LSU/Stanford charge (Women's)

[Tom M.]

Did I miss somthing on this play but why did LSU shoot the free throws. I had it as a team control foul. The ball had clearly left the offensive players hands on the pass then the charge occurred.

Doesn't team control exist on a pass and therefore LSU gets the ball at the spot of the foul. No shots. I thought Augustus took the free throws.

[Tom M.]

Did I miss somthing on this play but why did LSU shoot the free throws ? Doesn't team control exist on a pass therefore a team control foul. The ball had clearly left the offensive players hands and then the charge occurred. Should LSU have got the ball at the spot of the foul. I thought Augustus took the free throws.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Tom M.

Did I miss somthing on this play but why did LSU shoot the free throws ? Doesn't team control exist on a pass therefore a team control foul. The ball had clearly left the offensive players hands and then the charge occurred. Should LSU have got the ball at the spot of the foul. I thought Augustus took the free throws.

Tom M., it appears your computer has a virus and keeps transmitting the same post over and over.

LSU took the ball out and Wiggins immediately committed a foul, which was her 5th. She was confused that she had fouled out, probably forgetting that she had just committed her 4th on the charging call.

[M&M Guy]

Nate - please allow me to throw my .02 in. Words and phrases sometimes have different meanings depending on who is saying them, and who is hearing them. "Let the players determine the outcome" is one of those phrases. I think that, as a whole, all good officials subscribe to this statement. Now, there are indeed some officials that want and like the "spotlight" and enjoy making a call, or even making up a call, just to have the spolight on them at the end of a game, and that's a shame. But there are also those officials that want to avoid that spotlight at all costs, even to the point of not making necessary calls, just so people won't notice them as much at the end of close games. And these officials always use "I'm letting the players determine the outcome" as their excuse for not making those calls. I have met and seen enough officials in my time to know that it's usually these types of officials that use that phrase; most of the others consider this to be so obvious that it's not worth saying. Kind of like saying the sun's gonna rise in the east tomorrow. How many times have you said that recently?

Also, don't confuse testicular fortitude with wanting the spotlight; those are two different things. Making the right call at the end of a game, knowing that it may put that unwanted spotlight on you, takes guts. Too many lesser officials shy away from making the correct call because they're afraid of the spotlight. And that's NOT letting the players decide the game, that's YOU deciding the game by making or not making a call just to avoid controversy. If it's a foul or a violation at the 7:00-minute mark in the first half, it's the exact same call with 3 seconds left in a tie game, even though you know the home crowd is going to let loose with a whole bunch of expletives.

So, just in my experience, saying "let the players decide the game" is "code" for "I don't have enough guts to make an unpopular, but correct, call." Maybe that's not what you're saying, but that is what some officials hear in that statement. Again, jmo.

[jbduke]

First, M&M, the calm that your latest post brought to this discussion was the right prescription for this thread's feva. Snaps for that.

I just skimmed this thread, but I haven't seen anything mentioned about something my roommate pointed out, but that I didn't see on the play. He said that he thought he saw the slot's fist go up on the play. I'm not sure, but it wouldn't be shocking to me. The slot was Yarbrough, probably the most respected official in the women's game, and it's a play that I could see a veteran official making in that situation, given that the L passed on the play. Anybody notice this already, or have access to a replay to check?

[Nate1224hoops]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Nate - please allow me to throw my .02 in. Words and phrases sometimes have different meanings depending on who is saying them, and who is hearing them. "Let the players determine the outcome" is one of those phrases. I think that, as a whole, all good officials subscribe to this statement. Now, there are indeed some officials that want and like the "spotlight" and enjoy making a call, or even making up a call, just to have the spolight on them at the end of a game, and that's a shame. But there are also those officials that want to avoid that spotlight at all costs, even to the point of not making necessary calls, just so people won't notice them as much at the end of close games. And these officials always use "I'm letting the players determine the outcome" as their excuse for not making those calls. I have met and seen enough officials in my time to know that it's usually these types of officials that use that phrase; most of the others consider this to be so obvious that it's not worth saying. Kind of like saying the sun's gonna rise in the east tomorrow. How many times have you said that recently?

Also, don't confuse testicular fortitude with wanting the spotlight; those are two different things. Making the right call at the end of a game, knowing that it may put that unwanted spotlight on you, takes guts. Too many lesser officials shy away from making the correct call because they're afraid of the spotlight. And that's NOT letting the players decide the game, that's YOU deciding the game by making or not making a call just to avoid controversy. If it's a foul or a violation at the 7:00-minute mark in the first half, it's the exact same call with 3 seconds left in a tie game, even though you know the home crowd is going to let loose with a whole bunch of expletives.

So, just in my experience, saying "let the players decide the game" is "code" for "I don't have enough guts to make an unpopular, but correct, call." Maybe that's not what you're saying, but that is what some officials hear in that statement. Again, jmo.

I agree with most of what you said. My choice of words: Let players decide games, was probably not the best. It was great for a couple of IDIOTS to start bashing and telling me how incompetent an official I am. Everyone understandst the unwritten rule at the end of the game (except JR and Nevad). As far as not have balls, or testicular fortitude, I'm sure some officials don't want to make a call. And it could be for that very reason. All I am saying is that I don't think at that level the L didn't make the call b/c he lacks balls. I think he saw something else. It was his call, he knew it was his call. The T made the call and I am led to believe that the L didn't make the call b/c he chose to pass and "let it be decided by something different." Maybe that would have been a better choice of words.

[tomegun]

Nate, I hope the bit about being an English teacher was a joke because you are still butchering the language. Just to keep a running score -

"choose" and "chose" should be used differently.
"...well you where you can shove that." - doesn't really make sense. I guess you are missing the "know."

Also, I'm of the opinion that the official could very well lack the testicular fortitude to make the call. Read below or read it here - it is what it is. If there is a call to be made, the call should be made. There was a lot of contact and a call probably should have been made either way. It doesn't seem like the media is criticizing this call very much, and we all know they now kill officials in the press, so why are some people on this board so critical of the call? There was contact and a whistle.

Would you make this call during the first 39 minutes of the game?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Nate1224hoops

I disagree. Why would the T have first crack at the call. The ball has just entered and left the T primary. The T should have been concerned with contact made throughout his/her primary. So how could the T have seen all this plus noticed to see if Augustus was in proper position. I'm not saying that the T can't make this call, but the L should have first crack at it b/c he/she isn't following the ball as closely through the T primary and can better see if Augustus was there or not. I think the L passed on the call.

Nate, though this thread has meandered off course a few times since I initiated it, this is basically where I was looking for discussion to go. What is everyone's philosophy as to who should have 1st crack when a secondary defender (yes, I know, it's not an official phrase in the NFHS/NCAA rulebooks) slides in to draw a charging/PC foul in or near the lane in front of the Lead?

I subscribe to the same school of thought as you, that the Trail (or in some cases the 'C') doesn't have the best view as to initial LGP of the secondary defender and the Lead should take responsibility for that call. But others, like RockyRoad, have the philosophy that the official from where the drive initiated takes 1st crack at any resulting crash. It's a play that needs to be pre-gamed to make sure everyone is on the same page.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by

But others, like [b

RockyRoad[/b], have the philosophy that the official from where the drive initiated takes 1st crack at any resulting crash. It's a play that needs to be pre-gamed to make sure everyone is on the same page.

Sigh...it's the NCAAW mechanic. Not a philosophy that I have...and trust me, I pre-game this thoroughly and tell my partners that if it is a secondary defender, please feel free to come in and help out. The L didn't need to come in and help out because the T made the call...why is this so hard to understand?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

Sigh...it's the NCAAW mechanic. Not a philosophy that I have...and trust me, I pre-game this thoroughly and tell my partners that if it is a secondary defender, please feel free to come in and help out. The L didn't need to come in and help out because the T made the call...why is this so hard to understand?

Well since I work HS games with some officials who work NCAA-W and some who work NCAA-M and some who work neither, it's something that needs to be pre-gamed. That's my point. Did I imply that you didn't ? Just b/c you thoroughly pre-game it doesn't mean everyone else on this forum does.

My point is officials come into games with different philosophies/mechanics. I worked a girls' regional HS play-off game with 2 members of another board who both work NCAA-W and guess what happened at the end of the 1st quarter. We had no whistle to kill the quarter because I was the C, but tableside, and the trail, opposite table, was thinking about the NCAA-W mechanic instead NFHS. But I blamed myself immediately b/c I was the "R" and I knew I was working with 2 NCAA-W officials and I forgot to cover last second shot responsibilities in my pre-game.

BTW Rocky, the Sigh... and...why is this so hard to understand? were unnecessary.

[Nate1224hoops]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Well since I work HS games with some officials who work NCAA-W and some who work NCAA-M and some who work neither, it's something that needs to be pre-gamed. That's my point. Did I imply that you didn't ? Just b/c you thoroughly pre-game it doesn't mean everyone else on this forum does.

My point is officials come into games with different philosophies/mechanics. I worked a girls' regional HS play-off game with 2 members of another board who both work NCAA-W and guess what happened at the end of the 1st quarter. We had no whistle to kill the quarter because I was the C, but tableside, and the trail, opposite table, was thinking about the NCAA-W mechanic instead NFHS. But I blamed myself immediately b/c I was the "R" and I knew I was working with 2 NCAA-W officials and I forgot to cover last second shot responsibilities in my pre-game.

BTW Rocky, the Sigh... and...why is this so hard to understand? were unnecessary.

Things have changed around here. It's anything goes. It isn't about helping each other understand things, it's about I'm right-you're wrong and you're an @ss for have an differing opinion.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

BTW Rocky, the Sigh... and...why is this so hard to understand? were unnecessary.

Oh, ok...but the highlighting my name and saying it was my philosophy were ok with you?

And as for your playoff game, it wasn't your fault...those two partners need to be able to remember what level they are working and which mechanics are being used that night. If they can't remember that it's a NFHS game tonight, then shame on them.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

Oh, ok...but the highlighting my name and saying it was my philosophy were ok with you?

Wasn't meant to be an insult, just an illustration that you are viewing the Stanford/LSU play with one set of eyes (whether it's based on mechanics, philosophy, or past experience is really of no consequence) and Nate was viewing with another. Your post was actually the best argument/explanation I read backing the Trail having a whistle, that's why I used you as an example.

I'm guessing 99% of the forum is not Elite 8 level, but seeing and discussing the different plays these Elite 8 officials are involved in then hearing different opinions and philosophies (they may be mechanic-based, but still IMO philosophies) will hopefully help each one of us when faced with similar plays in the future.

And yes, my partner should have remembered, but with officials jumping back and forth between different mechanics and rules, it's forsee-able that is could happen. Therefore, I felt I should have reminded my partners about last-shot responsibilities.