Stay out of my pond!

[refguy]

Originally Posted by canuckrefguy

Actually, the play happened even further out - just above the 3pt line.

You look at the beginning of the play, and I can see how lead, who has no action other than two players across the key, might extend his primary here. I'm not sure the centre, from where he is, can see the "trip". You need to be able to see the other (90 degrees away) angle, and all the centre likely sees is the Kansas player fall down.

So I'm going to modify my original comments and grant that, on this play, lead is watching the throw-in action away from the ball, which MIGHT include stuff near the top of the circle.

As well, looking at the replay, lead would have had a decent - though FAR AWAY - angle to view the cutter and both defenders. He is also the best out of the three to view the entire play from start to finish.

But there's one of two things that happened:

1. There was no contact
2. There was slight contact, but it was incidental.

Either way - not worthy of a call.

So it could have been a good pickup by the lead - if there had been a foul.

Which there wasn't.

How could you say above in #2 that there may have been slight contact but it was incidental? The player went to the floor. Sheesh.

"Accidental isn't always incidental." by just another ref

Great quote.

[Adam]

This seems to boil down to a borderline foul, if it's a foul. If the T or C had called it, no one would question it. But the L?
If he got this one right, he got lucky.

[mick]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

This seems to boil down to a borderline foul, if it's a foul. If the T or C had called it, no one would question it. But the L?
If he got this one right, he got lucky.

I don't think I can call the foul, because #2 [yes, #2] was not put at a disadvantage when he was hit.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

This seems to boil down to a borderline foul, if it's a foul. If the T or C had called it, no one would question it. But the L?
If he got this one right, he got lucky.

I believe there was contact and the L may have got it right but I don't believe that is where he should have been looking. The C was high and looking straight across the court and the T had a clear view of the play. The L had 2 players in the paint. JMHO.

[canuckrefguy]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

I believe there was contact and the L may have got it right but I don't believe that is where he should have been looking. The C was high and looking straight across the court and the T had a clear view of the play. The L had 2 players in the paint. JMHO.

I like the philosophy, but don't agree 100%.

On this play, as the photo shows, L's primary could well include the KU player being pursued by MSU #1 and cutting by MSU #2. It's the closest competitive matchup besides the two guys across the paint - who aren't doing anything. And even then, L has to be watching wide enough to include the cutter, who starts the play well within L's primary.

As I stated before, I don't think C has a good enough look - too many bodies to see through.

I don't have a problem with L following this play - but he shouldn't have blown his whistle here.

Not because of primaries/secondaries, etc...but because there was no foul.

[Nevadaref]

NCAA rule:
Rule 10
Section 1. Personal Fouls
Art. 1. A player shall not hold, push, charge, trip or impede the progress
of an opponent by extending arm(s), shoulder(s), hip(s) or knee(s) or by
bending his or her own body into other than a normal position; nor use any
unreasonably rough tactics.


Curiously the rule doesn't state leg or foot, but if I were the Lead this is what I would point to for justification of the call.

The leg was clearly extended, that is not debatable, and it ended up being in the path of the moving opponent. I also understand the point of those who are saying that he did not deliberately or knowingly step in front of the opponent as he likely didn't even see him.

In the end, I would rather see a foul call made here than a non-call.

[Old_School]

Whether it was a foul or not is argumentive.

Having the lead make that decision, as refguy advocates, is completely ridiculous.

[dahoopref]

Originally Posted by Old_School

Whether it was a foul or not is argumentive.

Having the lead make that decision, as refguy advocates, is completely ridiculous.

Seen this type of "out of the primary" call by a Lead at a camp a year ago. The supervisor of the conference brought the crew together after the game.

Supervisor speaking to the Lead after the game: Why did you make that call out of your primary?

Official: Because it was a foul.

Supervisor: Do you trust your partners?

Official: Yes, but I thought they didn't have the best look at the play.

Supervisor: If you're looking out there, then who is officiating your primary area?

Official: (Silence)

Supervisor: If you're gonna make a call out there, you're telling me that you don't trust your partners. They should take their paychecks and go home because you're officiating their areas. That call you make out there better be a non-basketball play or a 1000% correct call. Let your partners live or die with that call or non-call; I'll deal with them if it needs to be addressed.

[Mark Dexter]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

NCAA rule:
Rule 10
Section 1. Personal Fouls
Art. 1. A player shall not hold, push, charge, trip or impede the progress
of an opponent by extending arm(s), shoulder(s), hip(s) or knee(s) or by
bending his or her own body into other than a normal position; nor use any
unreasonably rough tactics.

That would be great except for 4-29-2: "A personal foul shall be a foul committed by a player that involves illegal contact with an opponent while the ball is live."

Watching this play a few times now, I have yet to see any contact.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Mark Dexter

That would be great except for 4-29-2: "A personal foul shall be a foul committed by a player that involves illegal contact with an opponent while the ball is live."

Watching this play a few times now, I have yet to see any contact.

Hey, Dexter. Nice to have you posting again. Hope you are doing well.

I don't know if it will alter your opinion, but humor me by going back and reading what I wrote in posts #11 and #27, and usung the video link provided therein to see if you can pick-up the clipping of the foot that I mention. It is difficult to see from the given angle and without super slow-mo, but I do believe that it is there and caused the trip.

[canuckrefguy]

Originally Posted by refguy

How could you say above in #2 that there may have been slight contact but it was incidental? The player went to the floor and was about to be called for a violation. Sheesh.

"Accidental isn't always incidental." by just another ref

Great quote.

1. by just another ref is wrong. In this case.

2. Stuff happens. First question you ask if you're going to blow the whistle ought to be "what did the defense do wrong?" In this case, NOTHING.

"Sheesh" right back at ya.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by canuckrefguy

1. by just another ref is wrong. In this case.

2. Stuff happens. First question you ask if you're going to blow the whistle ought to be "what did the defense do wrong?" In this case, NOTHING.

Defender stuck his foot where another player was trying to run.

[refguy]

The other people must not be watching in high definition. I am not even sure it was accidental. He knew a cutter was coming through. Why would he stick his foot out at that instant? He wasn't moving to guard a player.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by refguy

The other people must not be watching in high definition. I am not even sure it was accidental. He knew a cutter was coming through. Why would he stick his foot out at that instant? He wasn't moving to guard a player.

Well I have a high definition TV and I saw no contact. The only players that made contact were the two MSU players. The Kansas player tripped over his own foot and that is why he fell. The Kansas player tried to squeeze through a spot and caught himself off balance. I am still trying to figure out how he could have contacted the MSU player.

Oh well.

Peace

[mick]

Originally Posted by refguy

The other people must not be watching in high definition. I am not even sure it was accidental. He knew a cutter was coming through. Why would he stick his foot out at that instant? He wasn't moving to guard a player.

#2 was looking at and guarding against the throw-in pass. When the thrower looked to #2's left (for W15), #2 was stepping in that direction.