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.

[Raymond]

The number is supposed to be indicated when giving this kind of warning for a delay.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[bucky]

Originally Posted by Raymond

The number is supposed to be indicated when giving this kind of warning for a delay.

I can't find where that is documented. Do you have a rule to cite or manual reference?