Syracuse v. Gonzaga (video request)

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

If this play was missed who is going to get in trouble? The Lead, not the Center. The Center could not get an angle on this play. We have these situations happen to us all the time.

Peace

I think you mean Trail. Lead was (properly) near or at the endline 45 feet away and while he can get a good look at the clock (because there's usually nothing else going on in his area), he has a horrible look at the division line.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I think you mean Trail. Lead was (properly) near or at the endline 45 feet away and while he can get a good look at the clock (because there's usually nothing else going on in his area), he has a horrible look at the division line.

Yep. Plus my point was that the C provides better help to the T on this play if he steps towards the division line instead of away from it.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Yep. Plus my point was that the C provides better help to the T on this play if he steps towards the division line instead of away from it.

Agreed, as it turned out. But, if the pass was deeper into the FC, and there was some issue, then we'd be criticizing the C for hanging around the division line.

Plays in the area between the T and the L, on the T's third of the court during transition are difficult calls.

[crosscountry55]

One thing I've noticed in studying this play is that, in the old days of a visible backcourt count, we might not have had a violation for two reasons:

1. T can focus on ball location while counting in his head, vice having to frequently peek at the shot clock, which was a contributing factor to the IC in this case.

2. The count probably would have been slightly slower, which may have permitted more time to get the ball across.

I like the new mechanic of using the shot clock for temporal accuracy. 10 seconds should be 10 seconds, not 13 seconds. But.....this is a drawback. Given that, C and L have to be prepared to help in these situations, and Ts must be prepared to receive information and change to IW from time to time.

By the way, never thought about this before, but what happens when a new 10-second count begins within the same shot clock interval (e.g. what should have happened in this case)? Does the official make a note of the shot clock time when he begins the new count, or in this case does he start a visual count?

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

By the way, never thought about this before, but what happens when a new 10-second count begins within the same shot clock interval (e.g. what should have happened in this case)? Does the official make a note of the shot clock time when he begins the new count, or in this case does he start a visual count?

If everything works the way it should, one of the officials will get the new number in their head. Granted, they won't be able to communicate it but someone will/should know it. In all likelihood on a play similar to this one it would've been the C - assuming they had the no-call correct, of course. However, it's not out of the question that the L would have the new number since they really wouldn't have much to do other than watch two players who probably wouldn't be getting the ball.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Agreed, as it turned out. But, if the pass was deeper into the FC, and there was some issue, then we'd be criticizing the C for hanging around the division line.

Plays in the area between the T and the L, on the T's third of the court during transition are difficult calls.

If the pass was deeper into the frontcourt it's clear to everyone the ball gained FC status. The concern for me on this play is what's happening at the division line. The C had great positioning throughout the play until the moment the pass is released, then he stepped down away from the play, instead of up towards it.

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

By the way, never thought about this before, but what happens when a new 10-second count begins within the same shot clock interval (e.g. what should have happened in this case)? Does the official make a note of the shot clock time when he begins the new count, or in this case does he start a visual count?

They use the clock. This cam up in the recent discussion we had on the shot clock. And, all the officials will communicate the new time to each other -- pointing at the clock, showing 10 fingers, mouting "new clock" or something.

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

If the pass was deeper into the frontcourt it's clear to everyone the ball gained FC status. The concern for me on this play is what's happening at the division line. The C had great positioning throughout the play until the moment the pass is released, then he stepped down away from the play, instead of up towards it.

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk

Sure, the FC wouldn't have been an issue, but what if there was immediate decision to make on a travel, or on contact during a trap, or a block/charge play?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

...

Sure, the FC wouldn't have been an issue, but what if there was immediate decision to make on a travel, or on contact during a trap, or a block/charge play?

The immediate concern is the division line, especially with the pressure Syracuse was putting on at the division line and the back court. There needs to be a priority and a reason for it to be a priority. Those other things might happen. The pass went to the division from a back court trap, the action areas were the division line and the back court.

I'm just not a fan of officials moving away from the action that needs to be officiated right now. At the 17 second mark of the video that pass is clearly going to the division line. There is no reason to move further into the FC at that moment. Once the pass is caught, then move down.

[BigCat]

If we r talking about the 10 second call, the T is right there looking at it. C is in good enough position also. Backcourt violations require more thought than others but T had good look. I couldn't watch the out of bounds video. The feet of the defender were clearly in FC.(on 10 second call) I think both T and C could see that. Think it was more a brain cramp on rule than positioning.

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

I'm just not a fan of officials moving away from the action that needs to be officiated right now.

This.

You hear this concept mentioned often in terms of the new L racing down the floor just to avoid getting beat. This situation is analogous. Why be so focused on being in perfect position for a play that might happen when you can stay and officiate a play that is happening?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

This.

You hear this concept mentioned often in terms of the new L racing down the floor just to avoid getting beat. This situation is analogous. Why be so focused on being in perfect position for a play that might happen when you can stay and officiate a play that is happening?

I am not so sure what the lead could have done in this situation. I think the C and T were on top of this play and kicked the play. I would think it would have been rather easy to know the ball was touched by a player in the FC and then comes back to the FC. Again, it was just a miss, not sure the lead could have known this for sure from his positioning even if he was not on the end line.

Peace

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I am not so sure what the lead could have done in this situation. I think the C and T were on top of this play and kicked the play. I would think it would have been rather easy to know the ball was touched by a player in the FC and then comes back to the FC. Again, it was just a miss, not sure the lead could have known this for sure from his positioning even if he was not on the end line.

I was illustrating the concept of not bailing out for a future event. I used a different type of play as an example. I was not advocating that the L should have been more aware in this particular situation. In this case I meant the C.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

I was illustrating the concept of not bailing out for a future event. I used a different type of play as an example. I was not advocating that the L should have been more aware in this particular situation. In this case I meant the C.

OK, I see.

Peace

[NNJOfficial]

Originally Posted by biz

I agree that there is definitely a time to come out of your primary but this is definitely NOT one of them. The C called Cooney for stepping on the endline from above the FT line extended while relatively straightlined!! The C had to look through a defender and try to call a line that he's looking at from a 90* angle. Never a good idea. The L (new T), while admittedly farther away (he was middle of the lane) is looking right down the endline and can see this a whole lot better than the C. My question is why is the C looking down at the line?



My first thought when he blew the whistle (Syracuse fan btw) was utter shock, then I immediately said (out loud) he must have been way OOB if the C called it. I wonder how the L/T missed it? Then I saw the replay.



Either way this is NOT the call to trumpet the merits of coming out of your primary to make a call. As you say he, "tried to get the play right and from his angle it did appear that Cooney was OOB." This is exactly why it's not the C's call! He can't possibly know with any certainty if Cooney was OOB which is why it is particularly shocking that he blew the whistle when the L/T had a pretty good look at it.

I absolutely agree. My point is that we should not be saddled with the antiquated notion that you can never make a call involving your partner's line and this is as good a time to bring it up as any. The collective goal of the crew is to make correct calls and if we make a call that involves our partner's primary or line we should not guess and be 100 percent sure of the call.

I always tell my partners in pregame to grab a call if they see I missed one. There's no such thing as a perfect game and the game is supposed to be about the players, not our egos. If a guy tells me he is not okay with me making a call in his primary if he misses one then I know that our collective performance on the game is going to suffer.

[Smitty]

Originally Posted by NNJOfficial

All that don't call my line BS is just that. Yes, stay in your primary 99% of the time, but occasionally your partner will miss a call and will thank you for grabbing it. The official was trying to get the play right and from his angle it did appear that Cooney was OOB.

Your argument is absurd considering the official was 100% wrong in this case.