Duke @ Notre Dame Plays (Video)

[ballgame99]

1. is a PC 100% of the time. That shouldn't be missed at this level or even in HS. Heck, he was even "set"

2. If the call was on the bump at the elbow that was one really late whistle. That looks like a shooting foul to me and I can't blame the coach for reacting the way he did.

3. No foul, but I'm sure it looked like one from the T's angle, but that is all the more reason he shouldn't make that call.

[Rich]

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A LATE WHISTLE!

My God, I can't BELIEVE there are officials saying this. I expect it from clueless coaches, but not from officials who, supposedly, know better.

Look at the trail -- he's ALREADY waving off the shot as the player finishes. It's obvious that he called it on the curl and had no intention of awarding shots here.

#3 -- If the T is calling a hold/push to keep the player down, I don't hate the call. I don't particularly like it, either.

[CJP]

Originally Posted by Rich

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A LATE WHISTLE!

My God, I can't BELIEVE there are officials saying this. I expect it from clueless coaches, but not from officials who, supposedly, know better.

Look at the trail -- he's ALREADY waving off the shot as the player finishes. It's obvious that he called it on the curl and had no intention of awarding shots here.

#3 -- If the T is calling a hold/push to keep the player down, I don't hate the call. I don't particularly like it, either.

I think you meant to say "a late whistle is what complaining fans and coaches yell at you when you are patient and see the play from start to finish". A patient whistle is a good thing.

[Bob Bball]

1. PC
2. Foul by the book, sure. A good call with player driving getting below foul line with limited contact not having any effect on ball handler. No, this is not a good call at this spot on the floor. He should have let the play develop and finish!
3. no foul

[Raymond]

#1: speaks for itself

#2: I don't see anything prior to the shooting motion

#3: Not a whistle that official should have had from that position on the floor. He was already high in the Trail, then missed the rotation. Old Center/New Trail was still in position to see that rebounding action, as was the Lead after his rotation.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

#1: speaks for itself

#2: I don't see anything prior to the shooting motion

#3: Not a whistle that official should have had from that position on the floor. He was already high in the Trail, then missed the rotation. Old Center/New Trail was still in position to see that rebounding action, as was the Lead after his rotation.

#2 - I don't either, I'm only commenting on what the official seemed to call. The last replay shows how early he's wiping off the basket.

#3 - I think the old C has the better look through the two players and his trigger wasn't tripped.

[Pantherdreams]

1. PC . . . What else does a guy have to do.

2. Would I like a patient whistle hear, probably. Is there contact with thr arms before any motion starts, I guess. Big problem here is that if the level of contact that gets you to call that foul before the shooting motion starts is the standard now. . . Well lots of guys without scholarships are going to be seeing the floor.

3. I think it's technically a good call, for the hold down and arms in the back, but it's not gotten a lot.

[ballgame99]

Originally Posted by Rich

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A LATE WHISTLE!

My God, I can't BELIEVE there are officials saying this. I expect it from clueless coaches, but not from officials who, supposedly, know better.

Look at the trail -- he's ALREADY waving off the shot as the player finishes. It's obvious that he called it on the curl and had no intention of awarding shots here.

#3 -- If the T is calling a hold/push to keep the player down, I don't hate the call. I don't particularly like it, either.

Sorry to have offended you. But my comment is based on the fact that in the last replay of the video the whistle doesn't blow until A1 is finishing down at the block. If that whistle is for a foul that happened two steps ago when he was turning the corner at the elbow, then yes, that is a late whistle. If you aren't going to let him play through it, and you aren't going to award shots, then why let him play through it and let him go up for a shot and get fouled again before you blow? I fully understand the concept of a patient whistle and to let the play happen, but isn't part of that seeing if the guy can play through a smaller foul to allow him to finish? It has always been my understanding that if you let him play through a small foul and then he gets fouled again going up for the shot you don't go back and say 'no shot' I have a hand check back here. This officials mechanics were very good, he clearly motioned that he had no shot, but that doesn't change the fact that he waited to long to blow if he was calling the hand check. And let's be honest, "waited too long" is a split second in this case.

And on 3, I wasn't clear what I meant, I understand that is T's call, but in this particular case the T was at a bad angle and was pretty deep, and he probably guessed there was a push, so he should just hold off on that call.

[Remington]

On play #2.........If you slow it down you can see it is a 10-1-4 foul before the ball is gathered. Yes, I had to slow it down to see that and typically if you have to slow it down either call is supported at live game speed. The player has his right forearm on the players side and left hand on his shoulder as he turns the corner. The official had a patient whistle but he also needs time to process it. IMO either call was supported when the observer broke down the play.

[so cal lurker]

Originally Posted by ballgame99

he probably guessed there was a push, so he should just hold off on that call.

Seriously? You're going to critique a D1 official by assuming that he guessed and based on that conclude that he should have held off? There's no question there was a push there -- the only question is whether it should have been called. I'm never a fan of isolating a single play like this on that type of contact. We expect players to adjust to the game that is being called by the officials that day -- but then we critique a call out of context of the other calls in the game. In a vaccum, I'm inclined to think it should be called, BUT in my mind it is certainly gray enough that the context of the game such that the level of contact being permitted throughout determines if it was (A) a clear call that had to be made, (B) a 50-50 call that could go either way, or (C) a "gotcha" call that came out of nowhere. (And I haven't seen any of the game other than the three clips, so I have no way to pick one of the categories.)

[ballgame99]

Originally Posted by so cal lurker

Seriously? You're going to critique a D1 official by assuming that he guessed and based on that conclude that he should have held off? There's no question there was a push there -- the only question is whether it should have been called. I'm never a fan of isolating a single play like this on that type of contact. We expect players to adjust to the game that is being called by the officials that day -- but then we critique a call out of context of the other calls in the game. In a vaccum, I'm inclined to think it should be called, BUT in my mind it is certainly gray enough that the context of the game such that the level of contact being permitted throughout determines if it was (A) a clear call that had to be made, (B) a 50-50 call that could go either way, or (C) a "gotcha" call that came out of nowhere. (And I haven't seen any of the game other than the three clips, so I have no way to pick one of the categories.)

Yes? The calling official is supposed to be in the C position. It was a recent flex, but still a flex. He calls a rebound foul on a play where he is straitlined and way out of position. He guessed there was a foul there. My comment is to say there is a lead official, heck even an old C/new T that has a better angle at this, both did not call it. So yeah, I think there is a critique to be had here.

[VaTerp]

Late to the party.

Play 1- We all know this is an obvious PC. I think the value of the discussion here could be WHY a good official misses a call like this. It seems to me that the L had a bad angle as he was unable to get to the endline in transition and was fooled by the way the defender fell by turning to the side. I'm not sure what he could have done to get a better angle though. I don't know if stopping enables him to get a better look at the defender.

Play 2- This is a shooting foul all day, every day. I don't care that he immediately wiped off the basket and never intended to award FTs. As much as some people want to take advantage/disadvantage out of the game I think this is an example of why its important. I don't understand penalizing the offense by wiping off the bucket here. I'd bet that after watching on tape he wishes he scored that one.

Play 3- I believe NBA officials refer to this as "bracing" an opponent. The contact could have impacted the player's ability to jump but I don't think it was enough to warrant a call IMO. I don't hate the call but would lean on the side of passing on that level of contact.

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by VaTerp

Play 1- We all know this is an obvious PC. I think the value of the discussion here could be WHY a good official misses a call like this. It seems to me that the L had a bad angle as he was unable to get to the endline in transition and was fooled by the way the defender fell by turning to the side. I'm not sure what he could have done to get a better angle though. I don't know if stopping enables him to get a better look at the defender.

Looks like another player moved in at the last second and obscured his look on this play.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by VaTerp

Late to the party.

...

Play 3- I believe NBA officials refer to this as "bracing" an opponent. The contact could have impacted the player's ability to jump but I don't think it was enough to warrant a call IMO. I don't hate the call but would lean on the side of passing on that level of contact.

On this play, I just think you have to trust the 2 partners who have the view of seeing between the 2 opponents.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by ballgame99

Sorry to have offended you. But my comment is based on the fact that in the last replay of the video the whistle doesn't blow until A1 is finishing down at the block. If that whistle is for a foul that happened two steps ago when he was turning the corner at the elbow, then yes, that is a late whistle. If you aren't going to let him play through it, and you aren't going to award shots, then why let him play through it and let him go up for a shot and get fouled again before you blow? I fully understand the concept of a patient whistle and to let the play happen, but isn't part of that seeing if the guy can play through a smaller foul to allow him to finish? It has always been my understanding that if you let him play through a small foul and then he gets fouled again going up for the shot you don't go back and say 'no shot' I have a hand check back here. This officials mechanics were very good, he clearly motioned that he had no shot, but that doesn't change the fact that he waited to long to blow if he was calling the hand check. And let's be honest, "waited too long" is a split second in this case.

And on 3, I wasn't clear what I meant, I understand that is T's call, but in this particular case the T was at a bad angle and was pretty deep, and he probably guessed there was a push, so he should just hold off on that call.

There is no such thing as waiting too long to blow. Clearly you don't understand that concept.

And on #3, I would categorize that as a hold moreso than a push.