Xavier vs Kansas State

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by zm1283

In this play, the K-State player caught it either while laying on the ground or going to the ground and threw it toward the BC with both hands. If that wasn't the definition of control, I don't know what is.

Whether the ball was caught(came to rest) is and will always be a judgment call to be made by the official responsible for that determination. If he says it wasn't caught, then it wasn't(whether it was caught in somebody else's judgment) and therefore there was no player control and no backcourt violation.

All you're doing now is arguing that your judgment is better than the calling official's judgment. And that's an argument that is impossible for you to win...or lose.

The only thing that is for sure though is that the calling official's judgment is gonna prevail...no matter what.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

The only thing that is for sure though is that the calling official's judgment is gonna prevail...no matter what.

+1

There's a reason that clinicians almost never say anything about an official's judgment. They might ask what you saw in order to probe your rules knowledge, but they generally don't challenge your judgment.

Their focus is on everything before and after that moment of judgment: getting into position, using good mechanics, etc. Good judgment comes only with good experience, but the rest is teachable.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Two things definitely can occur simultaneously, but last to touch in frontcourt/first to touch in backcourt cannot.

That's not even what the rule says. The rule says "last to touch before the ball goes into the backcourt" and "first to touch after it goes into the backcourt."

We have three events, (A, B, C).
If A happens before B, and C happens after B, it is impossible for A and C to happen simultaneously.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by mutantducky

good no call on last regulation possession, 3 foul shots. Talked to a couple of college playing buddies of mine and they both said the same thing that you have to foul harder and not some weird two armed grab.
Awesome game! Kansas St. fans must have been going crazy when Xavier kept coming back.

While you certainly came up with the correct answer, Grasshopper, requiring you to show your work has demonstrated your lack of understanding. Feel free to keep playing, though.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

While you certainly came up with the correct answer, Grasshopper, requiring you to show your work has demonstrated your lack of understanding.

Hey, if a couple of his college playing buddies say it's true, it has to be true. You sure can't find a more definitive source of officiating knowledge and expertise than that.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Hey, if a couple of his college playing buddies say it's true, it has to be true. You sure can't find a more definitive source of officiating knowledge and expertise than that.

I don't know, JR, I'm not sure I'd trust anything that milkaholic Lindsay says on a play date.

[APG]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Hey, if a couple of his college playing buddies say it's true, it has to be true. You sure can't find a more definitive source of officiating knowledge and expertise than that.

I actually like to break down game tape with my college buddies...especially with a beer or two!

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

That's not even what the rule says. The rule says "last to touch before the ball goes into the backcourt" and "first to touch after it goes into the backcourt."

We have three events, (A, B, C).
If A happens before B, and C happens after B, it is impossible for A and C to happen simultaneously.

Which makes the interp even more bogus.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Which makes the interp even more bogus.

Agreed; that impossibility is the only reason I ignore the interp.

[amusedofficial]

One should not read threads about backcourt violations while enjoying a refreshing Pabst Blue Ribbon. One can only take the death of so many brain cells at a time.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Which makes the interp even more bogus.

Fer sure......

It's a case play with absolutely no rules backing(as discussed ad infinitum, ad nauseum).

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

It's a case play with absolutely no rules backing......

Like a blarge.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Like a blarge.

I don't know -- I found double foul in the definitions in about 3 seconds.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

That's not even what the rule says. The rule says "last to touch before the ball goes into the backcourt" and "first to touch after it goes into the backcourt."

We have three events, (A, B, C).
If A happens before B, and C happens after B, it is impossible for A and C to happen simultaneously.

Define "goes into the backcourt".

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Define "goes into the backcourt".

Ball location is defined. That can't quite be it.