T-Mobile NFHS Invitational - Seattle Washington

[Rich]

Originally Posted by IREFU2

Walk on Red #5. passed on the walk and called the hand check and game her continuation to the basket (NBA?) Should have been on the floor.

You managed to hit 2 pet peeves of mine in one post.

"On the floor" has no meaning. If I've started my shooting motion, it's a foul in the act of shooting even if both feet are on the floor. I wish officials would say "before the shot" and eliminate "on the floor" from their vocabulary.

Continuous motion applies regardless of whether we're in the NBA or in a HS game.

[IREFU2]

Originally Posted by Rich Fronheiser

You managed to hit 2 pet peeves of mine in one post.

"On the floor" has no meaning. If I've started my shooting motion, it's a foul in the act of shooting even if both feet are on the floor. I wish officials would say "before the shot" and eliminate "on the floor" from their vocabulary.

Continuous motion applies regardless of whether we're in the NBA or in a HS game.

No problem, I dont use that in the game, but I just wanted to make sure I was understood. From what I saw, she looked like she was foul on the last dribble whistle, then two steps to the basket. Like I said, all judgement.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by IREFU2

No problem, I dont use that in the game, but I just wanted to make sure I was understood. From what I saw, she looked like she was foul on the last dribble whistle, then two steps to the basket. Like I said, all judgement.

I didn't see it, so I'll cede to your judgment.

Many times, though, I see fouls called as non-shooting that really were in the act of shooting.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by IREFU2

No problem, I dont use that in the game, but I just wanted to make sure I was understood. From what I saw, she looked like she was foul on the last dribble whistle, then two steps to the basket. Like I said, all judgement.

Yup, all judgement. And the official on the floor judged it be a foul in the act of shooting.

And....then the fanboys start second-guessing the official's judgement.

[WhistlesAndStripes]

Originally Posted by IREFU2

5:65, First Quarter:

Crash, No call. I replayed it back a couple of times and felt there should had been a whistle. #42 clearly had position and in my opinion there should have been a PC call.

Huh?? 5:65? or 6:05??

[IREFU2]

Originally Posted by Whistles & Stripes

Huh?? 5:65? or 6:05??

Sorry, 5:55!

[IREFU2]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Yup, all judgement. And the official on the floor judged it be a foul in the act of shooting.

And....then the fanboys start second-guessing the official's judgement.

I have no problem with his judgement.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by IREFU2

I have no problem with his judgement.

Say what?

The official judged it to be a shooting foul. You stated verbatim though- "She was clearly on the floor and it should have been an out of bounds spot. Team was not in the bonus, so therefore there should not have been any shots". Iow, you're stating on the record and in a public forum that the official's judgment on that particular play was completely and unequivocably wrong. Now, I'm glad that you're good enough and wise enough to pick all that out of a tv replay, and then declare so emphatically that the official did screw up the call, over the judgment of the calling official on the court that had a different view and angle than your tv did. I will admit that I'm certainly not good enough to do that.

Keep up the great work.

[IREFU2]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Say what?

The official judged it to be a shooting foul. You stated verbatim though- "She was clearly on the floor and it should have been an out of bounds spot. Team was not in the bonus, so therefore there should not have been any shots". Iow, you're stating on the record and in a public forum that the official's judgment on that particular play was completely and unequivocably wrong. Now, I'm glad that you're good enough and wise enough to pick all that out of a tv replay, and then declare so emphatically that the official did screw up the call, over the judgment of the calling official on the court that had a different view and angle than your tv did. I will admit that I'm certainly not good enough to do that.

Keep up the great work.

Why do yo always have to make stuff harder than it is? If he thought it was a shooting foul, than so be it. I was just giving my 2 cents on the whole game because one day I may have to eval some of my buddies. I never said anyone screwed up. So, stop reading between the lines.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by IREFU2

Why do yo always have to make stuff harder than it is? If he thought it was a shooting foul, than so be it. I was just giving my 2 cents on the whole game because one day I may have to eval some of my buddies. I never said anyone screwed up. So, stop reading between the lines.

Again, that just confuses the heck outa me. You said that there shouldn't have been any shots. The calling official gave 2 shots. Someone sureasheck must have screwed up and was wrong on this play- and it had to be either the calling official or you.

I'm not really trying to make things harder than they are. I'm just trying to figure out why your judgement watching the game on tv was completely different than the official who had to make the call. I do a little evaluating too. In cases like this, I usually ask the official what they saw before I make up my mind whether they screwed up the call or not. I also like to see if there are any other views available than the one that I've seen. Sometimes the camera does lie, especially if the play is being viewed from different angles. But....hey, that's just me though. Shrug. Take it fwiw, which is nothing really.