The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)
-   -   Video request: NU/Mich 1-and-1 confusion (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/102345-video-request-nu-mich-1-1-confusion.html)

Amesman Thu Mar 02, 2017 03:24pm
Video request: NU/Mich 1-and-1 confusion
 
Can someone (Rut?) post the sequence around that Michigan FTA late in the second half where none of the players move on the front-end miss? Maybe 4-5 minutes to go in the game.

I recall C raising his hand to chop in a possible miss but would like to see how everything was handled before and during, with signaling 1-and-1 (not 2 shots), etc. Players definitely blew it, and Michigan got ball back on the arrow.

Of course the commoners' belief is that the officials somehow blew it. Sigh.

JRutledge Thu Mar 02, 2017 04:39pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amesman (Post 1001523)
Can someone (Rut?)
LOL!!! It does seem like I am the only one doing this. But I can do this so I will. :D

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amesman (Post 1001523)
Of course the commoners' belief is that the officials somehow blew it. Sigh.
I actually thought Steven Bardo actually did not rip the officials. He basically said that Northwestern should have been alert. But the question is what did the administering official say in the lane.

He looks like he thinks it is two shots by the way he enters the lane.

Peace

JRutledge Thu Mar 02, 2017 05:08pm
Here is the video.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/hDMEr6Wtb5s" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Peace

Rich Thu Mar 02, 2017 05:21pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 1001544)
Here is the video.

Peace
He clearly signaled 2 before the free throw.

AremRed Thu Mar 02, 2017 05:30pm
It's been a long season for Mr. Wymer. Clearly signals 2 shots. Too bad Szelc or Steretore couldn't catch it.

It's been a rough season for the B1G staff. Michigan State vs. Florida Gulf Coast clock starting early, Indiana vs. Purdue blarge, this.

JRutledge Thu Mar 02, 2017 05:43pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich (Post 1001546)
He clearly signaled 2 before the free throw.
I did not see a clear signal. I saw something that looks like he signaled two shots, but that is not seeing his hand in total. Either way, he clearly did not ask for sure and the calling official did not make sure he had the right situation. This is certainly what happens when you do not communicate properly or observe.

Peace

Amesman Thu Mar 02, 2017 05:55pm
Thanks, Rut. Definitely an ouch moment for crew. That "2 shots" signal is clear as L backs out of the lane.

And you're right about Bardo. He was really pretty on it, as was the other announcer who said it would be a 1-and-1 right after the call.

I remember Collins mouthing "But we got the rebound!" which I thought was bogus at the time, but turns out to be true in the most technical of senses, though it was still an actionless rebounding scenario.

By the way, my "commoners" comment was about the officemates. I was their interpreter today.

Adam Thu Mar 02, 2017 06:50pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by AremRed (Post 1001547)
It's been a long season for Mr. Wymer. Clearly signals 2 shots. Too bad Szelc or Steretore couldn't catch it.

It's been a rough season for the B1G staff. Michigan State vs. Florida Gulf Coast clock starting early, Indiana vs. Purdue blarge, this.
I wouldn't put the blarge in that category. It's not a great thing, but it's hardly the end of the world: even if it ends up fouling out two players with one call.

bucky Thu Mar 02, 2017 07:40pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amesman (Post 1001523)
Can someone (Rut?) post the sequence around that Michigan FTA late in the second half where none of the players move on the front-end miss? Maybe 4-5 minutes to go in the game.

I recall C raising his hand to chop in a possible miss but would like to see how everything was handled before and during, with signaling 1-and-1 (not 2 shots), etc. Players definitely blew it, and Michigan got ball back on the arrow.

Of course the commoners' belief is that the officials somehow blew it. Sigh.
They did blow it. Monster mistake for a crew of that caliber.

hamnegger Thu Mar 02, 2017 11:48pm
Was that Elaine from Seinfeld? It shows how everyone can lose focus and screw up. There is a human element to our profession that can't be fixed. I wonder if there are any ramifications from their assignor/evaluator.

VaTerp Thu Mar 02, 2017 11:52pm
My thoughts from the couch:

I don't like that call coming from the L. I think he should have been more patient and gave the C first crack at that.

I think 2 shots should have been awarded.

He clearly signals 2 shots before putting the ball at the disposal of the FT shooter.

The C, who was obviously the calling official, looks like he's ready to start the clock after the 1st FT so he clearly knew it should have been 1-1. He must not have seen the L indicate 2. But again, its clear that the L did indicate 2 shots.

JRutledge Fri Mar 03, 2017 12:05am
Quote:
Originally Posted by hamnegger (Post 1001564)
Was that Elaine from Seinfeld? It shows how everyone can lose focus and screw up. There is a human element to our profession that can't be fixed. I wonder if there are any ramifications from their assignor/evaluator.
Yes that was Julie Ann Dreyfus. She has a daughter that goes to school there. Ironically one of my friends met her as her daughter is also going there and they are both in the same class.

Peace

Rich Fri Mar 03, 2017 12:07am
Julia Louis-Dreyfus even. :)

Camron Rust Fri Mar 03, 2017 12:11am
Quote:
Originally Posted by VaTerp (Post 1001565)
My thoughts from the couch:

I don't like that call coming from the L. I think he should have been more patient and gave the C first crack at that.

I think 2 shots should have been awarded.

He clearly signals 2 shots before putting the ball at the disposal of the FT shooter.

The C, who was obviously the calling official, looks like he's ready to start the clock after the 1st FT so he clearly knew it should have been 1-1. He must not have seen the L indicate 2. But again, its clear that the L did indicate 2 shots.
Agree. The L clearly indicated 2.

I find it interesting that the administering official, being the one who had primary coverage on the drive, thought it was 2. I think there is a good case for arguing that it should have been 2 all along. Perhaps he thought it was obviously a 2 and never say the lead indicate otherwise.

A Pennsylvania Coach Fri Mar 03, 2017 12:12am
Quote:
Originally Posted by VaTerp (Post 1001565)
My thoughts from the couch:

I don't like that call coming from the L. I think he should have been more patient and gave the C first crack at that.
The lead saw a foul before the act of shooting began and you want him to wait and whistle it even later? :confused:

JRutledge Fri Mar 03, 2017 12:19am
Quote:
Originally Posted by VaTerp (Post 1001565)
My thoughts from the couch:

I don't like that call coming from the L. I think he should have been more patient and gave the C first crack at that.
I have no issues of the L calling this as the ball is in the lane when the foul occurs and that is what the L has in the mechanics. He also has more of an open look than the C as it is coming down the lane and towards the end line. The C might see it but is looking through bodies.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VaTerp (Post 1001565)
I think 2 shots should have been awarded.
I do not think the shooter's upward motion started, which is the standard at the NCAA Men's level. It look like he was still trying to push through and I am not giving shots if I see it that clearly. It was close, but I think he got it right.


Quote:
Originally Posted by VaTerp (Post 1001565)
The C, who was obviously the calling official, looks like he's ready to start the clock after the 1st FT so he clearly knew it should have been 1-1. He must not have seen the L indicate 2. But again, its clear that the L did indicate 2 shots.
I am assuming you mean after they are ready to shoot the FTs?

Peace

Nevadaref Fri Mar 03, 2017 08:27am
TW absolutely indicated two shots to the players along the lane before administering the FT.

Someone can post a still photo from the video about the 26 second mark. He holds up two fingers with his right hand next to where the BTN logo is on the screen.

Raymond Fri Mar 03, 2017 09:06am
Whether or not it should have been a shooting foul, the Lead clearly wipes off the shot and points to the spot of the foul, so the administering official should have known it wasn't 2 free throws.

The Lead had no reason to put a whistle on that play. The ball was outside the paint on the C's side of the court, near the free throw line, and the C had an open look on the play. The Lead should have left that play to the C.

ballgame99 Fri Mar 03, 2017 09:20am
How is that not a shooting foul? He had ended his dribble and was jumping off of one foot when the illegal contact occurred. The jumping foot was still in contact with the floor, but does that matter in college? Under NFHS rules that's an easy shooting foul, is it not?

Moving on, you definitely cannot put this one on a lack of communication on the part of the calling official. He emphatically said no shot and pointed at the floor. The administering official must have just zoned out and because it was clearly a shooting foul just went with it. They have to go to the arrow in this case since all players were told it was 2 shots.

A bad look for sure.

Rich Fri Mar 03, 2017 10:53am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 1001568)
Agree. The L clearly indicated 2.

I find it interesting that the administering official, being the one who had primary coverage on the drive, thought it was 2. I think there is a good case for arguing that it should have been 2 all along. Perhaps he thought it was obviously a 2 and never say the lead indicate otherwise.
The C didn't even call a foul.

The NCAAM standard is upward motion. If the L said it's before the shot (and he does so VERY CLEARLY), then it's before the shot.

Rich Fri Mar 03, 2017 10:53am
Quote:
Originally Posted by ballgame99 (Post 1001584)
How is that not a shooting foul? He had ended his dribble and was jumping off of one foot when the illegal contact occurred. The jumping foot was still in contact with the floor, but does that matter in college? Under NFHS rules that's an easy shooting foul, is it not?

Moving on, you definitely cannot put this one on a lack of communication on the part of the calling official. He emphatically said no shot and pointed at the floor. The administering official must have just zoned out and because it was clearly a shooting foul just went with it. They have to go to the arrow in this case since all players were told it was 2 shots.

A bad look for sure.
Was there upward motion at the point where the L thought there was a foul?

Amesman Fri Mar 03, 2017 11:13am
And now the rest of the story
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 1001566)
Yes that was Julie Ann Dreyfus. She has a daughter that goes to school there. Ironically one of my friends met her as her daughter is also going there and they are both in the same class.
Even bigger connection: The son of Julia Louis-Dreyfus and comedian Brad Hall is on the NU team.

Camron Rust Fri Mar 03, 2017 11:44am
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadNewsRef (Post 1001583)
Whether or not it should have been a shooting foul, the Lead clearly wipes off the shot and points to the spot of the foul, so the administering official should have known it wasn't 2 free throws.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich (Post 1001588)
The C didn't even call a foul.

The NCAAM standard is upward motion. If the L said it's before the shot (and he does so VERY CLEARLY), then it's before the shot.
Absolutely agreed. I'm just trying to put some ideas out there why the C (new L) did end up with 2. He may have checked out for a moment when the L indicated it was before the shot and went with his gut based on what he saw....and was wrong.

VaTerp Fri Mar 03, 2017 11:46am
Quote:
Originally Posted by A Pennsylvania Coach (Post 1001569)
The lead saw a foul before the act of shooting began and you want him to wait and whistle it even later? :confused:
I don't understand your confusion. Its a play that is in the C's primary. I'm suggesting the L have more of a patient whistle.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 1001572)
I have no issues of the L calling this as the ball is in the lane when the foul occurs and that is what the L has in the mechanics. He also has more of an open look than the C as it is coming down the lane and towards the end line. The C might see it but is looking through bodies
I think the C has a great unobstructed look at the time of contact and again just think the L should have been more patient in going into the C's primary for this. JMO.

Quote:
I do not think the shooter's upward motion started, which is the standard at the NCAA Men's level. It look like he was still trying to push through and I am not giving shots if I see it that clearly. It was close, but I think he got it right.
I can live with that. I just have a different opinion.

Quote:
I am assuming you mean after they are ready to shoot the FTs?
Yes, if the C saw the L indicate 2 as they were about to administer the FT, he should have blown the whistle for a reset to get it right. Obviously, he didnt see it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BadNewsRef (Post 1001583)
Whether or not it should have been a shooting foul, the Lead clearly wipes off the shot and points to the spot of the foul, so the administering official should have known it wasn't 2 free throws.

The Lead had no reason to put a whistle on that play. The ball was outside the paint on the C's side of the court, near the free throw line, and the C had an open look on the play. The Lead should have left that play to the C.
Yes, the calling official indicated very clearly that it was a non-shooting foul. So the new L just must have lost track. It happens.

But agree completely on the L's whistle. I don't mind him coming in later but he doesnt appear to give the C a chance to ref the play right in his lap.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich (Post 1001588)
The C didn't even call a foul.

The NCAAM standard is upward motion. If the L said it's before the shot (and he does so VERY CLEARLY), then it's before the shot.
Obviously, if the official blows their whistle and wipes off the shot then that's what we have.

I'm just offering my opinion from the couch that I don't agree with it. I think its the Cs play all the way and would prefer that the L be more patient. And on this type of play, I'd prefer to award 2 shots to the offense. Again, JMO.

Rich Fri Mar 03, 2017 11:57am
Quote:
Originally Posted by VaTerp (Post 1001594)
I don't understand your confusion. Its a play that is in the C's primary. I'm suggesting the L have more of a patient whistle.



I think the C has a great unobstructed look at the time of contact and again just think the L should have been more patient in going into the C's primary for this. JMO.



I can live with that. I just have a different opinion.



Yes, if the C saw the L indicate 2 as they were about to administer the FT, he should have blown the whistle for a reset to get it right. Obviously, he didnt see it.



Yes, the calling official indicated very clearly that it was a non-shooting foul. So the new L just must have lost track. It happens.

But agree completely on the L's whistle. I don't mind him coming in later but he doesnt appear to give the C a chance to ref the play right in his lap.



Obviously, if the official blows their whistle and wipes off the shot then that's what we have.

I'm just offering my opinion from the couch that I don't agree with it. I think its the Cs play all the way and would prefer that the L be more patient. And on this type of play, I'd prefer to award 2 shots to the offense. Again, JMO.


Except they're being held to a much more strict standard in college men's -- no benefit of the doubt going to the shooter certainly.

Lead is king. :)

HokiePaul Fri Mar 03, 2017 12:33pm
A little off topic, but are the college administration of FTs different than NFHS?

The lead made the call and appears then go switch with the C opposite table and the C administers the FT.

In NFHS, the calling official is staying tableside as T and T is administering these FTs

AremRed Fri Mar 03, 2017 01:32pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by HokiePaul (Post 1001600)
A little off topic, but are the college administration of FTs different than NFHS?

The lead made the call and appears then go switch with the C opposite table and the C administers the FT.

In NFHS, the calling official is staying tableside as T and T is administering these FTs
Yes, the calling official goes opposite the table.

bob jenkins Fri Mar 03, 2017 01:46pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by AremRed (Post 1001602)
Yes, the calling official goes opposite the table.
... in NCAAM. NCAAW is the same as FED (in this instance, and recognizing that some states have the calling official go opposite in HS).

A Pennsylvania Coach Fri Mar 03, 2017 05:47pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by VaTerp (Post 1001594)
I don't understand your confusion. Its a play that is in the C's primary. I'm suggesting the L have more of a patient whistle.
If the L waits longer, then calls a foul before the act of shooting, he is going to have a problem.

Raymond Fri Mar 03, 2017 11:52pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by A Pennsylvania Coach (Post 1001612)
If the L waits longer, then calls a foul before the act of shooting, he is going to have a problem.
This wasn't a do-or-die play, the Lead should just leave it alone.

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

JRutledge Sat Mar 04, 2017 10:25am
Quote:
Originally Posted by VaTerp (Post 1001594)

I think the C has a great unobstructed look at the time of contact and again just think the L should have been more patient in going into the C's primary for this. JMO.
It is not about him being unobstructed, he is looking through a player to see contact, while the lead can see the space between the players and can see the arms. I have no problem with his call or the way he called it. That is the play they want the lead to take responsibility for and no one is really in his way to see it. That is according to the CCA book and what is being taught at camps. They want the lead to be the primary on these plays much more at the Men's level. It is talked about in just about every pre-game.

Peace

Rich Sat Mar 04, 2017 10:26am
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 1001641)
It is not about him being unobstructed, he is looking through a player to see contact, while the lead can see the space between the players and can see the arms. I have no problem with his call or the way he called it. That is the play they want the lead to take responsibility for and no one is really in his way to see it. That is according to the CCA book and what is being taught at camps. They want the lead to be the primary on these plays much more at the Men's level. It is talked about in just about every pre-game.



Peace


Short version: Lead is king. :)

JRutledge Sat Mar 04, 2017 10:27am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich (Post 1001642)
Short version: Lead is king. :)
In Men's college he is on this play.

Peace

Rich Sat Mar 04, 2017 10:28am
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 1001643)
In Men's college he is on this play.



Peace


You do know we're agreeing, right?

JRutledge Sat Mar 04, 2017 10:41am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich (Post 1001644)
You do know we're agreeing, right?
Yes. Just wanted to make it clear that this is a very specific philosophy in Men's college. Sometimes people think what is a high school mechanic or standard applies to other levels. I did not have a ":mad:" in the response. :)

Peace

Rich Sat Mar 04, 2017 12:44pm
Open looks are important at every level and once the ball's in the paint, the L shouldn't be looking away....

chapmaja Sun Mar 05, 2017 11:19pm
As a Michigan fan who was at work officiating volleyball instead of watching the game like I wish I had been, I will comment on this.

First, looking at the replay from above, at about 1:55 of the video, you can the foul is prior to the shot. I think 1-1 is the correct call on this foul.

I think the lead did screw up by signally two shots. NW's player taps the ball to the official, but does not secure possession of the ball after the first / missed attempt. Then the official secures it at which point it is now a dead ball situation.

Since no team had possession of the ball when it become dead, the only recourse was what the officials did, go to the arrow.

This was a screw up by the officials, but also by the players as well. That ball bounced long enough for either team to secure it on a 1-1 situation, and neither did.

The much bigger screw up was with under 2 seconds left. If you have a big guy to put on the inbounder, put him on the inbounder and don't allow the perfect pass that was thrown to allow the layup at the buzzer to beat you.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:29pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1