now Libbey jumps the gun...

Matt S. · #1 (**permalink**) Sun Mar 26, 2000, 06:18pm

What is with these NCAA refs. Now Dave Libbey decides to give a T to Ok. St. coach early in the game. Living in S. Cal, I've seen Libbey work his Pac-10 assignments, and he always has a quick trigger. Don't these guys realize the magnitude of these games? Thoughts?

ref39 · #2 (**permalink**) Sun Mar 26, 2000, 07:01pm

Do you change the way you call the game if its on Fox Sports Net vs. CBS? I know I wouldn't. Whether its a D. I conf. end of the season game or its a game to go to the final four, you should never change the way you call the game. Obviously, the tec. needed to be called at that time. If it didn't, I don't think Dave would of call it.

bsilliman · #3 (**permalink**) Sun Mar 26, 2000, 07:08pm

I watched a replay of the play and Libby started counting before anyone from Oklahoma State had possession of the ball. Bad call!

mattbray · #4 (**permalink**) Sun Mar 26, 2000, 10:29pm

What I think OSU dis was someone took the ball out of bound for OSU, then put it down and became a receiver. They had done it on two previous plays, but there was not enough pressure to make it a factor. On this play, it looked like the official started his count when the first player had the ball at his disposal. If he gives it up to another player, Idon't think he starts his count over. It looked like a ploy by OSU to buy more time, and Sutton when nuts when the official didn't buy it. I was happy to see the T.

Alaska Ref · #5 (**permalink**) Mon Mar 27, 2000, 12:08am

I agree Mattbray,

Eddie Sutton is dumb like a fox, i too believe he was trying to get an advantage by extra time to bring the ball into play.

He got caught and while everyone was watching the free throws coach Sutton had his team in a huddle giving instructions for the press break.

I am sure Dave Libby did what any referee had to do in that circumstance, just like the coaches are doing anything they can to get an advantage.

------------------
Don

bsilliman · #6 (**permalink**) Mon Mar 27, 2000, 12:35pm

Sorry guys but on that particular play OK ST did not use that play. Maybe Libby thought that they did have possession and started his count. I've started to begin my count only to realize that the team does not have the ball.
Maybe we can email him and ask his thoughts? Does anyone have his address?

DrC. · #7 (**permalink**) Mon Mar 27, 2000, 02:13pm

I am amazed that the Refs don't 'T' more coaches. I know they want to win, but the crying they do over the most obvious foul is getting out of hand. The language is also getting out of hand. In yesterdays 1st game
the bullsh-- word came out so clear and so often, by 8 year old now knows how to read that one on lips.

And yes, Billy Packer is a jerk. As refs, we are hated by 50% of the people on any given
call. I believe he is hated by 100% of the people on EVERY call.

Bart Tyson · #8 (**permalink**) Mon Mar 27, 2000, 04:25pm

As far as the rules go. Does the count start when the player secures the ball for the inbound or when the ball is at the disposal of the player?

pizanno · #9 (**permalink**) Mon Mar 27, 2000, 04:51pm

1. Count begins when ball is at disposal (read: available to inbound, regardless of player having the ball or not)

2. Too many people complain about the lack of respect, discipline and sportsmanship in today's game; few have the cajones to do something about it. Kudos to Libbey...do you think those coaches/players who have been on the receiving end of his "short trigger" will behave differently the next time they see him? You'd better believe so.

[This message has been edited by pizanno (edited March 27, 2000).]

Richard Kreimer · #10 (**permalink**) Mon Mar 27, 2000, 05:33pm

quote:
Originally posted by pizanno:
1. Count begins when ball is at disposal (read: available to inbound, regardless of player having the ball or not)

2. Too many people complain about the lack of respect, discipline and sportsmanship in today's game; few have the cajones to do something about it. Kudos to Libbey...do you think those coaches/players who have been on the receiving end of his "short trigger" will behave differently the next time they see him? You'd better believe so.

[This message has been edited by pizanno (edited March 27, 2000).]

I believe it is "cojones" not cajones

[This message has been edited by Richard Kreimer (edited March 27, 2000).]

Brian Watson · #11 (**permalink**) Tue Mar 28, 2000, 02:43pm

We don't know what Eddie said so, I think it is unfair to say it was a quick T.

In general...I think most of us tend to let the coaches go too far sometimes, I know I have. With the T being so disruptive to a game, and such a drastic penalty, I think officials either tend to wait until the coach "crosses the line" or until there is just no recourse before hitting the coach with a T.

I also think we tend to let coaches with the reputation (Bobby K withstanding) get away with a little more, because we expect it. Before the game even starts, I think that "line" is farther out that coach. I have heard things said to partners that I would have given a T for, but they shrug it off after the game as "well, that's just coach so and so". We could debate this topic for months (I am guessing there is no right answer), but I never believe that when a coach gets rung up the official has short fuse or quick trigger.

If you ever see Iowa play, Alford spends a lot of time standing on the court coaching. I saw a game when he coached at SW MO St. where he was standing 2-3 feet onto the court every time his team was on offense. It was the second half so the action was right in front of him, how he didn't get it the way was beyond me. Now, if the trail warns him once to get off the court, then hits him the next time down (let's say 1 1/2 minutes into the game or half), does this mean the official has a quick trigger?