Kentucky/Louisville

[dbking]

Foul enforcement:

The two fouls were offsetting, not double, per rule 10-5. All three fouls would have been Class A fouls. Since it was not a single foul, the resumption of play will be POI.

[jsblanton]

The whole crew missed the guy from Louisville sitting on top of Cousins' when the scrum started. I have started calling more fouls during loose balls and not letting kids dive on top of each other for loose balls. So many times several refs call a held ball instead of a foul.

[grunewar]

Will anything happen as a result of this play/game situation now or is it over and done?

Will the crew get a note/call from the NCAA on their thoughts as to what they did/didn't call? Procedures they followed? Will it just be ignored as just another game situation? Re emphasis go out to all officials?

Just curious as to your thoughts.
Thanks

[dahoopref]

Originally Posted by dbking

Foul enforcement:

The two fouls were offsetting, not double, per rule 10-5. All three fouls would have been Class A fouls. Since it was not a single foul, the resumption of play will be POI.

Thanks for your answer and agree with the offsetting Ts.

Could you clarify your above statement about the "single foul"?

Are you referring to the contact dead ball technical foul by L'ville #12? As I understand it the resumption of play is throw-in to the offended team (Ky) at the division line (with reset of the shot-clock).

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by grunewar

Will anything happen as a result of this play/game situation now or is it over and done?

Will the crew get a note/call from the NCAA on their thoughts as to what they did/didn't call? Procedures they followed? Will it just be ignored as just another game situation? Re emphasis go out to all officials?

Just curious as to your thoughts.
Thanks

Will probably see something on the Arbiter's Central Hub. They posted the Cincy/Xavier incident with some comments.

[WhistlesAndStripes]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Will probably see something on the Arbiter's ArbiterSports' Central Hub. They posted the Cincy/Xavier incident with some comments.

I fixed that for ya.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Will probably see something on the Arbiter's Central Hub. They posted the Cincy/Xavier incident with some comments.

Unfortunately, I believe that it is password protected and the information not available to the general public.

Perhaps such info could be posted on this forum by those with access.

[Jurassic Referee]

Here's a view from the front. There was a better view from behind showing the elbow being thrown that was constantly being replayed.

YouTube - DeMarcus 'Double Tech' Cousins

I thought it shoulda been called flagrant when I saw it live....and on the numerous replays. Still do.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Here's a view from the front. There was a better view from behind showing the elbow being thrown that was constantly being replayed.

YouTube - DeMarcus 'Double Tech' Cousins

I thought it shoulda been called flagrant when I saw it live....and on the numerous replays. Still do.

Agreed. Not sure why it was not called a flagrant after they went to the monitor.

Gotta love it when even the UK fan who is filming (or someone near him) says (right at the end of the video) "DeMarcus elbowed him in the head first".

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

Agreed. Not sure why it was not called a flagrant after they went to the monitor.

Deej, did you notice Cahill, the Lead, on the play? I thought that he had a good look at the play and he did call the held ball, but the Trail had to come all the way in to make the subsequent calls. The Trail called both initial "T"s against Louisville while Cahill seemed to stay right out of the play.

Cahill is a veteran official who has shown that he's certainly not afraid to make the tough call. I was just wondering why he didn't get more involved in a play that was right in front of him.

Thoughts?

[zm1283]

If that's not flagrant, especially after seeing it on the replay, then I don't know what is.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by zm1283

If that's not flagrant, especially after seeing it on the replay, then I don't know what is.

Well, three very well respected officials that have done a lot higher games than any of us felt otherwise....even with numerous replay and time to consider it. Right or wrong, I think I'll go with their judgement. Something about it, in their opinion, must have been insufficient for a flagrant.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Well, three very well respected officials that have done a lot higher games than any of us felt otherwise....even with numerous replay and time to consider it. Right or wrong, I think I'll go with their judgement. Something about it, in their opinion, must have been insufficient for a flagrant.

I do not see this as a flagrant either. I see players fight for the ball and some contact that might be rough, but not flagrant. Then again, I am not one of those officials on the floor and I am watching with the benefit of replay on my couch. Just saying.

Peace

[tomegun]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Well, three very well respected officials that have done a lot higher games than any of us felt otherwise....even with numerous replay and time to consider it. Right or wrong, I think I'll go with their judgement. Something about it, in their opinion, must have been insufficient for a flagrant.

If you don't feel like it should have been a flagrant, cool. But, the reasoning above is total BS in my opinion.

Rut, mentioned why he thought it isn't flagrant; an opinion that will initiate conversation. JR said he thought it was flagrant; another opinion. Neither of those opinions are lemming-ish. I made that up for this special occasion!

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Deej, did you notice Cahill, the Lead, on the play? I thought that he had a good look at the play and he did call the held ball, but the Trail had to come all the way in to make the subsequent calls. The Trail called both initial "T"s against Louisville while Cahill seemed to stay right out of the play.

Cahill is a veteran official who has shown that he's certainly not afraid to make the tough call. I was just wondering why he didn't get more involved in a play that was right in front of him.

Thoughts?

I honestly think he was blocked out of a lot of the stuff - too many bodies in the way. As he was closing in the Louisville players who did the pushing were pushing the UK player toward Cahill. So he was in probably the worst position to call those first T's...then he must have been the U2 as he was the one who stayed out on the court and kept an eye on the players/benches.

From my vantage point on the couch, I honestly thought this was a flagrant foul. I would love to hear their post-game discussion! Perhaps they only went with the T because the reaction of the Louisville player was fairly subdued...if he comes up and takes a swing, perhaps they toss both players? I don't know - just speculating here.