NCAA Tournament Video Requests - Saturday March 18

[Nevadaref]

Excellent rules point stated by Camron and backed by BNR.

[johnny d]

Originally Posted by bucky

Not saying you are wrong however....

When the ball handler crosses the 3-pt line (pause vid at :08), do you feel that the defender is in LGP? At the same time, do you feel that the defender is still a secondary defender?

IMO, the defender established LGP well before the contact and at contact was considered to be a primary defender. (for outnumbering fast-breaks, defensive players are secondary defenders initially). I know why they called this a block however I feel it should have been PC.

I can see your point. I would not go so far as when the dribbler is at the 3 point line. Perhaps when he is at the free throw line. I can see why some people would go that route and I don't have a problem with it, its just not what I would do in this type of situation.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

CBS
Wisconsin v Villanova
2nd half 36.4 seconds left
This is a team control foul!!!
Hope the crew gets this right.
Nope, they blew it and awarded FTs. A critical mistake.

A pet peeve of mine. I always go to my partners when they have whistles on this type of play. Unfortunately they aren't always willing to take the time to reprocess the play in their head and we end up shooting free throws.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by jTheUmp

I was just watching that myself... I thought they were discussing if it would be a FF1 or not. The WI player reached out and grabbed the Villanova player and there was no possible way for him to "play the ball" as they say. I would've strongly considered calling an intentional foul under FED rules.

I believe that was the discussion.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by The_Rookie

Coverage on the missed BI play....Is the The Trail's call who was table side or the Center who was opposite table? Would this miss likely end this crew's run?

To me, a hand through the basket is best seen by the Lead.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Peace

#1: I think it can be debated if initial LGP was when he placed his right foot on the RA.

#2: I think it is a Block regardless because he slid to his left after A1 was airborne.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

To me, a hand through the basket is best seen by the Lead.

I agree and he is probably not looking there. And I bet the other officials had some doubt as to where his hand was. Because he could have hand his hand in the net and not had a BI. But it was a miss and I think it was not tragic either. It probably surprised them as you do not see that every day for sure.

Peace

[frezer11]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

A pet peeve of mine. I always go to my partners when they have whistles on this type of play. Unfortunately they aren't always willing to take the time to reprocess the play in their head and we end up shooting free throws.

I also do this, and often also end up not changing their minds. I do think it is possible on this type of play to gain control if there is a clear push of the ball rather than a traditional tip, though that isn't the case here.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by frezer11

I also do this, and often also end up not changing their minds. I do think it is possible on this type of play to gain control if there is a clear push of the ball rather than a traditional tip, though that isn't the case here.

Be careful. Per the rules book control is gained only by holding or dribbling the ball. A bat or push of the ball may begin a dribble, but may not meet the standard for establishing control.
In such cases, the officials probably need to ask themselves, "Did the player dribble the ball?"

[frezer11]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Be careful. Per the rules book control is gained only by holding or dribbling the ball. A bat or push of the ball may begin a dribble, but may not meet the standard for establishing control.
In such cases, the officials probably need to ask themselves, "Did the player dribble the ball?"

You're right, and the scenario where I would deem it a dribble is one in which the ball essentially comes to rest in the palm, and is redirected directly towards the hoop, not a tip. If that were the case and they were then fouled by the (former) offensive player, I would certainly consider this control and worthy of FTs.

[dahoopref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Peace

Any chance of re-posting this? It isn't playing on YT, thanks.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by dahoopref

Any chance of re-posting this? It isn't playing on YT, thanks.

This play was flagged by YouTube for Copyright issues. I will try, but I have to figure out to get around this one. It was a longer video, maybe I will make it shorter. But something tells me that will not matter.

Funny I can see the video.

Peace

[bucky]

Use this link and forward to 8:25. You can see the play that way.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mRTHabd0Gm0


IMO - Clearly not a dribble and clearly a TC foul. Also, clearly intentional foul on reach/grab. Ergo, crew did not adjudicate play correctly...twice.

(guess that is one reason why I am home at desk and not reffing the tourney)

[jTheUmp]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

I believe that was the discussion.

I don't remember exactly... but on the broadcast it was brought up... something like "we're waiting to get an explanation" and then someone (not sure if it was one of the game officials, the alternate, or someone involved with the monitor) said something to the effect of "trying to determine if team control had changed or not, and they determined that it had". Nothing was mentioned about a possible FF1.

[bucky]

Originally Posted by jTheUmp

I don't remember exactly... but on the broadcast it was brought up... something like "we're waiting to get an explanation" and then someone (not sure if it was one of the game officials, the alternate, or someone involved with the monitor) said something to the effect of "trying to determine if team control had changed or not, and they determined that it had". Nothing was mentioned about a possible FF1.

That may have happened however the monitor can not be used to determine judgement calls.