and ignore him while the free throws are occurring. At least from the video it doesn't look like anything that can't be ignored from the coach.

4. The official called the foul on the initial contact, which was before the shot.

5. In real time, it didn't appear the defender did anything wrong. However, on replay, the defender's left hand goes into the body of the player and may have contacted the shooters arm as well. The offensive player also pushes off, but the official would have had a good angle to see the defender's left hand so I assume that was what was called.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

...

2. I believe that there is a slight touch to the face. Strangely the shooter doesn't even react to it. As Lead, I'm letting the Trail make this decision. What is being missed near the basket, if the Lead is looking out there?
...

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

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk

[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

[ballgame99]

1. Good call. Defender nowhere near vertical and coming forward.
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.
3. I know if a coach yelled across the court "that's bullshit, that's a terrible call" I wouldn't have much choice but to give an additional T.
4. Good call. Push foul came as he received the pass, caused a travel, and he was fouled again on his way up. From the initial angle I said count it, but from the low angle you can see the initial push.
5. PC. No-call at worst. You can't penalize that defender. I go PC on this because offensive player leads with an elbow and displaces the defender quite a bit. That would be an interesting discussion with the coach, especially with a minute left in the game, but it would be the right call.

[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

[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 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 !!!!

[Raymond]

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.

They were not at all engaged. The Iona player was moving away from the basket and defender. The lead was following the ball to see where it went and here was an immediate shot from a good three to four steps below the free throw line.

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....

[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