Kentucky/Louisville
 

A Forearm to the head against a guy flat on the floor, you have the monotor to check the replay, and you don't eject? Are you kidding me?

Someone please explain it. And don't give me the "it's a rivalry" crap.

Just for clarification (no joke here), are you asking if NCAA officials can use replay to determine if a foul was flagrant or not, or are you claiming the foul was flagrant and they just missed it - or both? Thanks.

When I saw who the first reply was, I thought, Oh Great, here goes the sarcastic responses.

As far as your question, I'm asking about both really. There was a scrum on the floor for the ball, 45 seconds into the game. Cousins from Kentucky throws a pretty good forearm to the head of the louisville player he was fighting for the ball with. Guy on the floor came up mad and got a quick T, as did one of his teammates I believe who came in angry to help break it up. Officials went and looked at the monitor and then assessed an unsportsmanlike T on Cousins, which must have been for the forearm to the head. I guess I'm asking if they could come up with the T from the reviewing the video, why couldn't they come up with the flagrant?

I thought it was the right route to go after looking at the monitor.

I bet you would have a different feeling if you were the one who took the shot to the head. If they make that call without the monitor I get it. But you go to the monitor and see that forearm to head of a player and don't toss him? They didn't have the balls to pull the trigger in the blue grass state. Sad from veteran NCAA tournamnet crew.

I'm a little confused -- it appears the foul on Cousins was a live-ball foul, so it couldn't (or shouldn't) have been a T.

They are allowed to use the monitor to determine if the contact was flagrant. I didn't (obviously) see the play, so I have no opinion on the specific call.

Very well stated. That's what was the most shocking to me. They called NOTHING on cousins prior to going to the monitor. And then, when they did, the call didn't seem to be justified by the action. It was live ball action and how it wasn't flagrant is beyond me!!

From the reverse angle, it looked like the trail, whoever that is, was WAY too far away from the play and needed to close in when the scrum happened.

Still, whoever the lead was should have also perhaps had a look at the two guys on the floor and the quite obvious forearm/elbow to the head.

Don't often agree with the halftime TV panelists, but they're right on this one methinks. Should have been covered better - and Cousins should have been ejected.

Having to go to the monitor is kind of lame, but at least it prevented Cousins from getting away scot-free.

Other than that, I thought they did a good job clamping down on maybe the most volatile start to a game I've seen in years.

There may have been a held ball called immediately preceding the contact...by a hair. That would explain what they come up. Not being privy to their exact call, it's a guess on my part.

Re: the contact...straight judgment call whether the contact was flagrant or not. Imo it was( after several replays also). In their opinion, it wasn't. They win. :) At least something did get called, even though it was retroactively.

Just your average ol' football forearm shiver...but to the head....and it sure looked deliberate to me.

More than likely we will see this play again during the course of the year when John Adams sends out his video breakdown of plays.

It seemed pretty deliberate to me, and to have the ability to use the monitor as many times as needed to make the determination.

I suspect there might be some consequences to be faced by the crew on this game.

Well then lets all do this, let us all try to convince the SEC or Big East to let any three of us work this game next year, and if the same situation happens, see if any of us as a crew has the guts to do what in some people's minds should have been done.

You are entitled to your opinion and I am entitled to mine. However, I am going to side with this officiating crew before anything else.

Oh "icallfouls", I would be shocked if this crew faced penalties for the way the handled that situation. If they had not been calling fouls early, and this happened, then I might agree with you. But, this crew came out putting air in the whistle early and often, thus I do not think they will face penalties.

That's a BS cop-out response, with all due respect.

The big-timers should be subject to the same scrutiny and accountability as everybody else.

They easily could have covered that play better. I'm not saying I've never made mistakes like that, but then again, this thread isn't discussing my mistakes or potential mistakes. Greene, Shows, and the third guy (?) have done more big games than I'll ever do - but dismissing criticism based on that is less than lame. You can bet the observer, if there is one, and/or their supervisor, will not be dismissing it, and will mention it as part of their critique.

The big guys screw-up too. It's a fact of life.

PS - penalties over it? C'mon, as if.

johnsandlin

Please open your mind. I only said consequences. As far as we know it could be something as simple as double secret probation. But for sure there will be some discussion on the matter.

In most conferences, the assignors policy is that for any T foul called by the crew, the calling official is to inform the assignor directly within a certain time frame so that the assignor can have time to review it as necessary. They will discuss it and there will be a video review. The assignor will tell the official(s) personally as to what their opinion is. That will basically be it. However, if the SEC was responsible for providing the officials, lately they have taken to commenting in public on the actions of their officials.

I have a couple of friends that work a serious D1 schedule and have been told that things like this can affect league tournament placement, NIT, or NCAA tournament games.

Absolutely the big hitters get the benefit of the doubt, but no one is excused completely these days. Too many people want their pound of flesh.

This isn't a matter of whether or not they were calling fouls early. They were. This occurred literally 45 seconds into the game. Prior to this, there had been 2 defensive fouls called for pushing through some screens too hard, and an offensive foul on a drive to the basket.

I think the issue here is that these guys didn't have the balls to make the big call which was so obvious, EVEN AFTER GOING TO THE MONITOR!!!