Video request: Xavier beats Creighton on final drive/foul
 

Oh, Ru-u-u-u-t ... (or anyone else with video snipping abilities),

Thoughts on the final drive that drew a foul call as Xavier sank 2 FTAs with 0.3 seconds left to win by 1 on Saturday?

Lead rotated over in mid-play to emphatically call a block from behind that will no doubt have tongues wagging in more than Nebraska. (Game just ended and need better looks.)

Thoughts?

Apparently there also was a foul called on Xavier hitting a Creighton 3-pt shooter relatively lightly (?) just a moment earlier (I was out of the room), and the Creighton shooter hit all 3 FTAs to put his team up 71-70 to set up the final drama. Both plays worth a look?

It's a secondary defender in transition that came from L's primary. I believe that is 100% his call under men's college mechanics.

It was a foul, and hats off to him for having the stones to call it. I'd probably be emphatic, too, if I was calling a foul in a 1-point game with 0.3 left.

I will get this later tonight or early tomorrow. I did not record the game but it is coming on several times tonight. I will see if I can get this play outside of a highlight.

Peace

He pinched the paint and made the decision mid lane. Absolutely fantastic mechanic, there.

And I think it was a foul, too.

The other one was a touch foul on an airborne shooter's non shooting arm after the shot was released. Someone smarter than me will have to tell me if they want that called in the name of protecting a shooter.

It was a foul
 

If it was a foul during the game, it is a foul with 1 second remaining in the game. Great call by the official. No LGP!!!!

Here are the plays (Video)
 

Play #1:
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/xdTaQlxDnC8" frameborder="0" allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Play #2:
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/howf87ZUL6k" frameborder="0" allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Play #3:
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Z-YPbfF9Lls" frameborder="0" allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Peace

that's not a foul, player went straight up, both of them, perfectly legal. only thing approaching a foul , and it wasn't either, was the off arm of the driver. clearly bad call.

1- travel. put his left foot down first to establish pivot, then right foot, picked left foot up and put it down. Happened so fast amazing the official got it really.

2- foul but minor contact. However I feel even minor contact to the arms in the act of shooting needs to be called.

3- no foul good LGP.

I like the foul on the 3-point shot -- having called one myself at the buzzer in OT with a tie score.

0:00 And A Buzzer ...
 

My post is aimed at rookies. bob jenkin's post reminded me of a situation that I observed this past week.

My partner and I were watching the end of the junior varsity game preceding our varsity game from the trainer's office as my partner was getting a hamstring injury taped. Tie score. Player fouled in the act of shooting at the buzzer. 0:00 on the clock, and the buzzer sounded. The junior varsity officials got together and decided to shoot the free throws and leave the clock at 0:00. What happened next is bizarre, on two counts. They allowed the players to line up on the free throw lanes while the free throws were being attempted; and they allowed the player to attempt the second free throw after the first attempt was successful (winning the game).

1. Travel. But almost never called...unless the alternative is a charge.

2. Flop. He touched him, sure, but that's it...no foul.

3. Good call...on #4, not #32.

Play 1: Not a travel. But I see D1 guys "save" a player a foul with this type of call all the time. Don't like that, this travel is splitting hairs and not consistent with the way other foot action is officiated in different parts of the game.

Play 2: Not a foul. Weak shit.

Play 3: Also not a foul, but 'consistent' with Play 2.

You can sell it, but ...
 

This is a great example to debate (clip 3), and it's not fair to the comrade in stripes because we can play it back and forth all we want (thanks again, Rut).

But, ultimately, if you're in that situation, other than showing you're paying attention, rotating and coming out strong with the call -- all done superbly -- just what the heck could you tell No. 32 to do differently next time? (OK, OK our job is not to coach ... )

But breaking this down, it's a sincere request. Take a look: What does this guy have to do differently next time? Be honest. He was in his own spot in time and jumped straight up. The clutter from No. 4 pinching (did he foul?) admittedly made it more confusing in real time.

It's a heat-of-the-moment call that could have gone either way. But with the benefit of video breakdown, it's tough to say this is something to punish a defender for -- at any point in the game.

Probably the most remarkable thing of this is the restraint 32 showed afterward.

And, no, I have no dog in this fight. I'm also not criticizing a fellow official. It's all about the learning aspect for next time, as far as I'm concerned. Grateful for the help this board always offers.

The foul was on #4, not #32. IMO, the contact from #4's left leg causes A1 to travel before releasing the shot.

1) First you say it's not a travel, then you say it's splitting hairs. It is a travel. Whether or not it is consistently called is another debate.

2) Close enough to the release of the shot, and significant enough contact to call a foul in this situation.

3) Significant enough contact to call a foul (on #4), especially in consideration of the previous play.

You still have the annoying habit of bashing officials instead of analyzing and breaking down plays. If you're going to call it "weak sh!t" here, then say it to them when they are observing at your camps. But don't be "that guy" who mouths off anonymously on social media, but not publicly with your name attached.

OK, THAT I can buy into, if someone wants to press that point. That's what I get for watching with the sound down and seeing the overabundance of camera on No. 32. It actually looks like 4's chest, not leg bumps shooter. And to tell the truth, that was my initial reaction in real time. Then got distracted by so much 32. :(

+1. The lack of respect shown for people who worked very hard to get where they are is astounding.

And, frankly, people are not as anonymous as they think they are.

1. No travel. Right foot pivot foot.

2. Minor contact. Big time flop.

3. Travel on Black #3 before anything else happened (left foot pivot foot). Probably difficult for T to judge unless he steps down more on the play so he can see ball status.

edit: Technical foul on White coach for leaving his coaching box/time out area to scream "that's bull shit!" "that's awful!".

Was hoping this would get posted. I went to Creighton so am a fan and not entitled to give an opinion on these plays.

Interesting to hear peoples thoughts though. Difficult plays to make game time decisions on.

Whoa whoa whoa, nowhere did I bash any of the officials on the game. You think I did, because I disagreed with the calls. However disagreeing with a call and thinking it is weak/not consistent with other calls made across the game/league/D1 is not the same as bashing an official. All three guys on this game are excellent officials and while I may not like a call here, I have tremendous respect for their resumes and how hard they work. Full stop. :)

I don't think that's true at all -- as long as you recognize your bias(es), and provide rules-based reasons for your responses

BOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sorry. Old habits die hard.

The foul was a great call as an unabashed Creighton hater. As a neutral official, it was marginal but I think you can support it with video.

Well with the disclaimer I will give my opinion:

1. I personally dislike the notion of if the foul on the 3 point shot is a foul then the final one is a foul also. With the amount of video available to officials/assignors/interpreters every play has to be refereed individually.

2. IMO white #4 establishes legal guarding position facing the defender and moves backward. The black player initiates the contact with white #4.

3. In somewhat contrast to my first point, like plays do have to be refereed consistently throughout the game. Throughout the course of the game I thought that there were plays well officiated in regards to LGP and verticality. There were instances were contact took place with a defender in LGP and this was deemed a charge or incidental.

4. Evon Burroughs is a great official with the best look at the play and it is difficult/impossible to definitely overrule him here.

I am a huge Michigan fan and post many of my videos of Michigan games. I often will show plays specifically that were against Michigan and give the officials the credit for calling the foul or not calling the foul when it is appropriate. Being a fan is one thing, but being an official is another.

Peace

Play 3: Clearly not a foul on 32. I can see the foul on 4 as being correct. What irritated me the most was the L's position. A vast majority of plays occur on the right side and once the dribbler turned in the BC to come down the right, he should have closed IMO. Otherwise, he is looking through multiple bodies. With the way the play actually went, L should not have had a whistle and trusted C's position/look. If L would have done that, then I bet we are not even talking about this play.

Do D1 guys talk about locking down your position with that little time left? So as to avoid a missed rotation? I'm wondering if that's the reason he stayed on the other side of the paint.

On a last second shot, there is no rotation to miss. Guys talk about getting wherever you need to get to referee the last shot.

For reference the call was made on white #4.

#1 - Travel, excellent get.
#2 - It's a foul. On the off arm, the balls already away, the guy fell like he got shot with a rifle, I get that, but it's still a foul
#3 - I really like the foul on #4. His body contact funneled the offensive player right into a defender. The question of consistency came up earlier in the thread to which I can't comment, but seeing only this play, foul.

This whole concept of locking down was a real fad around here for a while -- but we've eliminated it entirely from our conversation. The L goes where he needs to go to officiate and we adjust accordingly.

I'd say he pinched rather than come across because there's this effect that happens if you try to officiate a drive mid-rotation -- the whole thing passes in front of you and straight-lines you at the most important moment. If you can't get over and receive the play, step in to the lane to where you need to go to get it as best you can.

OK ,good. Thanks for clarification. I simply could not see on whom the foul was called. Now, given that #4 actually committed the foul, C should have just called it. I do not like L calling it on #4 as it is too straightlined. Whateves...

my $.02 :

1. that seems like a ticky tac travel but was technically right I guess.

2. I don't like that call but I don't hate it. Is this one that would have been called in the 1st quarter? I would say no, but this official had the best angle in the house and he did touch the off arm.

3. #4 fouled him. While I think the call was right, I do not like the L's position, that play was coming up the C side of the court the whole way, seems like L should have already turned that corner by the time the contact happened.

Great finish!

It may be a "ticky-tack" travel call, but if you don't call it then you have to call an RA block on the defender. Is that the right thing to do, ignore a travel and call the subsequent block?

Play #1- I have the feet coming down simultaneously after the catch so either may be the pivot, which I have as the right foot and no travel.

Play #2- Contact with the right arm of the defender on the chest of an airborne shooter. Good call, poor closeout.

Play #3- Great get on #4. One of those plays where everyone in the gym thinks it on 32 because they are watching as fans and have no clue what officiating is about and refereering the whole play.

I can’t believe the poobahs really want travels called when the feet are millinanoseconds from touching simultaneously.

If you’re shaving it that close, then Blueitt travels prior to the entry pass.

So ignore the traveling, call the block?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Unless you want to be consistent, and grab every spin-move, and every jump stop that’s the least bit sloppy, and every gather on a dunk, and triple your whistle count for the night—then I’d say get the block

Then you have to call a block/charge immediately after this play. That is the reason I posted the play. It was not just a play that was only a travel, it involved contact that took place right after the move. It is a dilemma, but it is something that has to consider. There are many times when we call a foul but we miss the travel that took place before. And I am not really saying that you should call the travel, just stating it appears he did travel.

Peace

I get it. And what I'm saying is we are on here arguing whether it was a travel or it wasn't. Would anyone argue that there was a foul on the defender following the "travel"? I'm going to say no. Now if the whole gym sees him travel get the travel, but I think you have to come out of this play with a foul.

I have no problem if an official decides to come out with a foul instead of a travel. But I hate it when an official properly rules a play a travel and he gets criticized b/c other officials need to watch a replay to see it.

Not to mention the fact that if it actually is a travel, even if it is very close, it is very unfair to penalize a defender with a block when trying to defend a player that traveled.

It is not all that different than a defender holding an opponent who then pushes off to get free. It would be the wrong thing to call the push off that everyone can see when you know the defender was holding.