Stay out of my pond!

[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.

[JRutledge]

I looked at the play again (not the YouTube version).

I am still trying to figure out who stuck out their leg. MSU #1 stepped to the ball but his back was to the Kansas player. The MSU player trailing the Kansas player did not touch the Kansas player at all.

Either people did not see the video in higher definition or they are making up the facts as time gets further away from the game. The Kansas player clearly hit his own leg and fell down as a result. The player fell several steps away from MSU #1 and the Kansas player was more than a step away from where he fell and where any contact would have taken place. They showed the moment about 3 or 4 times.

Peace

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I looked at the play again (not the YouTube version).

I am still trying to figure out who stuck out their leg. MSU #1 stepped to the ball but his back was to the Kansas player. The MSU player trailing the Kansas player did not touch the Kansas player at all.

Either people did not see the video in higher definition or they are making up the facts as time gets further away from the game. The Kansas player clearly hit his own leg and fell down as a result. The player fell several steps away from MSU #1 and the Kansas player was more than a step away from where he fell and where any contact would have taken place. They showed the moment about 3 or 4 times.

Still in your own little world.

You continue talk about MSU #1. That's the wrong guy.

Look at MSU #2. He's the player with the black knee brace on his left leg.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by dahoopref

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.

IMO, this whole attitude is taken just a bit too far. I prefer the saying "don't allow an elephant on the court just cause it's not in your primary."

Not saying this particular situation qualifies, but it is possible to work your primary and see something happening elsewhere that needs to be called.

[canuckrefguy]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

IMO, this whole attitude is taken just a bit too far. I prefer the saying "don't allow an elephant on the court just cause it's not in your primary."

Not saying this particular situation qualifies, but it is possible to work your primary and see something happening elsewhere that needs to be called.

Agree, Rich....but this wasn't an elephant. Not even close.

[Old_School]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

Not saying this particular situation qualifies, but it is possible to work your primary and see something happening elsewhere that needs to be called.

Agree, but....

Do you think that the lead should have made the call on the play that's being discussed?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

IMO, this whole attitude is taken just a bit too far. I prefer the saying "don't allow an elephant on the court just cause it's not in your primary."

Not saying this particular situation qualifies, but it is possible to work your primary and see something happening elsewhere that needs to be called.

That was an awful long ways away for something people cannot even agree on. Now the conversation might not have been that confrontational, but I bet something was mentioned about the Lead and where his partners were looking.

Peace

[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.

[jdmara]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

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 using 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.

Nevada-

I'm with you on this play. I believe that KU15 had his heal clipped by MSU2 which caused KU15 to trip over his own feet. I thought that watching the play live. Here is how I would break it down: KU15 runs towards the division line with MSU1 trailing him (no contact occurs until they are both on the floor at the end of the play). MSU2, who presumably is "guarding" the inbounder (KU15), backs up towards the three point line. KU 45 comes and tries to set a screen on MSU1. So MSU2, MSU1, KU15, and KU45 all converge about the same time in a small place. I contend that MSU2's left leg makes contact with KU15's right foot. KU15's left foot then comes down and the contact causes KU15's right foot to swing behind his left leg. It's the classic soccer trip as someone mentioned.

I'm shocked there is this much discussion on this one play.

-Josh

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by jdmara

...the contact causes KU15's right foot to swing behind his left leg. It's the classic soccer trip as someone mentioned.

Hmmmm....now who was that person? Could someone help me remember?

BTW I believe that mick has provided an excellent account of the action of MSU #2 during this play.

Originally Posted by mick

#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.