Kim Mulkey at it again

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

Why did we go from discussing a coach receiving a deserved technical foul in a women's college game to discussing officials' standards of attire? Oh well, BillyMac is being BillyMac again.

I'm actually mad at myself because this (below) got lost in the shuffle.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Did the official stop a Kentucky fast break to charge the technical foul?

Discussion?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Agree.

I've also paid more attention to what I was saying from behind my mask the past two years.

Saying the same thing with a smile can mean something very different from saying it with an angry expression.

Of course, if the coach, or player, can't see your face, what one says could be taken the "wrong" way.

I am not talking about saying something to not be seen as wrong. I mean saying things you would have never said because no one can see your facial expressions or hear you clearly. I would not be surprised if the officials cursed at Mulkey, because it would be harder to "prove."

Honestly, I have not really cared how they took it if it got the point across. I know that they would say things through their mask that would be seen differently if they did not have the mask on, and I said things back. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.

Peace

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I'm actually mad at myself because this (below) got lost in the shuffle.







Discussion?

I responded to that post. Go ahead put in your two cents.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

... no one can ...hear you clearly ...

Noticed a lot of our guys were pointing at the offender's bench while reporting a foul, something that we've been locally recommended not to do because some view it as an irritant. Those that do it have stated that it helps to clearly identity the offending team's color while wearing a mask.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Noticed a lot of our guys were pointing at the offender's bench while reporting a foul, something that we've been locally recommended not to do because some view it as an irritant. Those that do it have stated that it helps to clearly identity the offending team's color while wearing a mask.

I am a little confused. What about reporting and pointing? Did that happen here?

I might point to the bench if I am saying I gave a technical foul on them. But not if I am calling a regular foul during the game on the floor.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Did the official stop a Kentucky fast break to charge the technical foul?

Originally Posted by Raymond

I responded to that post.

I can't find it on the Forum, maybe on a different site, or maybe I'm not looking hard enough?

Also, like Raymond and bob jenkins, I'm interested in discussing the dead ball collision in the lane.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I am a little confused. What about reporting and pointing?

Just another mask "consequence".

[Altor]

Perhaps I'm just an old fogey who thinks this kind of conduct needs to be removed from all levels, but I'm looking for a reason to run her on that very first action.

NCAA-W Rule 10-15-1,2,3

It doesn't matter that the hand/fist didn't connect. She needs disqualified for fighting.

[Altor]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Also, like Raymond and bob jenkins, I'm interested in discussing the dead ball collision in the lane.

White defender in the lane attempts to set a screen on black 44, perhaps in an attempt to draw a team control foul. If play was still live, make your judgment regarding block/charge/no call, but I feel like she's still moving toward the opponent at the time of contact. Since the ball is dead due to the TF, this is nothing.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Altor

Since the ball is dead due to the TF, this is nothing ...

... unless (high school rules) the illegal contact is intentional or flagrant.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

... unless (high school rules) the illegal contact is intentional or flagrant.

In regards to this play, it is neither of those, as Altor is pointing out.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I can't find it on the Forum, maybe on a different site, or maybe I'm not looking hard enough?



Also, like Raymond and bob jenkins, I'm interested in discussing the dead ball collision in the lane.

I wasn't really concerned about who the foul was on. I was just wondering if they were reviewing it for the timing of that collision compared to the timing of the technical foul.

But that would only matter if an official blew their whistle for the collision.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Just another mask "consequence".

I am still confused. What is the consequence of the mask?

Peace

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Raymond

I wasn't really concerned about who the foul was on. I was just wondering if they were reviewing it for the timing of that collision compared to the timing of the technical foul.

But that would only matter if an official blew their whistle for the collision.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

I was also wondering if they were checking whether blue's contact was intentional. Did Blue have time to avoid white and still chose to run into her? Did blue "launch" (probably too strong a word) at white? Both questions raised while first watching the video and, given apparent higher tensions, worth=y of a look. Neither official was watching that area when the contact happened.

[CJP]

She got the T that she deserved. I think the foul that escalated the behavior was missed. I guess I don't follow college basketball enough to say if there is a chronic problem with her behavior.

In high school ball, slighted aggression towards officials concerns me more than this "in your face" behavior (as long as it is addressed). At least the T was given in this case.