So, again you agree with me. It was a conspiracy. Thank You, thank you, thank you, Hold the applause please.

Mark, I disagree. If you have a block at the APEX, and A1 comes back to the ground, how can you have a travel? SHot clearly prevented from being released, palyer returns to the floor, jump ball. (if I'm not reading the situation right, forgive me.)
And when I talk about the loose ball, I'm merely saying that
....
Oh, H*ll, I don't know what I'm saying.:( Just make sure
the play is allowed to finish. In this play if they come back to the ground, even if you wait a second after they do,
(ball loose,whatever) you're not going to get an argument from most players and coaches on the play. (They might argue for a foul, but so what?)

"So, again you agree with me. It was a conspiracy"

Hey. How else does a team like Kent State make it this far?;)

All debate aside, can you all imagine the grief we gonna get from howler-monkeys everytime we call a foul on a shooter or if a shot is blocked? This might be a can of worms. How many times do we expect this call to bite us in the arse on the lower levels???

"Tweet", "Whack", "Throw!":p

K-low,
I don't get bit at the lower levels.
Those imaginary coaches have imaginary teeth.
mick

Aptly stated Mick!!

This has nothing to do with common sense. A.R. 26(a) specifically states that B1 does not have to be in contact with the ball at the time that A1 returns to the court.

For those who do not have the NCAA rules book in front of you, A.R. 26(a) is as follows: A1 goes airborne to attempt a field goal. While A1 is airborne the ball is still in his/her hands, B1 places his/her hands on the ball preventing A1 from releasing the ball. B1 then removes his/her hand from the ball and A1 returns to the court having never released the ball. The ruling is that a held ball has occured as soon as A1 returned to the court. This is what happened in the Pitt-Kent State game.

Going off on a tangent or a rant, whichever you prefer. Some of you will notice I do not use the phrase common sense. It has been my experience in basketball officiating, that every time an official or coach uses the phrase common sense to justify a ruling that is contridictory to the rules and casebook plays it is because that person does not either understand or know the rule involved.

When we, as officials, make ruling, we have to use the rules and casebook plays to determine the correct ruling. Granted, there are times that there is not much help in the rules and casebooks, but that is where logic and experience must be applied to come to a fair solution to the problem.

A good example of how common sense can get us into trouble is the following play:

A1 is dribbling toward his basket. A1 stops his dribble while both feet are off the floor. After he stops his dribble and while still airborne he is fouled by B1. A1 then lands on his right foot, then jumps off that foot, then lands on his left foot, then jumps off that foot and releases the ball on a field goal attempt. Clear cut case of continuous motion. This play was discussed by me, the Bowling Green (Ohio) H.S. boys' varsity coach and two other veteran officials. All three of them told me that now matter what the rules book and casebook said, common sense tells us that A1 was not fouled in the act of shooting. All three of them told me that they really did not care what the rules book and casebook said, that to make that call defies common sense and that coaches do not want that foul called that way. One also has to remember that in Ohio, the coaches determine who officiates regular season varsity (and sometimes jr. varsity) games and all tournament games.

This same coach lost a game because officials he approved used common sense (and not the rules) and reversed a judgement call (and thereby wiping two points off the board), because the officials did not know how to apply the correctable error rule (in this case the correctable error rule did not have anything to to with the play at all).

Just leave common sense out of it. Know the rules, and apply the rules and logic instead.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Quote:

Going off on a tangent or a rant, whichever you prefer. Some of you will notice I do not use the phrase common sense.

Yup, I've noticed. And that's why I stop reading at precisely the point where you try to convince us that we don't need it. No offense intended, honest, but I think you're out in left field on that particular topic.

Chuck

[QUOTE]Originally posted by ChuckElias

Quote:

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. Quote: Going off on a tangent or a rant, whichever you prefer. Some of you will notice I do not use the phrase common sense. Yup, I've noticed. And that's why I stop reading at precisely the point where you try to convince us that we don't need it. No offense intended, honest, but I think you're out in left field on that particular topic. Chuck

I may be in left field, but the official made the correct call because he knew the rule and A.R. that applied. Besides, its right field where the non-athletes are always put, not left field.

blown call
 

i dont care how many times that i see the replay the official blew the call. i know that you cant see everything on tv, but how in the hell was he able to determine that this was a jump ball? if the kent st player returns to the floor with the ball isnt it a traveling violation. the bottom line here is that the ball was never tied up and the official guessed. i will be the first one to defend an official but in this case i know that he made the wrong call. you can rant and rave all you want to try and convince me that it was the right call, but i think you would be lying to yourself. just remember we are not perfect and situations like this are good for the forum.

take care,
mightyvol

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Quote:

I may be in left field, but the official made the correct call because he knew the rule and A.R. that applied.

Mark, I'm not talking about this particular official's call. As I said previously in this thread, I didn't see enough of the replays to have a definite opinion on whether the call was correct or not. What I was talking about was the fact that sometimes a correct ruling is not immediately apparant; and in those difficult situations a little common sense is not the anathema that you sometimes make it out to be.

I'm not talking about your athletic abililty, since I've never met you. I'm talking about your perspective. "Out in left field" is a phrase that dates back to Babe Ruth's playing days. I'll let you try to figure out what it means.

Chuck

Like I said, I've only seen the replay once or twice so haven't had much chance to break it down. I just think of a held ball as preventing the release of the ball and it didn't look that way at first glance. Haven't really looked at the foot returning to the floor, issue.

Re: blown call
 

No, it's not traveling if the defender prevented him from releasing ball.

Re: blown call
 

Read my earlier post. I quoted the NCAA A.R. 26(a). It was a held ball.