Vid Request: Mich State vs Perdue - hook/hold = F1

[bucky]

With about 5:45 left in the game, a rebounding foul is called. They go to the monitor and upgrade it to an F1 for hook/hold. I have seen many of these now and this appeared to be the least egregious of any hook/hold foul that indeed ended up being upgraded to an F1. Izzo bonkers, lol. Wymer on the game. Shortly thereafter, there is a rebounding foul called on a FT and it appeared very similar to the aforementioned F1 but they did not even go to the monitor. Announcers could not stop complaining about the new rule.

[deecee]

It's a new rule and concept. Expect growing pains and tweaking in the off season. Folks need to just get over it.

[JRutledge]

Peace

[Raymond]

Will Perdue is still playing college basketball?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

Will Perdue is still playing college basketball?

No, it's the college founded by Frank Perdue, specializing in the study of Chickenology.



Their biggest rival is Kentucky, not the Wildcats, rather the college founded by Colonel Sanders.

[bucky]

I do not necessarily mind the rule, I am just not sure why it was created. If someone was holding a jersey during a rebound, it would be an F1 right? There is no specific text/rule regarding holding a jersey but we have the F1 text/rule. Why was it necessary to have specific wording for this play created? Why couldn't they just use the F1 text/rule to address the situation. I think they reaction from said calls/fouls would have been the same and perhaps that is why they went out of their way to create specific language for it. IDK.

(thanks JRUT for video)

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by deecee

It's a new rule and concept. Expect growing pains and tweaking in the off season...

Especially when you publish a new rule with certain criteria then send out a bulletin that says that criteria doesn't really apply.

[SC Official]

The coaches write the rules.

Couldn't get through the video without a "make up call" assertion on the obvious rebounding foul by Purdue.

[Rich]

As someone who has no stake in the college game, I'll say this:

Ridiculous interpretation that simply needs to be acknowledged as a mistake and quietly go away.

[deecee]

Originally Posted by Rich

As someone who has no stake in the college game, I'll say this:

Ridiculous interpretation that simply needs to be acknowledged as a mistake and quietly go away.

+1 - it would be nice if the announcers understood or comprehended who sets the damn rules and expectations in the first place. Their heads would explode if they found out it was the coaches and teams.

[#olderthanilook]

Originally Posted by Raymond

Especially when you publish a new rule with certain criteria then send out a bulletin that says that criteria doesn't really apply.

Soooo....this video sequence is not a good example of a hook/hold???

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by #olderthanilook

Soooo....this video sequence is not a good example of a hook/hold???

I haven't seen the video yet. I was just commenting to the "growing pains" statement. The growing pains are self induced by Art Hyland.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Raymond

I haven't seen the video yet. I was just commenting to the "growing pains" statement. The growing pains are self induced by Art Hyland.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

I just viewed the video for the first time (I only watched the beginning to see the foul). Based on the rule that was written in the rulebook I don't have an F1. I'm not even sure if it's hook and hold.

But if the officials judged it was a hook and hold, Art Hyland put out a bulletin telling us to make it F1 automatically.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[crosscountry55]

Bothered me that the first player to seek the intertwining of arms was the Purdue player. He peeks back at the MSU player, than reaches his arm down specifically to get it inside his. Did the MSU player then clamp when the rebound shot off to their left? Well maybe. I don’t think so but three officials did, so I’ll defer to them. My point, with apologies for sounding immature, is that the Purdue player started it.

We could mandate that all arm locking is an immediate foul. But then that’s all we’d be looking for and we’d miss lots of other stuff. And we’d be going to the monitor endlessly. There doesn’t appear to be a good solution here. The dubious FF1 rule and interpretations notwithstanding, its uncomfortable to deal with the reality that’s it’s often the second guy who picks up the foul in these situations.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk