Notre Dame Toledo

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Altor

2nd half
4:04 Foul on TJ Gibbs. 50 - 45
4:04 TJ Gibbs Turnover. 50 - 45
4:04 Technical Foul on Notre Dame. 50 - 45
TJ GIBBS
Notre Dame Fighting Irish
#10
Guard
The foul was called on #10 as he ran past the ball handler. He must have given a shove.

Originally Posted by Raymond

The foul has to be on number 10. And the play by play posted above confirms it.

Certainly not the initial signal given by the nearby trail official.

I wonder what caused him to change his call?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Certainly not the initial signal given by the nearby trail official.



I wonder what caused him to change his call?

What was his initial signal?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

What was his initial signal?

Sorry I misinterpreted the video, foul was on White 10, not White 33. I wrongly thought that some wanted a foul charged to the defense.

Now, where are my house keys?

[JRutledge]

Peace

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by AremRed

Still don’t see an obvious push-off by white #10.

Do you have a camera angle that matches the calling official's view?

[ilyazhito]

Even from this angle, I could see that White 10 pushed the defender into his teammate. What was the Notre Dame player thinking?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Raymond

Do you have a camera angle that matches the calling official's view?

Hard to imagine the production crew didn't have some other view of this play to show. But, we were not shown one. Usually when something like that happens, we get it from 3-4 angles.

So, to your point, you can't say there wasn't something obvious with just one angle any more than we can be sure of every situation on the floor from just one position. Lacking obviousness on video is a bad threshold to judge the correctness/incorrectness of a call/no-call for the same reasons we talk about open looks and closed looks. The camera angle was a closed look...don't trust it.

[Altor]

The obvious foul was the commentators and everyone on the Intarwebs screaming about the officials for calling a foul on the player that was "blown up" when that wasn't at all what was called.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by AremRed

Nope. Do you?

I'm trying to figure out the reason for this comment:

"Still don’t see an obvious push-off by white #10"

I don't see any posts in this thread where somebody said they saw an obvious push-off.

So if you are disagreeing with the official's call, what basis do you have since you don't have his same angle of the play?

--Yep, just re-checked, and not one person called it an obvious foul on #10.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by AremRed

^

Well if you cannot see the play from his angle, then you are not in a position to say it was an ant. You don't know what kind of contact occurred by #10.

When you make it a point to say you don't see an obvious foul call when nobody else said there was obvious foul, it seems like you're just trying to denigrate the judgment of the calling official

Just my opinion based on years of being around referees who like to sneak diss other officials, especially college officials who are from the same area of the country.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Certainly not the initial signal given by the nearby trail official.

All I see him signal is a team control foul. Could be on either player.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

All I see him signal is a team control foul. Could be on either player.

It is a TC foul signal. A player pushing his opponent into the ball handler is a TC foul. He gave the proper signal.

And he has Mike Bray in his face immediately. If you see the entire video, the coach realizes he overreacted to the call and almost acts like nothing happened.

Peace