NCAA Tournament Video Requests - Saturday March 18

[Nevadaref]

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.

Pat Driscoll came over to the broadcast crew and informed them that the crew determined that control was obtained by the Villanova player and FTs would be awarded.

If you replay a video of the game, you can see and hear Driscoll give this statement.

[wyo96]

Does anybody here see anything that established team control?? I don't.
They said they used reply and called it control, what am I missing?

IMO, The touch is a "bat or tip" not a dribble.
I can see getting confused in the heat of the moment, but with reply......

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I do not disagree that the language is fuzzy, but that is not how the rule is applied. When the player is in the RA during contact, that is what they seem to want to be called a block. Many examples have been shown on video to support that position. Because I have seen secondary defenders back up into the RA and get called and have seen video that supports this.

Peace

Fuzzy? This isn't one of those fuzzy things. It may be how you and other are applying it but that doesn't make it right. Perhaps in those videos, they didn't deem the defender to have gained LGP before backing into the circle.

[dahoopref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I do not disagree that the language is fuzzy, but that is not how the rule is applied. When the player is in the RA during contact, that is what they seem to want to be called a block. Many examples have been shown on video to support that position. Because I have seen secondary defenders back up into the RA and get called and have seen video that supports this.

Peace

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Fuzzy? This isn't one of those fuzzy things. It may be how you and other are applying it but that doesn't make it right. Perhaps in those videos, they didn't deem the defender to have gained LGP before backing into the circle.

Per the NCAA Men's Basketball Central Hub via Art Hyland - Rules: Rules Clarifications and Play Situations (November 17, 2016):

Play 3. B1 and B2 are defending against a 3 on 2 fast break by Team A. Around the top of the key, A1 passes to A2 who is on the wing and B2 then commits to defending A2 by establishing a legal guarding position outside the RA on A2 (2 feet on the floor and facing his opponent). B2 defends A2 all the way to the basket and takes a charge in the RA.

RULING – B2 is initially a secondary defender because of the outnumbering fast break situation. However, B2 established legal guarding position on A2 outside the RA. Therefore, he is no longer a secondary defender and may defend A2 all the way to the basket including in the RA. In this situation, the RA rule is not in effect and block/charge plays should be adjudicated accordingly (Rule 4-35.4, 4-17.4, 4-17.7, and 10-1.14).

[bucky]

Originally Posted by dahoopref

Per the NCAA Men's Basketball Central Hub via Art Hyland - Rules: Rules Clarifications and Play Situations (November 17, 2016):

Yes! Yes! Yes!

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Fuzzy? This isn't one of those fuzzy things. It may be how you and other are applying it but that doesn't make it right. Perhaps in those videos, they didn't deem the defender to have gained LGP before backing into the circle.

Unless you see the videos on a regular basis where they give examples of these plays, then those plays are often shown as a RA block. And it is really the case when there is a outnumbered break where the defender moves and is in the RA during contact. So I get what you are saying, but you clearly are trying to "gotcha" with the rule, while not realizing that they put out almost weekly videos of plays which have caused some confusion at times. So I am not convinced they got this wrong in practice. And even this Hyland example caused some confusion and was talked about in pre-games.

Peace

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Unless you see the videos on a regular basis where they give examples of these plays, then those plays are often shown as a RA block. And it is really the case when there is a outnumbered break where the defender moves and is in the RA during contact. So I get what you are saying, but you clearly are trying to "gotcha" with the rule, while not realizing that they put out almost weekly videos of plays which have caused some confusion at times. So I am not convinced they got this wrong in practice. And even this Hyland example caused some confusion and was talked about in pre-games.

Peace

LOL...see the Art Hyland play quoted above. Apparently, you're misunderstanding the rulings or the reason for the rulings.

And you have it backwards....the "gotcha" is calling such a player with a block when they deserved a charge just because he ended up with a heel on the line.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

LOL...see the Art Hyland play quoted above. Apparently, you're misunderstanding the rulings or the reason for the rulings.

And you have it backwards....the "gotcha" is calling such a player with a block when they deserved a charge just because he ended up with a heel on the line.

I did not misunderstand his ruling, I think they have been contradictory. Again, there is video that has muddied this water. I actually worked a game where this was unclear based on a video the NCAA put out about a similar play. But then again, do you work college? You have access to the videos? This was discussed this year about what is the proper thing. That was put out this year and then there was a video that looked like the player backed into the RA and a block was encouraged to be called. Also, they appeared to call a block because of the RA in this play. So if I am misunderstanding the information put out, I guess I am not alone. You can play the "This what Art Hyland said..." but you do not appear to be aware of the videos that are put out based on this conversation and other conversations that are discussed on staffs or with fellow college officials. And I am sure if this is wrong, the NCAA will either clear up their wording from Art Hyland or make it clear when J.D. Collins comments for the coming year if they do not change the rule or the interpretation.

Peace

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I did not misunderstand his ruling, I think they have been contradictory. Again, there is video that has muddied this water. I actually worked a game where this was unclear based on a video the NCAA put out about a similar play. But then again, do you work college? You have access to the videos? This was discussed this year about what is the proper thing. That was put out this year and then there was a video that looked like the player backed into the RA and a block was encouraged to be called. Also, they appeared to call a block because of the RA in this play. So if I am misunderstanding the information put out, I guess I am not alone. You can play the "This what Art Hyland said..." but you do not appear to be aware of the videos that are put out based on this conversation and other conversations that are discussed on staffs or with fellow college officials. And I am sure if this is wrong, the NCAA will either clear up their wording from Art Hyland or make it clear when J.D. Collins comments for the coming year if they do not change the rule or the interpretation.

Peace

Whatever you've seen, the statement above is 100% clear. Continue to rationalize your error all you want. That doesn't change the facts.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Whatever you've seen, the statement above is 100% clear. Continue to rationalize your error all you want. That doesn't change the facts.

And continue to ask me if I care what you think? Nope, not one bit.

When you start working in the games I work, maybe I can worry about what you think of Art Hyland or what we were told at the pre-season meetings.

Peace

[Rich]

Same thing I said in the other thread.

I don't care about resumes, what either of you work, none of that crap. None of that impresses me nor should it.

Be nice to each other or ignore each other or something before a moderator needs to get involved further.

I'm closing this thread, too. If someone wants to post videos, open another one.