An announcer gets it right

[KCRC]

I've read two threads this past week criticizing Jay Bilas and Doug Gottlieb and their knowledge of or application of the rules.

Did anyone happen to see the Ole Miss/Miss. St. game last night on ESPN? Rece Davis and Jimmy Dykes on the call. A1 and B1 are battling for rebound that eventually is secured by B2. A1 and B1 have a hard time separating from each other as they start to run to the other end of the court. A1, frustrated, throws a "half elbow" that misses B1. B1 takes exception and gives A1 an elbow/arm bar that makes contact and causes A1 to go to the floor (a little flop if you ask me). L comes in and signals foul on A1. The officials come together to discuss and then go to the monitor to sort it out.

Jimmy Dykes must have either had the rule right in front of him or have a great memory. He quotes the flagrant personal foul, live ball (NCAA 4.29.2.c), almost verbatim and explains that we probably have at least one flagrant personal foul during a live ball. As it turns out, the officials went to the monitor and determined that neither act was flagrant (HTBT, could have gone either way IMO), and issued a double personal foul against each player.

Interestingly enough, Mr. Dykes called one of the officals over. ESPN showed the offical giving the explanation to Mr. Dykes, who then put his headset back on and relayed the ruling and penalties to the TV audience.

Great job by all involved IMO. I think it is fair game to criticize announcers for not knowing the rules. However, when an announcer does get it right and has a knowledge of the rules, that is worth a kudos.

Did anyone else happen to see the game?

[Adam]

So the officials call a double personal foul for a) one player throwing an elbow that doesn't connect and b) the other player retaliating with a push?

[KCRC]

I agree with your point. I really thought that each would get a flagrant. So did Mr. Dykes. I don't want to criticize the officials' judgment. It was a close call, I wouldn't necessarily call it an elbow and a push. In the original post, I called it a "half elbow" followed by an arm bar. It all happened fast as they were separating from rebounding action. I wish I had video so you could see for yourself. My primary point was that Mr. Dykes was right on top of the rules situation.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

So the officials call a double personal foul for a) one player throwing an elbow that doesn't connect and b) the other player retaliating with a push?

And they "upgraded" a no-call to a common foul? I thought you could only upgrade a foul that was called.

[paxsonref]

Did he also mention that by rule, you cannot charge a personal foul after going to the monitor to review a flagrant?

If nothing was called, you can have these things....

1. Nothing - no call
2. Flagrant personal (or technical)
3. Intentional
4. Dead ball technical

you CANNOT add a personal foul after monitor review

If you have a personal foul called, you can have these things....

1. Original call (personal foul)
2. Flagrant
3. Intentional
4. Dead ball technical (if it was determinted to be during a dead ball instead)

oh, and did I mention, you CANNOT have a personal foul call tacked on after reviewing the monitor.....

Didn't see the game, so if it happened the way it was described, then it was administered incorrectly.

[KCRC]

Bob,

There was an original foul called by L, either a common foul or a double foul, couldn't tell from the original signal. Then the officials got together to discuss BEFORE going to the monitor. It was unclear what the actual original call turned out to be from the officials' discussion. So I don't think it was an upgrade from a no call to a double foul, but a double foul that did not get upgraded to a flagrant. You guys are better with the rules than I am. Does this make sense?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by KCRC

I agree with your point. I really thought that each would get a flagrant. So did Mr. Dykes. I don't want to criticize the officials' judgment. It was a close call, I wouldn't necessarily call it an elbow and a push. In the original post, I called it a "half elbow" followed by an arm bar. It all happened fast as they were separating from rebounding action. I wish I had video so you could see for yourself. My primary point was that Mr. Dykes was right on top of the rules situation.

Not really, or he would have noted you can't call a personal foul when there's no contact. Was contact made?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by KCRC

Bob,

There was an original foul called by L, either a common foul or a double foul, couldn't tell from the original signal. Then the officials got together to discuss BEFORE going to the monitor. It was unclear what the actual original call turned out to be from the officials' discussion. So I don't think it was an upgrade from a no call to a double foul, but a double foul that did not get upgraded to a flagrant. You guys are better with the rules than I am. Does this make sense?

OK, this makes more sense; but I still question why they'd call a double personal foul when one of the players did not make contact with the other. It sounds like the best call would have been an unsporting T followed by an intentional Technical.

Not sure if this is considered a double T, though, as the Ts are different classes in NCAA (IMS).

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by KCRC

However, when an announcer does get it right and has a knowledge of the rules, that is worth a kudos.

No, it's worth a "gee, some announcer is finally doing their job right". Kudos would be for doing a brilliant job on explaining the strategies of each team in depth at a level that can be easily understood by the average fan.

[icallfouls]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

Kudos would be for doing a brilliant job on explaining the strategies of each team in depth at a level that can be easily understood by the average fan.

Dipsy doo - dunkeroo baby!

[Adam]

Originally Posted by icallfouls

Dipsy doo - dunkeroo baby!

Sure, when it's Duke. If it's the other team, "Wasn't that over and back?"

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Sure, when it's Duke. If it's the other team, "Wasn't that over and back?"

Actually, I think Duke had the ball then.....I could be wrong, though. That game was a few days ago. I've moved on.

[Mark Padgett]

I wish I could remember who the commentator was, but it was an NBA game on CBS a few years ago and during a spot inbound play, something happened having to do with the team not having control while the inbounder was holding the ball OOB. One of the coaches asked about it and the referee (I think it was Dick Bavetta) said there was "no control". The commentator, who I'll call Brainiac, said "No control! How can there be no control? He was holding the ball with both hands!"

[bas2456]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

I wish I could remember who the commentator was, but it was an NBA game on CBS a few years ago and during a spot inbound play, something happened having to do with the team not having control while the inbounder was holding the ball OOB. One of the coaches asked about it and the referee (I think it was Dick Bavetta) said there was "no control". The commentator, who I'll call Brainiac, said "No control! How can there be no control? He was holding the ball with both hands!"

Must have been Greg Gumbel

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

OK, this makes more sense; but I still question why they'd call a double personal foul when one of the players did not make contact with the other. It sounds like the best call would have been an unsporting T followed by an intentional Technical.

Not sure if this is considered a double T, though, as the Ts are different classes in NCAA (IMS).

Well, there was contact....takes two have any contact....just not on the first elbow. So, a double foul could still be a valid call.