Gonzaga vs Ohio State - DOG?

[bucky]

With 1:23 to go in the first half, Gonzaga player scores, then gives ball to ref. DOG called by......the C. Did not appear to delay anything. New T right there and did not call it. Perhaps something was already said previous to that play. Gonzaga player befuddled. Shocker.

[SNIPERBBB]

Didn't see anything to make me think there was problem.

I have noticed an odd amount of touches of the ball by the new trail after a made basket by the new offense tossing the ball to the trail.

[Camron Rust]

I haven't seen this play but why grab the ball and had it to the ref? Usually, the only purpose for doing that is to delay the game. It would usually take a bit longer for it to go through the refs hands to the other team. The players need to just let it bounce and let the other team get it.

[deecee]

I always told a team the first time they did this to leave the ball alone. The next time I call a DOG. This is only done to slow the game down and throw the other team off.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by bucky

With 1:23 to go in the first half, Gonzaga player scores, then gives ball to ref. DOG called by......the C. Did not appear to delay anything. New T right there and did not call it. Perhaps something was already said previous to that play. Gonzaga player befuddled. Shocker.

So now Gonzaga won't do that anymore. What's the problem? The purpose of a warning is to prevent further behavior of the same kind?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[IUgrad92]

Originally Posted by Raymond

So now Gonzaga won't do that anymore. What's the problem? The purpose of a warning is to prevent further behavior of the same kind?
Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

The only problem is consistency. The action Gonzaga was warned for is something seen a number of times in previous tournament games, and done regularly by teams for entire games, and nothing said or done by the officials.

I'm fine and probably agree with the DOG, but officials, as a whole, definitely are not on the same page on this.

[deecee]

Originally Posted by IUgrad92

The only problem is consistency. The action Gonzaga was warned for is something seen a number of times in previous tournament games, and done regularly by teams for entire games, and nothing said or done by the officials.

I'm fine and probably agree with the DOG, but officials, as a whole, definitely are not on the same page on this.

Is your expectation that officials are on the same page for a lot of things, or did this effect your team in a negative way?

[bucky]

I found it strange that the action did not appear to delay the offensive team and that it was called by the C with the new T merely feet away.

[LRZ]

Originally Posted by bucky

I found it strange that the action did not appear to delay the offensive team....

Preventive officiating.

[IUgrad92]

Originally Posted by deecee

Is your expectation that officials are on the same page for a lot of things, or did this effect your team in a negative way?

My guess is that Mr. Collins would want the officials working to call it the same way. This particular play, an offensive player tossing the ball to the new T after a score, is not a judgement play. It is black and white. This specific crew decided that it was going to be a DOG. My assumption is that they have the rule book to back up their decision. If that is the case then why did the crew in the Auburn/Clemson game not call a DOG for the exact same play that occurred in the first half? BTW, nor did the crew stop the game to give a team warning. With that said, my guess would be that this action is going to be allowed by this crew for the remainder of that game.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by IUgrad92

My guess is that Mr. Collins would want the officials working to call it the same way. This particular play, an offensive player tossing the ball to the new T after a score, is not a judgement play. It is black and white. This specific crew decided that it was going to be a DOG. My assumption is that they have the rule book to back up their decision. If that is the case then why did the crew in the Auburn/Clemson game not call a DOG for the exact same play that occurred in the first half? BTW, nor did the crew stop the game to give a team warning. With that said, my guess would be that this action is going to be allowed by this crew for the remainder of that game.

The crew on one game has nothing to do with the crew on another game. Additionally, we don't know the history of that particular team. Maybe they've been doing that all season and the opponent noticed it on video and alerted the officials to it. It wouldn't be the first or last time that has happened.

[deecee]

Originally Posted by IUgrad92

My guess is that Mr. Collins would want the officials working to call it the same way. This particular play, an offensive player tossing the ball to the new T after a score, is not a judgement play. It is black and white. This specific crew decided that it was going to be a DOG. My assumption is that they have the rule book to back up their decision. If that is the case then why did the crew in the Auburn/Clemson game not call a DOG for the exact same play that occurred in the first half? BTW, nor did the crew stop the game to give a team warning. With that said, my guess would be that this action is going to be allowed by this crew for the remainder of that game.

Don't take this personally but this is a bit naive. One crew may adjudicate differently than another one. It would be rare that Senor Collins would make an announcement on this as this action is not THAT prevalent. There are more pressing issues to get officials on the same page that have a greater impact than this. There will never be 100% uniformity in how things are called at the NCAA level, however they try their best to get all officials on the same page as far as contact and freedom of movement stuff.

[IUgrad92]

Originally Posted by deecee

Don't take this personally but this is a bit naive. One crew may adjudicate differently than another one. It would be rare that Senor Collins would make an announcement on this as this action is not THAT prevalent. There are more pressing issues to get officials on the same page that have a greater impact than this. There will never be 100% uniformity in how things are called at the NCAA level, however they try their best to get all officials on the same page as far as contact and freedom of movement stuff.

I officiate, so I take very little personally. At the same time, I probably view things like this, something that is truly a black and white situation, as something that "should" be fairly easy to get everyone on the same page with. "If anyone from team A possesses the ball after a score and throws the ball to one of the officials, a DOG warning shall immediately be called." (for example) From my perspective there is no 'gray area' here, and all officials could be easily observed on how it is adjudicated. To be honest, it could be something that saw nearly 100% consistency overnight.

Unlike, contact and freedom of movement, which I agree are more pressing issues. There will always be a 'gray area' for those things and individual judgement, thus people will always see inconsistencies from game to game, no matter how much focus the NCAA puts towards it.

Side note: Just saw video of a 4A boys semi-state game in Indiana where a DOG warning was given to team A after A1 had a breakaway dunk, A1 then grabbed the ball (no one from Team B was close to the ball or trying to gain possession of it), turned and nicely handed it to B1 who was standing right beside him. Seemed like an odd call, considering no delay truly resulted. Maybe a state interpretation was handed out or maybe it was just an individual official's interpretation??

[LRZ]

This is a matter of situational judgment, not "black and white." Making it so is overly officious, imo.

[deecee]

Originally Posted by IUgrad92

Side note: Just saw video of a 4A boys semi-state game in Indiana where a DOG warning was given to team A after A1 had a breakaway dunk, A1 then grabbed the ball (no one from Team B was close to the ball or trying to gain possession of it), turned and nicely handed it to B1 who was standing right beside him. Seemed like an odd call, considering no delay truly resulted. Maybe a state interpretation was handed out or maybe it was just an individual official's interpretation??

I'll bet there was no interp, it was just an official being overly officious. In the end I call this a DOG sometime. It definitely get's a "leave the ball alone" from me the first time, but it's situational.

I wouldn't carte blanche say, anytime a team that just scores touches the ball it's a DOG. That's excessive.