Duke/MD held ball calls

[Nevadaref]

In watching the Duke/MD game it struck me that the second type of held ball was clearly being miscalled.

Section 35. Held Ball
Art. 1. A held ball occurs when an opponent places his or her hand(s):
a. So firmly on the ball that control cannot be obtained without undue roughness.
b. On the ball to prevent an airborne player from throwing the ball or attempting a try.

A.R. 27. A1 jumps for a try for field goal. B1 jumps to defend against the try and (a) touches the ball before it leaves A1’s hand and A1 returns to the floor with the ball and the ball never loses contact with A1’s hand(s) or (b)the ball loses contact with A1’s hand(s), A1 retrieves the ball while in the air and returns to the floor in possession of the ball and begins to dribble or (c) after the ball touches the floor, A1 recovers the ball and
begins to dribble. RULING: In (a), the official shall call a held ball. In (b) and (c), the play shall be legal. A1 has gained a new possession in both instances.

The two plays that demonstrated my above comment were a block by a Duke player in the first half near the basket, in which the ball was even loose when the Lead official blew the whistle and signalled a held ball, and at the 10:01 mark of the 2nd half when a MD player on the perimeter jumped, but had the ball hit by a defender causing it to come out of his grasp, and fly up in the air. He caught it again before returning to the floor and a held ball was called.

Anyone out there who Tivo'd or recorded this game could affirm this.
It made me wonder what the ACC is instructing their officials to call a held ball.

[tomegun]

The ACC is not giving any specific instructions on calling a held ball.

[WinterWillie]

Originally posted by Nevadaref
In watching the Duke/MD game it struck me that the second type of held ball was clearly being miscalled.

That wasn't the only area they were struggling in.

[BktBallRef]

On the first held ball, the L signaled a foul, then changed it to a jump ball. It was neither. It was a clean block. I think he realized that after he went up with his fist. That's when he changed the call.

I thought the second play was a no call. The ball was clearly slapped out of his hands and he caught it and returned to the floor. Nothing there.

The foul that wasn't called on Sheldon Williams was the biggest miss of the night. MD player goes up to dunk and Williams grabs his forearm, nowhere near the ball. Of course, ESPN showed it over and over. But they were right. That's a foul in any league.

Having said all that, I'd probably make a lot more mistakes than they did if I was to ever work a Duke game in Cameron Indoor. At least the Dookies lost!

[WinterWillie]

Originally posted by BktBallRef
.

Having said all that, I'd probably make a lot more mistakes than they did if I was to ever work a Duke game in Cameron Indoor.

If the Dookies were playing the Tar Heels at Cameron and you were doing the game, as bad a ref as you are, (we all know that) I still think that you would have gotten the Sheldon Williams foul.

[theboys]

I watched the ad nauseum replay of the missed foul, too. The angles from above definitely showed the foul. But, when they showed the angle from around where I guess the trail would've been, I could see where the official might have thought Williams hit the ball first. Plus, we were seeing the replays in slo-mo replay.

Since I'm an ignorant fan/coach, whose call would that be? In two-man, its the official up top, right (trail?)? Is it the same for three-man?

I gotta tell ya, though, I see post-release contact like this all the time. Sometime its called, sometime its not. I mean, even the block that was called a held ball had contact on the follow-through after the block.

[BBall_Junkie]

Agree with BBR on the first held ball. Official anticipated the fould blew the whistle and signaled a foul. However quickly replayed the play in his head and realized it was a clean block and went with the held ball, which was his only out and in my opinion the right thing to do.

As for the Sheldon Williams "blocked shot" play in question that ESPN replayed "ad nauseum" the official definitely kicked it (which we do some times). A fould should have definitely been called. However, I think an argument could be made (and one the announcers never considered in their incessant babble over the play) that it was an offensive foul. Remeber Williams took a forearm to the nose. If you watch the play, the Maryland player used his off hand to fend off the defender (this contact happened first) and may have prevented Williams from getting to the top of his jump and subsequently the ball. I just throw this in as a different view point, because I don't think we as officials call this type of play enough, it happens alot and we are quick to hit the defense with a foul. All that being said, a foul one way or the other was appropriate as he did get all wrist.

BTW... isn't the wrist part of the hand, and the hand is part of the ball, so... Just kidding!

[WinterWillie]

Originally posted by BBall_Junkie
If you watch the play, the Maryland player used his off hand to fend off the defender (this contact happened first) and may have prevented Williams from getting to the top of his jump and subsequently the ball.

I believe you have these events in the wrong sequence.

[BBall_Junkie]

I don't think so. I watched all 1,207 of the replays and that is what I saw and i have it on tivo so i gave myself an extra couple of looks. The contact to the face definitly happened first. Now was it an arm bar and enough to consider an offensive foul, in my opinion yes. However, some may say no and I can respect that as well. My point for bringing it up is that it is a call we don't see often and happens more than we call. I was more or less trying to make a discussion point out of it. Bottom line, a foul happened either by the offensive player or by the defensive. It was not nothing. And I think the crew upon looking at it would say the same. Overall I think they did an excellent job.

[David B]

Originally posted by BBall_Junkie
I don't think so. I watched all 1,207 of the replays and that is what I saw and i have it on tivo so i gave myself an extra couple of looks. The contact to the face definitly happened first. Now was it an arm bar and enough to consider an offensive foul, in my opinion yes. However, some may say no and I can respect that as well. My point for bringing it up is that it is a call we don't see often and happens more than we call. I was more or less trying to make a discussion point out of it. Bottom line, a foul happened either by the offensive player or by the defensive. It was not nothing. And I think the crew upon looking at it would say the same. Overall I think they did an excellent job.

Well the one that I really questioned was at the end when the guy from Duke clearly rebounded the FT (over the back) and then pushed the Md player off and layed it in for the basket.

Coach Williams almost came on the court after that miss.

And agreed, the contest was very physical and there were a lot of non-calls in my opinion that went to Duke toward the end of the game. Call it the home court advantage.

Thanks
David

[Adam]

Originally posted by David B

Well the one that I really questioned was at the end when the guy from Duke clearly rebounded the FT (over the back)

AAAAHHHHH!!!!!

[BBall_Junkie]

Originally posted by David B

Well the one that I really questioned was at the end when the guy from Duke clearly rebounded the FT (over the back) and then pushed the Md player off and layed it in for the basket.

Coach Williams almost came on the court after that miss.

And agreed, the contest was very physical and there were a lot of non-calls in my opinion that went to Duke toward the end of the game. Call it the home court advantage.

Thanks
David

Home court advantage??? The officials who work this level don't let home court filter in. Unless someone can prove otherwise these comments are unjustified.

The call you are talking about, in my opinion and view, the duke player outjumped the MD player and beat him to the ball. The fact that the MD player was in front has nothing to do with anything and is not an "over the back" as this is fan speak. He did not PUSH do get the board. Then, he had MD players all over him, and it looked as though he may have pushed them off. But I think the officials passed on the grabs and holds and thus decided it would not be right to call the push on him and ultimately no-called the play. Right or wrong this had nothing to do with home court.

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by David B
Well the one that I really questioned was at the end when the guy from Duke clearly rebounded the FT (over the back) and then pushed the Md player off and layed it in for the basket.

Coach Williams almost came on the court after that miss.

And agreed, the contest was very physical and there were a lot of non-calls in my opinion that went to Duke toward the end of the game. Call it the home court advantage.

There may be a lot of reasons the call was missed. But the fact that Duke was playing at home was not one of them.

[David B]

Originally posted by BktBallRef

There may be a lot of reasons the call was missed. But the fact that Duke was playing at home was not one of them.

I am going to agree with all of you that I don't think any D1 official that I know of would give any kind of a "home field advantage", and I watch a LOT of basketball.

But Coach K has lots of pull and last night in the last three minutes of the game, I know of three or four calls that all went to Duke that were questionable. If might be just a freak, but it did make me wonder.

Even Dickie V (Mr. Duke himself) questioned a couple of them.

But, as we all know from calling games ourselves, it probably was just a matter of circumstance. I know of games where all of the calls just seem to go towards one team,

But, but with Coach K right in the officials ear and there was a no call, just makes you wonder doesn't it?

Just a thought.

Thanks
David

[Adam]

I don't allow myself to be "worked," so I have to assume D1 officials don't either. So, in other words; no, it doesn't make me wonder.