Purude vs. Northwestern

[dbking]

I would love to know some interpretations on the play at the 1:02 mark of this video.

http://all-access.cbssports.com/play...ur&media=99802

The play happens at the division line. The NU player clearly kicks the ball and there is no call.

Your comments please.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by dbking

The play happens at the division line. The NU player clearly kicks the ball and there is no call.

Way to taint the jury, dude.

[Spence]

I agree.

[refguy]

Originally Posted by dbking

I would love to know some interpretations on the play at the 1:02 mark of this video.

http://all-access.cbssports.com/play...ur&media=99802

The play happens at the division line. The NU player clearly kicks the ball and there is no call.

Your comments please.

The play had no effect on the game as they missed the shot on the other end.
How about the foul called with 2.2 seconds left? That had an effect on the outcome.

[LDUB]

Originally Posted by refguy

The play had no effect on the game as they missed the shot on the other end.
How about the foul called with 2.2 seconds left? That had an effect on the outcome.

So just because Northwestern didn't score possible kick call had no effect on the game? What about all the time that ran off the clock while Northwestern had the ball? Purdue would have had a throw in had the kick been called...what if they scored on that possession....what if Northwestern stole the throw in and scored quickly....what if Purdue's best player fouled after the throw in was stolen? Seems to me like not calling it a kick definitely changed the ending of the game. Every call has an effect on the game.

[Kelvin green]

Really a clear kick?

First, from what I can tell from the video is that the physics are all wrong... What does a ball due when it is intentionally kicked? Goes right back to the defender and he gets the ball and dribbles for a layup?

Second... Guy is playing good defensive posture, I cant see where even if the ball went off his foot it would be a kick... I agree more with the arm hitting it...

Lastly Graet intentional call!

[Jay R]

Boys, some of you guys are taking this solidarity thing a bit too far. Ted V. Ed H and Curtis shaw are tremendous officials with all kinds of credentials.

However, the ball is clearly kicked by the defender. Acknowledging that fact does not take away from the officials. If you look at the video, the trail official does not get a look at the play so he misses the kick ball. it happens to the best. To deny that the ball was kicked is difficult for me to believe.

[Camron Rust]

Looks clean to me. As someone said....looked like he batted it with his hand. The ball went to the floor near his foot after the bat. No kick.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Jay R

Boys, some of you guys are taking this solidarity thing a bit too far. Ted V. Ed H and Curtis shaw are tremendous officials with all kinds of credentials.

However, the ball is clearly kicked by the defender. Acknowledging that fact does not take away from the officials. If you look at the video, the trail official does not get a look at the play so he misses the kick ball. it happens to the best. To deny that the ball was kicked is difficult for me to believe.

It is not about solidarity. It is about that it is not clear that a kick took place and the angle on a bad video does not make it clearer. I will say I thought there might have been a kick when I saw the play live, but I was not at the angle the officials were. And I know how angles and being on the floor give you a completely different perspective than some tape after the fact. You have not convinced me that the ball hit the hand first and then foot, which is debatable if there was a kick. The ball might have touched the leg, but not necessarily a kick.

Peace

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by dbking

I would love to know some interpretations on the play at the 1:02 mark of this video.

http://all-access.cbssports.com/play...ur&media=99802

The play happens at the division line. The NU player clearly kicks the ball and there is no call.

Your comments please.

Really?

Peace

[jeffpea]

Originally Posted by dbking

I would love to know some interpretations on the play at the 1:02 mark of this video.

http://all-access.cbssports.com/play...ur&media=99802

The play happens at the division line. The NU player clearly kicks the ball and there is no call.

Your comments please.

looks to me (sitting here in my comfy office chair) like he hit the ball w/ his arm....however I will trust the judgement of Ed Hightower, Curtis Shaw, and Ted Valentine - all of whom were in a better position to view this play than you or I or anyone else......

btw, I tried to look up how many combined Final Fours this group has worked, but I couldn't count that high.

[Brad]

Agree with the others -- it is not "clear" by any means ... and I am going to have to go with the referee who is standing RIGHT THERE on top of the play rather than trying to determine the play from a poor quality internet video!

Also, great intentional foul on the play before.

[Adam]

Okay, it's killing me. Where is Purude?
Do they play in the Big Ent?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Okay, it's killing me. Where is Purude?
Do they play in the Big Ent?

No, Continental Conference.

Peace

[wildcatter]

I was at the game, and had a great view of the play. Looked like it grazed of the hand, hit his leg - not an intentional kick the way I saw it, and I had some great seats. If you pass a ball off a player's leg, that's your own fault, you shouldn't be bailed out by a violation...

Then again, if you can't tell by my handle, I'm WOULD qualify as a fanboy in this case...

Great crew at the game, I loved watching the way they worked. Interesting to see the camraderie between Valentine and Hightower. For some odd reason, I thought they had been at odds with each other previously.