I don't remember, but I saw someone on FB say the UCF bench was screaming about

I've seen less contact called an F1 Hook & Hold than what Duke #12 did on UCF #35; that was unfortunately a miss.

UCF #15 does a really bad job on boxing out. The ball bounces outward from the rim. The C and L would have a closed look on any obvious contact by Duke #5.

I thought that hook would have warranted a second look had anyone noticed it live. But it's very congested and the ball went the other direction, so I don't blame them for not seeing it live.

A lot the BS on the internet is focusing on the nonexistent push on tne offensive rebound. It's simply a horrible box out.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

I wouldn't call the push nonexistent, but it was a terrible effort of the UCF player.

There was no displacement that comes close to warranting a foul.

The iniial drive, similarly, wasn't enough for a PC foul.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

Play 1: 50/50 foul but defender jumps first and compromises position. Need faster whistle though.

Play 2: Absolutely not a PC on Zion. CC on grounded RA play on Tacko.

Play 3: CNC. Interesting to note that if Tacko deflects the inbound pass the rule changes and there would no longer be a back court exception. Important for the Trail to pay attention to whether the ball was deflected and also for the Lead to have awareness to call this play if Trail does not.

Play 4: Marginal push in the back on Slot side rebounding, given the time/score in that situation. Could see a hook and hold foul on the Lead side rebounder.

Any video of this review?

1. This is a tough call if you think he was going to finish with his outside hand anyway then contact is marginal let shot blockers be shot blockers. If you fee like he was going up with 2 or lost the ability to finish with his inside hand because a 260+ pound man is on and through his inside arm then I'm ok with it going to the line. Felt late to go with the foul but I'm ok either way.

2. This looks too much like the one he got called for earlier to not get the PC on the first contact. For consistency no call both or get both Official got the rule right with RA and grounded on Tacko.

3. Looks odd but we are all good.

4. It certainly doesn't look like he pushes him hard, but why on the most important rebound of your life would the player jump under the rim and basket to board the ball. Feel like their was displacement there based on what I'm seeing.

Play 4 is an obvious hook and hold on white 12. Should have been an F1.

I do not think that is a hook and hold at all. #12 is the one that puts his arm under the arm of #35, but they do not lock or even prevent movement of the others. That at most would be a regular foul, but even that is a stretch to me.

I have not seen a single "hook and hold" like that called an F1 at the D1 level all year. And I know as a small college official, we tried to avoid that call on plays like this.

Peace

IDK Rut, this looks like a pretty good example of a hook/hold to me. I've definitely seen similar plays called as such. The only difference being the player being held attempting to jump, which didn't happen here because the ball went to other side of the lane.

Not much to see or learn from there. Ball didn't obviously hit the rim, the call on the floor stood.

Gotta agree with you on this one, this action however brief looked like every video JD put out this year addressing the hook and hold.

From what was described, UCF shot was missed (but "grazed" the rim), shot-clock buzzer goes off, play continued as UCF got the rebound and made put-back FG.

The crew stops the game to review if the previous attempt was a shot clock violation.

From what I know, a shot clock review can be done after the original FG is made; they have to stop the game immediately to check if the shot was released in time.

In this case, the original shot was missed but deemed to have hit the rim. The subsequent FG attempt (the 2nd shot) was made by UCF thus making the previous (alleged) shot clock violation non-reviewable.

Please correct me if I'm wrong; thanks.

I have seen quite a few of these as well and as the season went on they were making it clear that we do not call any "locked" arms a hook and hold. You have to be restricted and there was little to no restriction here. A foul maybe, but not a hook and hold.

Peace