Ohio State & Georgetown
 

I guess I will make the first post on this.

2nd Half - 6:37 - Definitely should have been a PC!

2nd Half - 8:50 - Hibbert's hold on the rebound (from my seat on the coach) should have not been called. There were 3 Ohio State players there for the rebound. NO disadvantage gained by this small hold.

By the way both of these calls where made by Valentine.

The first call in my opinion could have gone either way. I would have likely gone with the PC foul. BTW, I think Valentine was waiting for someone else to make a call and took it because of the contact.

Second call was a great call. You cannot hold someone when they are going for the ball. If you have 3 fouls you cannot be so stupid to make that play on a much smaller player. That needed to be called and was properly.

Peace

The first call was tough. I thought looking at it live it was a PC, but after looking at the replay I somewhat changed my mind and thought he had it right. I agree with Jeff, that it certainly looked like Valentine was expecting a call from the C on that play.

2nd call I thought was a great call. Clearly gained an advantage by holding someone trying to get the ball.

The first one I thought was an easy PC watching it live. It was alot closer in slow motion but I still got a PC, imo.

Second one is a hold.

I think Valentine calls a good game but I have never seen him count left handed.

I thought that was a PC when I saw it live. After watching the replay I knew I was right.

It happens, but Valentine got this call wrong. Otherwise the crew had a great game, but that call might have made a difference.

I don't see how it could go either way. If this is the NBA then it is a block HOWEVER in high school & college this is definitely a PC.

I would agree with you if there was a Georgetown player about to pick up that ball but there were 3 Ohio State players there to pick up the ball. How was an advantage gained?

What made you change your mind?

I don't think that he is expecting C to make the call this is Lead's call.

I agree that Hibbert held him BUT if you have a patient whistle then Ohio State picks up the ball and they play on. I think this is a great play to watch the whole thing and determine if there is an advantage gained.

It could have gone either way because it was so close. It is one thing to look at something on slow motion replay. It is quite another to call the game in full speed.

How many players were around the ball is not the issue. There was an advantage by holding the player he was standing next to. It does not matter how many other players are around. If that player had an opportunity to get the ball and he is held, that is an advantage. Maybe if the ball went in the opposite direction I might agree with you, but not when these two players could get the ball. If you do not want to get called for something, do not hold them.

Peace

That is not true at all. The ball came from an angle where the C would have a great look at the play. The lead is not the only one to make this call and sometimes not the person to make this call at all.

Peace

I never saw it in slow motion. I only saw it at full speed. I will be going home later to review it but this was a PC in my opinion.

I agree that it is alot harder to make that call live in a game of this magnitude. I am also not saying that I could do a better job then Valentine in this game. I am however able to point out a call that was nailed or missed. In this case I feel that he missed it. This is how we get better by watching games and determining what should be called and what shouldn't be called by rule.

I respect your opinion but I disagree.

You know what they say about people with opinions right? :D

Peace

I agree completely.

I agree completely.

I agree completely. You can't hold a guy who is about to gain possession of the ball.

Why? Because of the arc under the basket?

No because he started his habitual motion. From my understanding the NBA rule is that you must have LGP before the player starts their habitual motion. Is this not correct?

Honestly, I don't know. But I've never heard that before. It should be easy enough for somebody to check on the NBA's website.

1st call - Player Control. Position was established well before the shooter left the floor. Valentine must have come in when the C didn't pick it up. (Right in the middle of the lane - could go either way.)

As for the hold call - it was such a blatant hold, and on a deep rebound, that I think it was a good call to make.

From the the Block/Charge guidelines on nba.com:

Good call, All Heart.

Oden's play was a PC and I think it would have had an impact on the game because Oden would have sat down.

I don't have a problem with the hold call because it was correct.

What I do have a problem with is the fact that Oden was allowed to pull up on a dunk AND slap the backboard on either side after he dunked. IMO it shouldn't matter how big a game is - if they do something like this it should be a technical foul. Maybe Hank Nichols should send a representative around to talk to the teams and remind them that although the offiicials do not want to call something like this it will be called if it happens.

Can you believe this article???


http://sportsline.com/collegebasketball/story/10100591

"A defensive player is not permitted to move into the path of an offensive play-er once he has started his shooting motion."

From the NBA's online rulebook (http://www.nba.com/analysis/rules_index.html) under the Block-Charge link.

Wow.

Did he have that written before the game tipped?

The worst part is that "Foul officiating robs us of chance to see real Oden, Hibbert" is posted as a headline on the site. :rolleyes:

When I saw this I went uh oh because I was expecting a technical. You've got to wonder if this would have been called in a regular season game. (Let me know if that is how they've been calling it all year)

He is one of those writers who gets the FANATIC fans to read his stuff cuz he is just like them. Got to get readers somehow, and that is his way.

Is that a charge on Oden?
 

I haven't seen a replay yet, but that looked like an obvious charge on Oden. That play completely changed the momentum of the game. Georgetown was getting close and that really took the air out of them.

I know I've seen a lot less called for a charge this year, but I just wanted to get some consensus on that call. I'm not one to jump on close calls, but I thought that was pretty clear-cut.

I also found it dubious that Ohio State fans were clamoring for Ted Valentine before the game:
http://sportsline.com/mcc/messages/chrono/1936260

For those that don't, I'll tell ya. Opinions are like a$$holes -- everyone has one, and everyone else's stinks but your own.

As for the plays in question. The drive to the basket was a definite player control. I thought so in live action, and I thought so again when I backed it up on the DVR and watched it in super slow-mo. It was definitely a late whistle from Big Teddy at lead, however, I think that he was probably expecting his partner who's area it came from to get it, and when no one else took it, he had to come in and clean up the mess.

As far as the hold by Hibbert, that was as ticky tack as they come. There was hardly a hold there at all, and as many before me stated, OSU was still going to get the ball. Where's the advantage?

What was the coach doing on the floor after the block!? :mad:

It doesn't matter if there was a timeout requested! A timeout was not granted until after the foul was called. The coach came all the way out to the paint to yell something to Oden!

On a side note, at 10:51 in the 2nd half an OOB was missed. This was understandable due to the contact that he was zeroing in on.

Really? Could you elaborate and enlighten us with your officiating wisdom?
My first question. What in the h3ll is a Hoya?

No . . . what's on second. Who's on first.

Seriously, though. The word 'hoya' loosely translates from the Greek as 'what.' It comes from the first word of Georgetown's slogan/chant/battle cry of "Hoya Saxa" which means "what rocks."

Hmm - one fan on one internet message board does not "clamoring" make. Even if it did, I doubt that too many OSU fans have the phone numbers of Hank Nichols and the Men's Basketball Committee members.

I agree that the block call that Ted made was a 50 - 50 call....I also think he was prepared to pass on it until he saw the miss,..and then he had to call something.

As far as the hold on the rebound...two things...one...everyone has been calling that kind of a foul all throughout the tournament. And, two...when you hook the rebounder, you put him at a disadvantage. No problem with the call.

Three things:

1) Minor contact does not mean that it's a ticky-tack call. Minor contact can give a big advantage.

2) Call the obvious!! The hold was obvious! One player is stretching and reaching for the ball and couldn't get off the ground.

3) That is the kind of play that escalates, IMHO. Get the first one and put a stop to it.

I agree with scrapper1 100%.

Plus, I am not sure why Ohio State or Georgetown would be complaining about Valentine? He works in the both of the leagues they play in regularly seeing both of these teams who knows how many times a year.

So, they should know what they are going to get when Valentine walks on the floor.

Thanks to everyone on the forum for helping me become a more intelligent fan, especially on the actual rules regarding the Jeff Green "travel" in the Vandy game.

Ted Valentine did not work a Georgetown game all year until last night. He is not a Big East official any more (http://grfx.cstv.com/photos/schools/...ff-records.pdf page 7) and he did not work the road games at Vandy, Michigan, or Duke.

Interesting, but irrelevant. Wait, it's not interesting either.
Even if it did correct a slight error of reporting.

I found it interesting, since I didn't know that Ted V. didn't work in the Big East. Any reason you decided to sound like a smug, jackass with your response?

Slight? LOL

That was my edited version, for what it's worth; but I'll elaborate on my thoughts.

In a thread questioning the NCAA for allowing Valentine to officiate the Buckeyes, a first time poster jumps in and notes that Valentine did not in fact work any Big East games this year. I don't really find that interesting at all, even though I agree that it corrects (if accurate) an error in reporting. Normally, I don't comment on what I'm not interested in. But the fact that this thread is pointedly questioning the wisdom of hiring Valentine for this job makes it comment-worthy.

What I do find interesting is that a first-time poster points it out in this context. Without judging the intent, bias, or qualifications of the poster (not enough information for that), I simply wanted to point out that, as others have said, it's not relevant.

Oden sat down for 17 minutes in the first half and OSU won the half.
I don't know if the call was correct or not....but Ohio State can play pretty well with Oden sitting down.

They won the half? I thought this was baseball, not tennis! :p

This was a common theme in this morning's sports talk radio. This game was hyped as a battle of the titans, but the giants involved spent a lot of time on the bench. Since officials are an easy target, the bulk of the criticism has been directed at them. After all, other than this forum's members, no one tuned in to the game to watch the officials.

Some day a commentator or columnist will say something like, "Too bad Oden wasn't smart enough to not get such a dumb foul on that illegal screen."

Don't hold your breath.

We should keep in mind that Greg Oden has been in foul trouble all post season in just about every game. Even his games in the Big Ten tournament he has been on the bench for many minutes for the same reasons I just stated. I think officials have been consistent on the type of fouls they have called on Oden.

Also two of Hebbert's fouls were pretty obvious. Hebbert's 4th foul he hit the shooter in the face while trying to block a shot (and missing). Then on this 5the foul he grabs a player clearly preventing him from getting to a ball. I did not see the entire game, but those are just two fouls and they were pretty obvious at critical points of the games. And from what I remember Hebbert had foul trouble also most of the tournament.

Peace

This must have been a tough year for Oden. He looks like a 40 year old man.

Almost entirely correct, but not quite precise. Typical of a GW grad. ;)

The Hoya part is actually the Greek exclamation not the interrogative. (BTW the saxa is Latin.) So "Hoya Saxa" would be better translated as "Such rocks!" Truly the focus is not on the word "what" or "such" but rather on the exclamation point, so one could really write just "Rocks!"

Georgetown Prep even has a little exclamation point as a mascot that hops around at games. :D


There are differing stories on the origin of the cheer.

1. The cheer comes from back in the day when Georgetown had a notable football team and the spectators were extolling the play of the defensive line.

2. The baseball team used to be called the stonewalls and that morphed into the cheer.

3. There is a stone wall that encircles most of the campus and what used to be the location of the athletic field. The spectators used to sit upon this to view the games. This rock wall became associated with the students that entered the campus.

PS In days long gone, students had to pass both Latin and ancient Greek in order to graduate from the school.

Hey - I just go by the information that Georgetown gives me. Not my fault if most of their students and their spirit department doesn't know the proper meaning of their own cheer/mascot.

http://guhoyas.cstv.com/trads/gu-hoya.html

Wow - as much as I love grammar, I'm glad I didn't get a job there. :D

Hmm - sometime around 1789, then? :p

Shortly thereafter... :)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgetown_Hoyas

"In the 1940s, Georgetown had one of the better college football teams in America. As the college game became more expensive, however, Georgetown refused to make the expensive investments that other Catholic universities like Notre Dame made to maintain a top-notch program.
In 1941, Georgetown played in the Orange Bowl, where they lost 14-7 to Mississippi State. They also played in the 1950 Sun Bowl against Texas Western. Texas Western, now known as the University of Texas at El Paso (more commonly UTEP), won the game by a score of 33-20.
After a 2-7 season in 1950 which included losses to the likes of Penn State, Miami, and Maryland, Georgetown discontinued the sport, which was revived in 1964 by students. Its first game drew 8,000 to campus against New York University (NYU). Today's Georgetown team plays at the Division I-AA level, competing against Ivy League and Patriot League schools."

Wikipedia is "garbage-in--garbage-out" sometimes. They're simply not a credible a source as some others. A good analogy would be Referee magazine and IAABO. Just because they both publish rules interpretations doesn't make those interpretations correct. I'm not saying that's true in this particular case, but it's certainly possible.