Ohio State @ Iowa Plays (Video)

[Pantherdreams]

1pc
2 not wrong call but not a lot to be seen from this angle.
3travel
4 charge
5 travel

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Pantherdreams

1pc
2 not wrong call but not a lot to be seen from this angle.
3travel
4 charge
5 travel

ditto

[sdoebler]

Originally Posted by Pantherdreams

1pc
2 not wrong call but not a lot to be seen from this angle.
3travel
4 charge
5 travel

Same, on #2 no one had a better view than the calling official, it's tough to make any argument against that person with out a closer angle.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by sdoebler

Same, on #2 no one had a better view than the calling official, it's tough to make any argument against that person with out a closer angle.

To me, this was more about his mechanic and his positioning. I have no idea if what he saw was actually there, but he is right there to call it and made the call confidently. Also, it did not appear anyone said anything. So that tells me something about the call.

Peace

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

To me, this was more about his mechanic and his positioning. I have no idea if what he saw was actually there, but he is right there to call it and made the call confidently. Also, it did not appear anyone said anything. So that tells me something about the call.



Peace

Originally Posted by sdoebler

Same, on #2 no one had a better view than the calling official, it's tough to make any argument against that person with out a closer angle.

This brings up an interesting epiphany I’ve had over the last week, supported by a great email from our association last night. With less and less post play, and more and more zone defense, I find myself without many matchups to watch as the lead. So I’ve been tempted to stay a little wider and open up (say 60 vice 45 degrees) to at least have something to officiate. Technically the area inside the arc is lead’s, but many coverage diagrams show that hashmarked “dual coverage” area where both L and T are looking, so historically I’ve ceded a lot of that space to the T. Maybe I need to be more aware of that space (for example where the foul was called in #2). But....how much is too much? At what point do I risk having four eyes in the corner and missing an unexpected drive or cut in the paint? It’s a conundrum for me as the game evolves.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Matt S.]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

This brings up an interesting epiphany I’ve had over the last week, supported by a great email from our association last night. With less and less post play, and more and more zone defense, I find myself without many matchups to watch as the lead. So I’ve been tempted to stay a little wider and open up (say 60 vice 45 degrees) to at least have something to officiate. Technically the area inside the arc is lead’s, but many coverage diagrams show that hashmarked “dual coverage” area where both L and T are looking, so historically I’ve ceded a lot of that space to the T. Maybe I need to be more aware of that space (for example where the foul was called in #2). But....how much is too much? At what point do I risk having four eyes in the corner and missing an unexpected drive or cut in the paint? It’s a conundrum for me as the game evolves.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

For starters, we're in the same association

This is precisely why the NBA/NCAAW give the entire corner to the lead once the ball is below FT line extended. That said, as L, working wide when there's no competitive matchup in the paint or on the block is ideal as you'll be able to see BH/D, defender, and potential secondary defender without having to position-adjust.

Excellent epiphany!