Video Request: Kentucky vs. Kansas State (Sweet Sixteen)

[crosscountry55]

Feel free to merge into a General Sweet 16 video thread if one is created.

CBS probably won’t release this, but worth a discussion if anyone can find it. 14:25 2nd half:

1. Block/Charge call goes PC against KY. Thoughts about the call and the L’s signaling mechanics?

2. KY gets tagged with a Class B tech of some sort. Announcers seem to think they whacked Calipari for being out of the box. Maybe that’s true (is that a Class B these days?), but the still frame CBS showed had him outside the old 28-ft box but clearly inside the new 38-ft box. Did the officials mess this up, did the still frame CBS showed not capture the right moment, or was the T for something altogether different than what the announcers thought?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Multiple Sports]

Just put the whole game up there...that was a tough game to work.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

Feel free to merge into a General Sweet 16 video thread if one is created.

CBS probably won’t release this, but worth a discussion if anyone can find it. 14:25 2nd half:

1. Block/Charge call goes PC against KY. Thoughts about the call and the L’s signaling mechanics?

2. KY gets tagged with a Class B tech of some sort. Announcers seem to think they whacked Calipari for being out of the box. Maybe that’s true (is that a Class B these days?), but the still frame CBS showed had him outside the old 28-ft box but clearly inside the new 38-ft box. Did the officials mess this up, did the still frame CBS showed not capture the right moment, or was the T for something altogether different than what the announcers thought?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I do not know about the TF, but the PCF was a good one.

MTD, Sr.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Multiple Sports

Just put the whole game up there...that was a tough game to work.

I don't think it was as tough as they made it. I think, in several cases, they called stuff that just wasn't there (both ways), at least in comparison to how most games have been called this year.

[Multiple Sports]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I don't think it was as tough as they made it. I think, in several cases, they called stuff that just wasn't there (both ways), at least in comparison to how most games have been called this year.

I agree with the last half of your statement but that being said, I challenge you to watch the game off the ball. KSU
causes you to make decisions. Hands on cutters, screeners moving, etc. I thought the post was clean. We may just have to agree to disagree....

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by Multiple Sports

Just put the whole game up there...that was a tough game to work.

I tend to agree. KY’s MO is to take it inside and get to the FT line. It worked, but KY also had some sloppy post play and they made some silly ball handling mistakes on offense due to their aforementioned game plan. All of this made for a very busy night for the crew.

Camron said he thought there were phantom calls on both sides. To be honest I agree with him. You could write a book about the evolution of the officiating in this game. It would be a great case study. I’ll bet the crew had a great pre-game, anticipated the physical play, and agreed to clean it up early. I think they probably went a little too far and got some stuff that just wasn’t there on both ends. I’m sure they had a feel for this as the game went on. So paradoxically in both halves—but especially the second—they started passing on some stuff that really needed to be called IMHO. When everyone has four fouls with six minutes left in a close game, that’s what tends to happen. Likewise when you realize both teams are in double bonus with eight minutes left in the first half.

I am not being critical of the crew at all. I thought they worked really hard and had the best intentions in mind with how they thought that game should be officiated. But I also believe that as a crew they would approach it differently if given another chance. This is why I’d argue the whole game is a fantastic case study.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Kansas Ref]

I agree, the entire game could be used as a 'case study' for how a crew can anticipate that a certain style of play will occur and then officiate to that expectation--[i.e., preconceived notions].
I was confused momentarily on that block/charge call that you cited: After the made basket by the Kentucky player, the L gave a signal of a " closed fist that was accompanied by a horizontal back-n-forth motion with his arm".
Was that not typically the "signal'' used by many refs to indicate that the basket was 'good' and we're shooting 1 FT? That event did give me a moment of pause because I was looking for the classical PC signal: with "palm behind head" and followed by a "directionality" indicator. When I [and ostensibly the announcers] did not see this classical sequence of signals, then it did cause momentary confusion to both players, headcoaches, and viewers. Just sayin...

And this one final comment before I step down from my soapbox: I Hated it on the Loyahla Chicago vs Nevada game, when at about the 1.8second point the Loyola player recv'd the pass, turned and then got collided on by the Nev player. Then the announcers--after reviewing multiple replays ins super slo-mo come and say: "ohhhh the refs missed a clear and obvious travel violation". As if they could've done better..sheesh! I never was a fan of chris webber anyway

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Kansas Ref

I agree, the entire game could be used as a 'case study' for how a crew can anticipate that a certain style of play will occur and then officiate to that expectation--[i.e., preconceived notions].
I was confused momentarily on that block/charge call that you cited: After the made basket by the Kentucky player, the L gave a signal of a " closed fist that was accompanied by a horizontal back-n-forth motion with his arm".
Was that not typically the "signal'' used by many refs to indicate that the basket was 'good' and we're shooting 1 FT? That event did give me a moment of pause because I was looking for the classical PC signal: with "palm behind head" and followed by a "directionality" indicator. When I [and ostensibly the announcers] did not see this classical sequence of signals, then it did cause momentary confusion to both players, headcoaches, and viewers. Just sayin...

And this one final comment before I step down from my soapbox: I Hated it on the Loyahla Chicago vs Nevada game, when at about the 1.8second point the Loyola player recv'd the pass, turned and then got collided on by the Nev player. Then the announcers--after reviewing multiple replays ins super slo-mo come and say: "ohhhh the refs missed a clear and obvious travel violation". As if they could've done better..sheesh! I never was a fan of chris webber anyway

I was in a bar half paying attention and immediately said "travel" when that happened.

I contend that a HS official sees that more -- the catch/turn/surprise/travel -- than those top D1 guys do.

[Kansas Ref]

Originally Posted by Rich

I was in a bar half paying attention and immediately said "travel" when that happened.

I contend that a HS official sees that more -- the catch/turn/surprise/travel -- than those top D1 guys do.

I like how you phrased the capturing of the event you wrote: "catch/turn/surprise/travel". Yes I have seen this in my NF games, now I have a way of phrasing it to inquisitors. Thanks!
So I gather from the context of your remark that top level D1 refs do not see this "catch/turn/surprise/travel" as much as an NF ref would see it; therefore, it makes them less prone to recognize/identify & call this violation. I am solely an NF level ref (and honestly have no desire to be anything but an NF level ref), so I don't have a reference point for upper level collegiate reffing, but nevertheless the gall of announcer to say and pile-on about "missing an obvious travel" disturbed me. Just sayin....

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by Kansas Ref

I was confused momentarily on that block/charge call that you cited: After the made basket by the Kentucky player, the L gave a signal of a " closed fist that was accompanied by a horizontal back-n-forth motion with his arm". Was that not typically the "signal'' used by many refs to indicate that the basket was 'good' and we're shooting 1 FT? That event did give me a moment of pause because I was looking for the classical PC signal: with "palm behind head" and followed by a "directionality" indicator. When I [and ostensibly the announcers] did not see this classical sequence of signals, then it did cause momentary confusion to both players, headcoaches, and viewers. Just sayin...

I had the same confusion you did and that's why I brought it up. During the middle of the season here, our association put out some observations, and one of them was that in our individual efforts to apply some style to our signals, some of our "and-one" signals could be confused for a punch going the other way. In this example, it was the exact opposite. The "punch" was kind of restrained, and came down a little more like Thor's hammer. I really thought that L was counting the basket (so did everyone else....part of the reason Calipari had a minor meltdown right there, although I think that it was more because he disagreed with the call). I thought L should have punched a little more definitively, or if not, then he probably needs to add the palm behind the head. The palm behind head is indeed an approved signal, but truthfully its use has declined in the era of the stylistic punch. I don't often use it at the spot of a PCF, but I do when I report to the table.

By the way, FWIW, I thought it was a block. I don't think it was all that close, either.....I'd call it 70/30. I think the defender had two feet down just in the nick of time, but the rest of his body was still moving toward the shooter at the point of contact. I even thought this was somewhat purposeful on the part of the defender. My humble opinion.

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by Rich

I was in a bar half paying attention and immediately said "travel" when that happened.

I contend that a HS official sees that more -- the catch/turn/surprise/travel -- than those top D1 guys do.

I was sober in my living room and didn't see it from the long angle view in real time. I can understand missing this when everyone and their brother knows what the defense is trying to do. Look for foul. See foul. Call foul as quickly as possible. Any travel short of dramatic and obvious in that situation probably isn't going to get noticed. Not to mention the gumption needed to make that call. If you're wrong, the consequences are astronomical and career-defining.

That said, it probably wouldn't hurt me to add "catch/turn/surprise/travel" to my vernacular. That's not a bad way to frame plays like that. I like it!

[Rich]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

I was sober in my living room and didn't see it from the long angle view in real time. I can understand missing this when everyone and their brother knows what the defense is trying to do. Look for foul. See foul. Call foul as quickly as possible. Any travel short of dramatic and obvious in that situation probably isn't going to get noticed. Not to mention the gumption needed to make that call. If you're wrong, the consequences are astronomical and career-defining.

That said, it probably wouldn't hurt me to add "catch/turn/surprise/travel" to my vernacular. That's not a bad way to frame plays like that. I like it!

Maybe I'm in tune with this cause I see it get missed often -- live and on film. The defender is punished for "being there" -- and since there's no time/distance factor when it comes to a player with the ball, I hate seeing someone get punished for playing smart defense.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Kansas Ref

I like how you phrased the capturing of the event you wrote: "catch/turn/surprise/travel". Yes I have seen this in my NF games, now I have a way of phrasing it to inquisitors. Thanks!
So I gather from the context of your remark that top level D1 refs do not see this "catch/turn/surprise/travel" as much as an NF ref would see it; therefore, it makes them less prone to recognize/identify & call this violation. I am solely an NF level ref (and honestly have no desire to be anything but an NF level ref), so I don't have a reference point for upper level collegiate reffing, but nevertheless the gall of announcer to say and pile-on about "missing an obvious travel" disturbed me. Just sayin....

It was an obvious travel, without the slow motion replay.

The very final play of the game was a great execution of a jump stop to avoid being fouled.

In the KSU game, in the last 4 minutes, the KSU PG executed a legal jump stop, but then was allowed to pivot and kick the ball out for a big 3 point shot.

[ODog]

Originally Posted by Raymond

It was an obvious travel, without the slow motion replay.

...

In the KSU game, in the last 4 minutes, the KSU PG executed a legal jump stop, but then was allowed to pivot and kick the ball out for a big 3 point shot.

On point one, absolutely agree. Like a previous poster said, even live I said "Uh oh, he traveled." Ohhhhh the irony, however, that Chris Webber -- beneficiary of one of the most infamous missed travel calls in history -- chose to pile on there.

As for point #2, I think this has gone the way of the spin move. It's a clear travel 99 percent of the time, but it's an accepted part of the game now and nobody (including yours truly) calls it anymore.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by ODog

...

As for point #2, I think this has gone the way of the spin move. It's a clear travel 99 percent of the time, but it's an accepted part of the game now and nobody (including yours truly) calls it anymore.

That's one we cannot allow. I let the illegal spin go sometimes when it is really fast. But a jump stop followed by a pivot, that's a clear and obvious travel that I call when I see it.