|
|||
Here's the key part of that paragraph:
In cases of screens outside the visual field, the opponent may make inadvertent contact with the screener and if the opponent is running rapidly, the contact may be severe. Such a case is to be ruled as incidental contact provided the opponent stops or attempts to stop on contact and moves around the screen, and provided the screener is not displaced if he/she has the ball. I watched the game, and it was one heckuva screen. However, I had no foul on the play. The screen was outside the OU player's field of vision. Did he attempt to stop on contact? That's a judgement call, but I didn't see anything to indicate otherwise. I believe it was a good "no call." |
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
Never argue with an idiot. He will bring you down to his level and beat you with experience. |
|
|||
Rethinking....
As to the no-foul on Price.... Reading that paragraph would suggest a no-call. Price clearly made no attempt to go through Fife. Yeah, the contact was so sever it sent Fife backwards several feet and put him on his backside. I'm not sure the screen was so out of Price's vision, but he certainly wasn't looking.
One thing about that paragraph that has never made sense to me -- in what kind of play does the player with the ball become the screener? |
|
|||
One thing about that paragraph that has never made sense to me -- in what kind of play does the player with the ball become the screener?
I was just discussing that with another official this morning. The best we came up with would be a post player gets the ball at the top of the key and then screens for the guard as he cuts to the basket. Not sure if I've ever seen it, but I reckon it's possible! |
|
|||
Re: Rethinking....
Quote:
Picture a high post player with the ball pivoting and picking off the defender of a cutting teammate. mick |
|
|||
Re: Re: Rethinking....
Quote:
__________________
foulbuster |
|
|||
I was the one who originally brought up this situation. I have looked at it again (BTW it was White not Price, my fault).
I personnaly would not call a foul at that level (NCAA). However if I was doing anything below high school, I would probably call a foul on White. Just because with those younger age groups, you may try to protect them more. A couple of years when I was coaching (should I admit that?) my player was given a foul on a similar play, only problem he was setting the screen. I did not like the call. I think the ref called the foul on the screener because the player who was screened received the worst of the contact. Jay |
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
Re: Re: Rethinking....
Quote:
|
|
|||
Quote:
Chuck |
|
|||
I personally take offense to JRutledge saying that Packer "sure knows his X's and O's" He is a complete moron who is constantly second guessing coaching decisions probably even more than he does the officials. He is a wanna-be. How many time throughout the championship game did he criticize Maryland's gameplan? How many times did you hear him say in the semifinals that "the sooners need to pressure Indiana fullcourt" If he is such a wizard, why not put him in the coaching box? Oh that's right his teams would never get televised because they would suck so bad. The guy is out of touch.
|
|
|||
I agree with ericdenn. I have a feeling coaches must sit around and laugh about some of the things Packer comes up with. At least with Bill Raftery and Dick Vitale, they can come across as a little wacky, but their remarks are not as condescending.
|
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
Quote:
When Vitale gives advice to coaches on national television, I think that would feel condescending to me if I was someone like Mike Davis. I don't even remember the specifics, but Vitale kept talking in interviews about advice he had given Davis when they were 7-5 and implied that he was in part responsible for their great run. I have also heard him talk about giving advice to other great coaches like Calvin Sampson and Roy Williams.
__________________
Church Basketball "The brawl that begins with a prayer" |
|
|||
Sooner press
Actually, I do agree that the Sooners should have pressed a bit. They didn't even try it until the very end. If they had better speed, why not? And with the IU point playing on a weak ankle, why not make him work? The announcers indicated that a press might free up the big guy at the offensive end, but give it a try to see they can hit 'em.
I enjoyed the game, even if my alma mater lost. |
Bookmarks |
|
|