Duke @ Notre Dame Plays (Video)

[JRutledge]

Play #1:



Play #2:



Play #3:



Peace

[BlueDevilRef]

First of all, Dakich is an ******* and a moron!!

Secondly, thanks for posting my bluedevils.

Play 1, to me, was clearly PC. Like 100%.

Play 2: depends on which foul was being called. There is a bump as ball handler makes the curl. He gets fouled again after the gather. No shot on first foul, in the act on the 2nd.

[Jay R]

1. Charge
2. Continuous motion

[Freddy]

Re. the first video. This is especially applicable on the high school level. Those working on and assessing those on the NCAA level may have differing opinions.
When an official's first impulsive movement in immediate reaction to a play like this is two fists rising from the hips, there's only one call that's gonna result. Most who start with two fists rising default to a block because of the early initiation of what will become the later fist-banging-on-the-hips signal, regardless whether it was actually a charge or not.
At least on the high school level, that seems to be true.
Further reason why to insist upon the approved mechanic of a single fist in the air first, then go to the foul signal.
Anybody else find this is true?

(Come to think about it, JD Collins insisted upon that very same thing to his NCAA-M officials this preseason, didn't he?)

[CJP]

Play 1. Easy PC

Play 2. No shot. Very patient whistle.

Play 3. I see two hands on the back as the inside player is gathering himself to go up. Correct call in my opinion.

Play 1: Easy PC

Play 2: Shooting, correct tech though

Play 3: No foul

[BlueDevilRef]

I guess I missed the 3rd video.

No foul in that video. Was not a rebounding push.

[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.

[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.)