The Official Forum
Page 4 of 7 « First 23 4 56 Last »
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)
-   -   UNC/Duke Game (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/32460-unc-duke-game.html)

Nevadaref Sun Mar 04, 2007 10:37pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by sj
Right call. They had one look in real time so that's what they had to go on. I certainly don't know what all their conversation was but even if they weren't sure it was intentional/flagrant or not they erred on the side of caution so to speak and kicked him out. I can only imagine what it would be like in the press if they hadn't ejected him. I thought they did a good job of slowing everything down, discussing it among themselves and then talking to both coaches. It looked extremely professional. I know I learned something watching it.
No, they didn't have just one look in real time. They used the courtside monitor to determine if a fight occurred as is permitted by the NCAA rules. BktBallref cited the proper A.R. in post #7 of this thread.

Nevadaref Sun Mar 04, 2007 10:42pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffpea
- I absolutely hope the officials made their decision WITHOUT THINKING ABOUT THE CONSEQUENCES. I want them to make their decision based on the video "evidence". They should NOT include the "if we toss him, he'll miss their next game which is the ACC tournament opener - so let's not do that" argument...
Actually, that is an incorrect statement. BktBallRef provided the two different flagrant foul references that could have been called on this play in post #7. One call carries a one game suspension. The other does not. Yet both are flagrant fouls and the player is DQ'd from that game. Please go back and reread that post.

BktBallRef Sun Mar 04, 2007 10:47pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by MajorCord
:( I missed the game. Anybody got a link for the video of what happened?

Thanks!
Major, I've uploaded it to YouTube but it hasn't been processed yet. Just watch ESPN. I'm sure you'll be able to find it.

MajorCord Sun Mar 04, 2007 10:53pm
:) Thanks BBR. (From one Carolinian to another!)

BktBallRef Sun Mar 04, 2007 11:08pm
Here ya go!

http://media.putfile.com/Henderson-Cheapshot

canuckrefguy Sun Mar 04, 2007 11:41pm
Good take by ESPN's Pat Forde:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/colum...0&sportCat=ncb

Adam Sun Mar 04, 2007 11:42pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by BktBallRef
Excuse me but are you clueless or are you a Duke fan? I guess that's an oxymoron. :rolleyes:
I think "redundant" is the term you're looking for.

Jurassic Referee Mon Mar 05, 2007 06:08am
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffpea
The point that everyone is missing is that once airborne, <font color = red>Henderson <b>received</b> contact from Hansborough</font> that knocked Henderson off-balance and caused him to instinctively <font color = red>begin to protect himself</font> (for fearing of landing on something other than his feet first). At that point, it looked to me like he brought his focus and his arms/hands downward (he was no longer following the ball). <font color = red>He was attempting to protect himself</font>, thus the downward arm movement that ultimately hit Hansborough in the face.
Say what? Hansborough <B>caused</b> the contact? He was just <b>protecting</b> himself? What next? Are you're going to say that the foul shoulda been called on Hansborough for hitting Henderson in the hand with his nose?

tomegun Mon Mar 05, 2007 07:47am
Honestly ladies and gentlemen. For jeffpea to say Hansborough had anything to do with Henderson making contact nearly trumps all of Old School's posts combined.
Jeff, if you really believe what you posted you will have a hard time as an official. I intend no personal attacks or anything like that. You are way off with this one. Way off!

Raymond Mon Mar 05, 2007 08:30am
Quote:
Originally Posted by canuckrefguy
Coach K: "The game was over before that," he said. "I mean the outcome of the game, let's put it that way. That's unfortunate, too, that those people were in the game in that play. Maybe this wouldn't have happened."

Coach K has reached Isaiah Thomas stupidity with this remark.

BktBallRef Mon Mar 05, 2007 09:11am
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadNewsRef
Coach K: "The game was over before that," he said. "I mean the outcome of the game, let's put it that way. That's unfortunate, too, that those people were in the game in that play. Maybe this wouldn't have happened."

Coach K has reached Isaiah Thomas stupidity with this remark.
I thought the same thing at first. But he then went on to say that both teams should have had their walk-ons in the game at that point. I don't think he was being critical of Williams. The truth is if he had let the game end, then Henderson wouldn't have been in the game and he wouldn't be sitting on the bench Thursday while his team is playing.

In the meantime, he continued to foul to stop the clock. Williams had to leave some of his starters in. You'll also notice tha Henderson, Paulus and Scheyer were still in the game, too.

ibumgardner Mon Mar 05, 2007 09:14am
2 questions
 
I agree with the decisions that were made by the experienced and talented crew in the last minute of the game. I could have lived with an intentional foul on that play.

Two questions:
1. Do you think that they would have called it differently if Henderson's elbow would have landed 3 inches to the left or right and Hansbrough could have stayed in the game (assuming no blood)? Should that (blood or player's responce to situation) be a factor to the type of foul that is called?

2. After watching it a couple of times, it appears that Les Jones' whistle blew on the first foul (on #51 for Duke), then there was the situation with Henderson. I probably would have done the same thing that they did (ignore the foul on #51). Does this fall under the false multiple foul? So, if they had called both fouls (common and flagrant) how would they have been administered?

BktBallRef Mon Mar 05, 2007 09:15am
http://www.runemasterstudios.com/gra...es/bs_sign.gif

Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffpea
- You're right about the instinctive reaction to visually follow the ball when you're in mid-air. The point that everyone is missing is that once airborne, Henderson received contact from Hansborough that knocked Henderson off-balance and caused him to instinctively begin to protect himself (for fearing of landing on something other than his feet first). At that point, it looked to me like he brought his focus and his arms/hands downward (he was no longer following the ball). He was attempting to protect himself, thus the downward arm movement that ultimately hit Hansborough in the face.
Good grief!!!!! http://www.runemasterstudios.com/gra...es/roflmao.gif

Dan_ref Mon Mar 05, 2007 09:18am
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffpea
That's certainly a good question and something that makes a lot more sense seeing that this is a basketball forum and not law school forum talking about the legal nuances of self-defense while standing outside a McDonald's.
There is nothing basketball-specific about the term 'comabtive act' - unlike, say, 'travel' - as it appears in the rule books. A combative act is any act which potentially leads to a fight. Period. At McDonald's, in a shopping mall, on the basketball court.
Quote:

In general, I would say that blows that come from hands (open fist or not), forearms, elbows, knees, legs, or feet that outwardly strike an opponent, who is in a vulnerable position, in a manner that is deemed to cause harm or injury can be considered "combative". This is not an exhaustive or specific list (note I did not list a head-butting action - although that should clearly be construed as combative) of instances.
Disagree completely with what I underlined.

At least we can agree striking an opponent with an open hand can be considered a combative act.

Edit: Just took a look at the video. What a stupid discussion. This is a clearly flagrant act, whether or not you want to call it combative.

BktBallRef Mon Mar 05, 2007 09:23am
Quote:
Originally Posted by ibumgardner

1. Do you think that they would have called it differently if Henderson's elbow would have landed 3 inches to the left or right and Hansbrough could have stayed in the game (assuming no blood)? Should that (blood or player's responce to situation) be a factor to the type of foul that is called?
Yes.

NCAA A.R.5
Player A1 falls to the playing floor and is (a) bleeding or (b) doubled over in pain, holding his/her abdomen. Is the official permitted to use the monitor to determine if the conditions were a result of a fight? RULING: It is permissible for the official to use the monitor to determine if a fight occurred and who participated. In using the monitor, when the official ascertains that an opponent struck a player with the arms (elbows), hands, legs or feet, and if he/she concludes that the act was combative and flagrant, he/she shall deem it a fight. Consequently, the player shall be ejected and the fighting penalty invoked.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:45am.
Page 4 of 7 « First 23 4 56 Last »
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1