Stay out of my pond!
 

If you saw the end of the MSU-KU game, then you saw exactly why you don't fish in somebody else's pond.

With less than a minute to play, KU inbounds the ball at the division line. K1 races to the throw-in, TRIPS over his OWN feet, catches the ball and falls near the division line. The LEAD races out and calls a MSU foul, with the trail looking at him like he's got two heads.

Unbelievable, bad call. :(

while I agree with your premise that the lead should have never come out to make that call... I think an argument can be made (on phone with Brad I actually argued your POV) that there was a slight touch of the KU player by number 2 of MSU that caused his foot to kick back and trip his other foot. So to categorically say it was an "Unbelievable, bad call" may be a stretch. Just a thought.

Still I don't think I would reach that far to get it when it is that close. I think you have to let the trail live and die with that.

I saw the play. That was a terrible call. I understand if he saw it, but he clearly did not. Reggie Greenwood looked baffled.

Peace

Nope.

Brain cramp by the lead.

If you're gonna call THAT far out of your area, it better be somebody getting punched in the face or the mother of all train wrecks.

agree that Reggie looked baffled and had every right to be. I would be hacked off as well.

however, I find it strange, Jeff, that you say he clearly did not see it. How do you know? I am not trying to be an a$$ but you are the one that generally makes the argument that unless you talked to him about the play or what he saw you can't pass judgement You are not him and you have not talked with him about what he saw. So what makes this particular scenario different? Serious question and not trying to troll at all.

again, I would never have put air in my whistle but it is possible that there was slight inadvertent contact that caused collins foot to go backwards enough that at that speed it caused him to clip his other foot and go down. I am not sure as replay does not completely rule that possibility out imo.

Thumbs down??? You know for sure that there was no contact. Also, I did say that I would not have called that and agree that a call from that far away needs to be non-basketball. All I was arguing is the point that he def tripped over is own feet. He may very well have, but replay indicates that he *may* have been tripped.

:rolleyes:

The Kansas player was a step or two ahead of the MSU player. He clearly did not see what happen, he had to guess. When I saw it live, it looked to me like he fell on his own. I am not sure why you claim he could have seen. It was right in front of Reggie and he passed on the play. It looked like Reggie was contemplating calling a BC violation if the player fell on or over the line.

I do not know what the Lead could have seen. It looked like he thought there was contact and there clearly was not.

Peace

Unlike you I am not claiming he blew the call based on what was ignored. This was clearly missed because there was no contact, not a play that we have to slow down to know what happen on a travel. And this was one call, not something that was chronic all night. Then again, you do not know basics of college officiating. Stick to what you know. ;)

Peace

I never claimed he did see it. I just find your statements that, you know for a fact that he did not see it, to be incongruent with your typical position.

As I have said I did not like the call at all, and I think the trail has every right to be hacked.

Also, box score on USA today does not list Greenwood at all. They have Luckie, Simmons and Stephens. Was it Greenwood after all?

That's what I saw. MSU#2 stepped with his left leg, the one with the black wrap on his calf, and extended it out of his vertical space. The KU player running for the inbounds pass caught his toe on the back of that lower leg and this contact redirected his foot behind his other leg resulting in the tangling of his feet and the trip.

I believe that it was a foul.

It looked like Greenwood to me, but the camera angle was so far it was hard to tell on that floor who was working.

Then again it is one call out of a long game. I think the Trail had a better look at the play and that is why Tony started this thread. I said the very same thing in the chat room. And I do not buy the contact before argument, because the Kansas player got away from whatever contact there was. The Kansas player just tripped himself. And this was caused in my opinion because it was so far away from the Lead. The contact if any happened. The contact took outside of the 3 point line. That is a long way to go for the Lead. I would have rather seen a call from the Center.

Peace

I just want to step in and say that the T was Michael Stephens and not Reggie Greenwood. I know Reggie and it certainly wasn't him.

Nevada, do you have a link to the play? It didn't look like a foul to me, but I want to look at it again to see what you are saying.

Tom...Its 2009 man get a TIVO!!! Just playing with you. Hope to see you around this summer...

Are you kidding me? I have two DVRs - trying to keep from paying for a third - and my desktop has a TV tuner card in it. I just wasn't recording the game.

I hope to see you too, but this new ownership group isn't cooperating.

I have a feeling they will show this play on SportsCenter. Or the College Gameday show.

Peace

He didn't call a foul because the saw a slight touch by the MSU player.

He called a foul because he was too fair away and he saw the KU player foul.

#2 stepped toward the thrower, making a completely legal move. There was slight contact as you say but it was not a foul and should not have been called.

It's unbeleivable and a bad call because he had no business making it, because the trail was right there and because the trail passed on it. I would bet he didn't get a strong grade on the call.

Why would they show a play that was rightly officiated?!?
Tremendous get by the lead as that player started in his primary and he stayed with the play. I don't know what TV you were watching but it was clearly a tripping foul. The MSt player extended his foot outside his vertical plane causing contact with the Kansas player. Great call!!!!!

Tom... go to ncaa.com and follow the link to watch the games on line. There you can see the whole game video. Play happens with 34 secs to go in second half. Fast forward to 2:08:48 and that will be it.

So you're saying it is ok to criticize one missed call, but not ok to mention something thats occurrence was "chronic all night." Chronic all year (and beyond) is more accurate. If that's a basic of anything, you're right, I don't understand it.

ugh those announcers got annoying at the end.
YES, we know it may work out and it may not. Really insightful buddy.
Initially they thought it was a great call.
I thought it could have been a foul but perhaps a no-call would have been better. Looked like incidental contact if there was any contact which wasn't clear. For most of the game the officiating was fine.


btw- kind of seems out of character for some people here to be criticizing calls when I've seen other posters do it and they get ripped for it by the same people...

There is a difference between saying one call or even two calls were wrong, than saying, "They are just ignoring the rule" and "I cannot understand why these guys constantly miss travels."

This was one call and was missed for mechanical reasons, not just a missed call because the video showed it was missed. The trail and his reaction appeared he did not know what the Lead called.

And as someone that is actually in a position to evaluate officials in camps, the first question I would have asked the Trail is "What did you see?" It is likely that the trail did not see the same thing the lead did and that would be the basis of the discussion. That is very different than accusing every official at a level ignoring something on where you only can tell this by replay and we can debate when a pivot foot is established. And the way this entire discussion was started was because the OPer (Tony) wanted to illustrate that not only the call was wrong, but why. I do not recall your position in the other thread was why these calls were missed or even referenced the mechanics (maybe you do not do much 3 person). This was as much about the mechanics and the call.

Peace

I just looked at the replay.

There was a MSU player (#1) standing with his back to the end line and facing the thrower from Kansas. Number #15 from Kansas runs by the MSU #1 and did not make any contact while stepping out to defend the pass. MSU #1 had position to go for the ball as #15 from Kansas is running behind him. Number 1 from MSU is trailing #15 from Kansas and he is about 2 strides behind #15. As the #15 from Kansas goes and gets the ball, he stubbles by having his right foot, hit his left foot and he falls to the floor.

Let us say for argument sake that #1 for MSU made contact with Kansas #15, I do not know how the MSU player could be called for a foul as he was not facing the Kansas player and if any contact took place, I think it would have been incidental at best because he was in a better position to go after the ball. If the MSU player would have went after the ball, the Kansas player would have went through his back. MSU #1 for some reason stopped moving towards the ball and kept his defensive position. And based on the little I saw in the second half, that would not have been a foul. All this action took place about 5 to 10 feet outside of the 3 point line. Let us say for a moment the call was correct, that was a long way to get that call. The Center would have been a better help on this play. And if you look at the Trail, he looks like he did not know what just happened. His arms were out as if to suggest, "What you got." I am sure he did not want to give that body language, but that is what it looked like. The player fell at the division line.

The only players that made any significant contact, were the two MSU players.

Peace

I think the lead guessed.

He saw the player fall, and thought the trail, who was maybe eight feet away, got screened out or something.

On such a big play, he thought they needed a crew-saving call.

He was wrong.

My $0.02

I think you hit the nail on the head. The last minute of the game is on youtube.
You can watch in HD and get a good look at the "redirection." If a shot from the endline comes up somewhere, I think we will see what the lead saw. I think it's a great call, whether it's a proper mechanic or not.

You have noted a very key point.
We are seeing the angle that the Trail had. The horizontal view, looking across the court from the side. From this front-end POV it is difficult to tell if the right foot of the KU player makes contact with the left calf of the MSU player. Depth perception is not easy with this angle.
However, it seems that the Lead, positioned on the end line and looking vertically up the court, would have a great angle to see if contact occurred in such a manner.

Nowhere in your analysis do you discuss MSU #2, Raymar Morgan. It is MSU #2, with the black knee brace on his left leg, who was charged with the foul for tripping KU #15, Tyshawn Taylor, not MSU #1, Kalin Lucas. Pay no attention to MSU #1, Kalin Lucas. He arrives late and afterwards.

Please take another look and focus on the lower left leg of MSU #2 and the right foot of KU #15 as he runs behind him. (1:39 or 1:40 on the video clip)

YouTube - Sweet 16: Kansas vs. Michigan State

From ESPN.com play-by-play (Kansas Jayhawks vs. Michigan State Spartans - Play by Play - March 27, 2009 - ESPN
<table class="tablehead" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tbody><tr class="evenrow"><td valign="top" width="50">0:32</td><td valign="top"> </td><td align="center" nowrap="nowrap" valign="top">60-63</td><td valign="top">Foul on Raymar Morgan</td></tr></tbody></table>
Perhaps this was clearer to me because I am also a soccer referee. This kind of contact is very common in a soccer game.

I think that the Lead will be rewarded with a trip to the Final Four because of this call. We'll have to wait and see.

You are correct. I watched Mike Stephens work in Boise during the first weekend.
Officials: Jamie Luckie ,Doug Sirmons ,Michael Stephens

Now did Luckie or Sirmons make this call?

Just found it on youtube and posted the link in my previous post. :)

I just watched the game this morning. I saw it the same as you. MSU #2 getting into a defensive stance extends his left leg which trips up the Kansas player.

JP

Watching it last night live and then watching it this morning, I believe it is a foul. A view from the lead would be better to see it but it sure looks like to me that #2 from MSU stuck his leg out into the path of the KU player causing the trip. Coming right at the trail like it was, he may have had a hard time seeing it. He had a lot of action coming right at him.

The title of this thread is exactly what's wrong with men's college officiating. Too much ego and not nearly enough teamwork. This was an example of a play that started in the lead's primary, especially based on where the Trail was, and he stayed connected to the play and continued to officiate as there was nothing between him and those players. The mechanics are in place as a guide. It doesn't mean you don't extend your coverage area when the players dictate it. Nobody cares if you officiate the heck out of zero players in your "primary" if there is crap going on elsewhere that fails to get called. Anybody can officiate the wood or the paint on the floor. For anybody that claims this was not a foul, I would have trouble believing that they know how to apply the basic principles of officiating. Again, great call by the lead - Sirmons. By the way, Jamie Luckie has had 3 outstanding games so far in this tournament. I don't know him but based on his performance thus far I think he is a lock for the Final Four.

"Nowhere in your analysis do you discuss MSU #2, Raymar Morgan. It is MSU #2, with the black knee brace on his left leg, who was charged with the foul for tripping KU #15, Tyshawn Taylor, not MSU #1, Kalin Lucas. Pay no attention to MSU #1, Kalin Lucas. He arrives late and afterwards."

It was not a foul.

Your analysis is a pile of crap. The PLAY did NOT start in the lead's primary. The throw-in may have started in the lead's primary but the PLAY occurred directly in front of the trail and well outside of the lead's primary. The PLAY is the slight contact(if any) that may have happened. And you're dumping on the trail who was in great position to make that call in his primary if he thought that there was a call that needed to be made.

All officials will make a bad call on occasion. This was one of those occasions.

You're not talking about a train wreck here. You're advocating calling a very iffy touch foul that is right in front of one of your partners and way out of your primary. What you are advocating is utter nonsense from a basic officiating standpoint!

Popcorn. ;)

Where did I dump on the trail?!? I don't think the Trail could have seen the contact based on where he was and where the players were. He didn't call it because he didn't see it, not because it wasn't a foul. Show me where "train wreck" appears in the manual or rule book. Someone needs to learn or re-read the definition of a foul - Contact which creates a disadvantage to a player. The player went to the floor and was about to commit an over and back violation.
Question: If a shooter pulls up for a 15 foot shot on the baseline 4 feet from the lead and gets hit on the right elbow away from the lead, and you see it as trail, you're not calling it because it's not a train wreck? I referee 1st for the players and to get the play right.

I have not seen a link this morning, but last night I think I saw what you folks say.

Throughout this discussion, it has not been mentioned that #2 was guarding someone else and paying no attention to the player that was tripped.
Contact was made on the back or side? of #2's leg and the player that tripped must have some responsibility for running too close to, and from behind #2, who was playing good, legal defense when the contact was made.

I've got incidental contact forced by the tripped player from behind.

Piggy-backing on some of Mick's phrasing here because last night, I THINK I saw a key that hasn't been mentioned. The live telecast showed a somewhat overhead shot and -- THERE WAS CLEARANCE between Nos. 2 and 15.

The guy who "got tripped" actually was trying to avoid his teammate's defender (No. 2) -- and he performed what I believe is called a "karaoke" move ala a linebacker drill (twisting the hips and putting one leg behind another while running sideways). Except he kicked his own foot.

The YouTube clip could never show this because it is a straight horizontal shot and you don't have the depth perception. Same reason the Trail couldn't make the call (if there was one to make, that is). Appears the Lead thought he had a better angle -- just might have been fooled, too. Need to see that other camera angle!

Dont think this started at lead and was enough for lead to chase


I did a freeze frame graphic but could not get it to go here-I am still not good at forum magic...


http://saltlakeproambasketball.info/graphic.aspx you can see the separation between O and D and where the ball is...

I think by the time player gets to ball he is free of the defenders he is trying to get away from. Any contact is incidental....He was going between two defenders.

Common sense says the play is not going to originate very low (FT line area) which is periphery of lead... Based on where it started C has just as good a look through...

Tourney advancement should be based on crews...

Agree, agree and agree.

I guess that neither of us knows how to apply the basic rules of officiating.:)

Agree, agree, agree.

Seems to me, refguy, that you need to take a closer look and maybe slow the replay down. The Kansas player tried to squeeze through an area where there wasn't enough space - mainly because his own center, Aldridge, was trying to set a screen and didn't do a very good job of it. Amesman had a great description of what the Kansas kid tried to do. He tripped himself. #2 from MSU did nothing illegal and there should not have been a whistle on this play - especially from an official who could not possibly have a good look at what happened due to all the bodies in that small of an area.

And I needed Kansas to win because my bracket was toasted enough already!!:mad:

Yes, someone certainly does need to learn the the definition of a foul. You left out the key word in the definition--"illegal". You can have legal or "incidental" contact that also will create a disadvantage to a player. That <b>isn't</b> a foul. It seems that you really don't understand the concept.

You also need to learn what a "play" is. Someone <b>without</b> the ball running completely <b>untouched</b> through an official's primary is not part of any "play" that needs to be adjudicated. In the situation being discussed, the actual "play" started well outside of the lead's primary.

Question: Does an official's primary change based on the location of the players or simply it is always as drawn in a diagram in the book? White #2 stuck his leg out - outside of his vertical plane right before #15 came through causing 15 to trip and fall down.
Question: A player is set for 5 seconds with his feet wider than his vertical plane and an opponent trips over his foot. Foul?

Just in case - link:
YouTube - Sweet 16: Kansas vs. Michigan State

The primary area is that is written in the book. That being said I have no problem with extending that area if need be to help out. But the problem with this play in my opinion, the Lead was the last to make this call. The ball was around the FT circle and had gone further and further away from the Lead's area and well outside the 3 point line. If there was going to be a call, the Center was a better official to call something if the Trail passed. Let us forget if that was the right call or not.

It might be if the player is setting a screen. But you have to set a screen for that to "automatically" apply.

Peace

Taking your word for it on the numbers involved, but I think this is pretty much what happened, but I would say as he came through, rather than before. Accidental isn't always incidental.

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.

It appears that the Center official had no one in their area. Usually in this situation in CCA Men's Mechanics, this would be a Center call for that very reason. The Lead needs to be more concerned with plays near the basket. Not to say the Lead could not have been watching some players near the circle, but the Center if they are doing what is normally taught, the Center would have been a much better person to call this. And I am sure the Center was likely looking at this pay. And the Trail did not have a close defender on the throw-in so he can watch more than just watching the person with the ball. And if you are one of those officials that this is not your primary, you cannot be wrong. I have no problem with a call from either Lead or Center, just be right. I know if I had made this call as the Lead, I would want that play back. And that was really the point of this thread in the first place.

Peace

Just for information's sake...
 

Here's a screenshot of the play - trail is just off screen, straddling the centre line, and then takes two steps along the sideline, into the FC.

http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l5...968/msukan.jpg

I agree. #2's foot was moving (and off the ground) when the contact was made [from behnd].

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. :confused:

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

Great quote.

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.

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. :rolleyes:

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

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.

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

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.

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.

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

Whether it was a foul or not is argumentive.

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

Oh very nice. :rolleyes:

Don't forget to bring your stopwatch next time you ref, so you can call 3 seconds.

http://www.runemasterstudios.com/gra...mages/spit.gif

You would think that certain people have never seen a basketball game before.

Peace

So, if I understand it, the secondary defender is allowed to stick out his foot and trip a player, so long as he has his back to him.

Make it look like an accident.

"There's just one thing that bothers me."


http://tbn2.google.com/images?q=tbn:...04/columbo.jpg

#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.

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.

No. That isn't allowed. It could even been adjudged "Intentional" or "Flagrant".

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

Still in your own little world. :rolleyes:

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.

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.

Yep.

Done that.

Still nothin'.

You are right about the wrong number, but he did not touch him. No one touched the Kansas player at all. Not when he jumped not when he got by the MSU player that was from behind. NO CONTACT AT ALL!!! Who in the heck could have stuck their leg out?

The Kansas player hit his right foot into his left leg and fell. And the fact that people are even trying to justify such a call is hilarious. That was the same thing I saw on my HD 1080i TV last night. And that was the case on the HD player the NCAA and CBS provides. No contact what so ever.

Peace

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

Agree, but....

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

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

As I said, it may be argumentive if a foul actually occurred on this play. Fwiw though, I agree completely with your analysis above. I have watched the play numerous times, slo-mo and otherwise, and I still haven't see any contact by an opponent that would cause the player to trip.

Jeff,

Look at the replay from floor level and tell there was no contact.

YouTube - Sweet 16: Kansas vs. Michigan State

Dude, I have watched this play multiple times. I watched a better it on NCAA OnDemand which had a better picture and same angles, no contact.

And let us say there was contact for argument sake. The MSU player did nothing illegal. The Kansas player was running from behind the MSU player has a right and he tried to jump around him. That is not a foul. If anything it was tangled feet with two players trying to go in the same direction. Then again, I saw no contact on the HD version. They even slowed this down more times than on the YouTube version and there was no contact.

Peace

As mentioned before - Lead came a heck of a long way to make a call that no one can even agree there was contact on.

Like I told Rich - not an elephant.

Or, Jay - as those CIS guys like to say "not for God and country". :)

You'll notice that the Trail was NOT about to call a violation, and Kansas would have retained the ball anyway (just to throw another angle into this argument :D)

Three people in a row comment on my post...notice I did say "not that this play in particular qualifies..."

I just hate hearing this as an absolute, like we should have blinders on everywhere except our primaries.

I think it was a stretch and, worse, a guess. I wouldn't have reached on this one, no way.

I do not think anyone has used this as an absolute (at least in this discussion). My point is if you are going to get something that far out of your area, you have got to be right. You cannot have a call that people are going to debate the validity of the call and your partners completely pass when they would be the usual calling officials. In my experience when an official comes that far, they are usually wrong. Or at least they have their partners wondering what the hell they just called.

Peace

I have never said there was a foul in any of my posts. all I'm saying is that there is definite contact between #2 of MSU and KU player. The KU player is running towards the ball and his right leg goes way behind his left leg. That does not happen naturally. #2 for MSU stuck out his leg and contact was made. Should it be a foul? Should the lead have called it? That's why they make the big bucks. But there was contact.

Not in my opinion.

It does if you are lunging to get around someone and you lose your balance. I have seen people fall before in and out of sports and they did not come in contact with people. The situations I have seen people fall necessarily happen by them running.

Once again, he did not step out his leg to stop the Kansas player to do anything. If anything I doubt seriously he even saw the player. I think he was going after the ball and realized he did not need to leave the thrower or any other player for defensive position. If anything, the Kansas player initiated contact with him. He has a right to his position on the floor. Not sure how anyone can justify a foul on a player that was ahead of the player coming up their back.

There was? :D

Peace

That's it. That's the key to this whole thing, because that's all you can really see from the angles we have. I don't think anybody could have called a foul based on the look from either side. I would sure like to see a shot of this play from the endline.

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.

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

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.

Good description, Josh.
The place we differ is noted and my opinion comes from the only replay that CBS showed from the "looking down" camera.
After #15's left foot had cleared, I still contend that #2's left foot was moving laterally and that #15's right foot hit the back or side of #2's calf/ankle causing the ricocheted #15 right foot to make contact with #15 left foot. :)

I wish they would just post all the angles for our sake lol

-Josh

Some supervisors are just idiots-get the call right, especially in a big game like this-damn the out of primary thought.

The lead (enline ref) absolutely, without a doubt, can go to his grave-has the best look (angle) on this play. The c is straight lined, the trail has an angle the might not allow him to see contact.

If I can't be 22-23 feet at an approximately 90 degree angle, see a trip and not call it, I do not belong on that floor. That view is easy as pie to see and call. Professional umpires make bang bang calls at 1b often in the 18-21 range all day. This is not much more. That ref had a great angle, the best angle of any 3 on the court.

Now, a college ref (and somenone mentioned it in another post) said concerning rythym, balance, speed and quickness: If one happens, you might have a foul, if two happen, you have a foul. This is concerning contact. So in our case, do we have one or two, first of all. Second, is the contact illegal. If we have yes to 2 of 4 and a yes to illegal contact, we have a foul.

From what I say from you tube, balance, rythym and speed are all affected. Did it happen cause he messed up or contact by the MSU player. That simple; all the other stuff is nonsense. Player going to get the inbounds is the play.

-While I agree that most players do not fall down by themselves there are times when there is contact between feet that just is not a foul...In a confined space there is time when there just is not a foul..

While I cannot see all agles of the play... Philosophically can you penalize a defender that did not do anything wrong?

-Where did the 2 of 4 (rythym, balance, speed and quickness)plus illegal contact become a foul?

-Illegal contact is a foul.. (remember there is legal contact). If there is contact often we use rythym, balance, speed and quickness to determine if there was an advantage/disadvantage or if the contact was incidental.

If there is contact and it changes even one of the four I might have a foul...

Not sure how it fits this description, but the contact in this case caused the guy to basically fall on his face.

I've watched the play about a half-dozen times now and still don't see any contact between Blue 15 and White 2. When I look closely, I see B15's right foot hitting the back of his left calf, his right foot then plantarflexes and his toe hits the floor, dragging him a bit and causing him to fall - tripping over his own feet.

From what I saw #2's leg contacted #15's right leg causing it to go into the back of his left leg.

#2's father is a buddy of mine, I'm gonna ask him this week if there was any contact. I trust his son will provide an honest answer.

The fact that so many people have looked at this play and disagree about whether there's a foul or whether there's even contact makes my point that you don't make this call from lead.

Unless the L's angle (which none of the cameras could show) gave her a view none of us had.

I agree that it's very hard to make this call from the lead, but if we ever get to see the look the lead had, I think we'll all agree there was contact.

No Contact ...
 

From the videos posted, I don't see any contact at all, legal, or illegal. The ball handler tripped himself.

If the lead had a better angle than the trail, and than the cameras, and saw some contact, then I have no problem with him making the call because the contact that he saw certainly put the ball handler at a disadvantage, he fell, and went into the backcourt. I just hope that he didn't guess from the lead.

Don't need to see that angle to see the contact. This is to the point of hilarity that referees on here cannot see the foul. I saw it the 1st time and on each subsequent replay CBS showed. As #15's foot passes #2's calf, watch it change direction and go behind his other foot causing him to fall. I guess not all are created with equal eyesight or ability.
What happens when you see a foul - not in your primary and your supervisor asks if you saw it. Are you gonna say it's not my primary or just say you weren't looking there as many use that cop out.

Even if there was contact (which I clearly have not seen any by replays), then I still do not see how this is a foul. The Kansas player ran up the back of the MSU player. If that is a foul, then we miss a lot of fouls in the game of basketball. Other than him falling, nothing the MSU player did or would have done was illegal.

Peace