Knight still clueless

[zm1283]

Not that I'm surprised, but this was funny nonetheless.....

Tennessee/South Carolina game on ESPN right now. Late in the first half, SC got called for goaltending. UT took one shot and missed, another UT player gets the rebound and goes up for a shot. Shot clearly hits the backboard first followed by a SC player swatting it. Official in the C calls the violation and counts the basket. Knight claims that it isn't the right call and wants a replay. They show the replay and it is even more clear that the SC player touched it after it hit the backboard. He still said they missed it and that it was on the way up. Someone needs to tell Knight that he doesn't know the college rule about goaltending.

Another good one: L gives the ball to TN on an OOB violation. One of the other two came in and let him know they had it off of TN instead. Knight informs us that the other official "overruled" the official that called it. Said that the non-calling official must be 100% sure to "overrule" the other official. Said nothing about telling him what you have and let him decide with the info you give.

[zm1283]

Now he's telling us that you can't have a no-call on a drive to the basket when someone falls down. I guess guys never flop....

[TheViper]

Not only does Bobby Knight not have a clue (I just started watching with 10:00 left in the 2nd half), but Teddy Valentine has got to call something. People have been getting mauled right in front of him...

[Old_School]

Originally Posted by zm1283

Shot clearly hits the backboard first followed by a SC player swatting it. Official in the C calls the violation and counts the basket. Knight claims that it isn't the right call and wants a replay. They show the replay and it is even more clear that the SC player touched it after it hit the backboard. He still said they missed it and that it was on the way up.

Hitting the ball after it has hit the backboard doesn't necessarily equate to an automatic goaltending call. Was the whole ball completely above the ring when it first touched the backboard? If not, you may want to look up new NCAA rule 4-34-3.

[zm1283]

Originally Posted by Old_School

Hitting the ball after it has hit the backboard doesn't necessarily equate to an automatic goaltending call. Was the whole ball completely above the ring when it first touched the backboard? If not, you may want to look up new NCAA rule 4-34-3.

Yes, it was above the ring. He wasn't arguing that anyway. He said that the ball wasn't on the way down, which it didn't matter because it was above the ring when it hit the backboard and it was above the ring when it was touched by the defense.

[Scrapper1]

And this just in. . . the ocean is still wet!

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

And this just in. . . the ocean is still wet!

Being a Midwestern kid, I did not know that. Thanks for this breaking information.

Peace

[Brad]

Originally Posted by TheViper

First of all, I am a 2nd year official

Then you might want to think twice before giving one of college basketball's premiere officials advice through this forum.

Originally Posted by TheViper

If I am no longer allowed to post my opinion on hear because of your false accusations, please use your almighty power to remove me from the site.

You can post your opinions, just do it in a non-derogatory manner. There are plenty of sites that you can go to if you want to rip on officials - this isn't one of them.

(BTW, Nevadaref can't remove you, but I know someone that can. )

[GoodwillRef]

Why are we surprised when ex-player and ex-coaches that work on tv make stupid comments about the officiating. Just because someone coached or played at a high level of college or pro basketball doesn't mean the know anything about the rules or officiating in general.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by GoodwillRef

Why are we surprised when ex-player and ex-coaches that work on tv make stupid comments about the officiating.

I don't think anyone is surprised. It's frustrating, though, when we know that people are listening and really believe that these "experts" are correct.