![]() |
|
|||
![]()
Way too mechanical and in depth for me, quite sure someone may be over-complicating the krap outa this in an egocentric attempt to win an argument.
![]() You guys know as well or better than me, these physical skirmishes tend to begin much earlier than when they explode. Players start jawing, getting "chippy," maybe a little extra hands on or pushing that is borderline incidental or intent. My point is that probably there was a good reason that the C had eyes exclusively on the three close to the T. Plus, did he? Looks to me like the back of the C's head is facing the camera JR, nobody can tell where the C's eyes are! I suppose you can guess where he's looking by the direction of his head, but then you say things like, "never took his eyes off...," and you don't know that. Your argument is in part based on an assumption you can't prove. Eye balls can and do move side to side within their sockets! It's just as reasonable to speculate that the C just quickly scanned to his right and noticed that there was space between the 7 who just ran past him, then moved his eye balls back to the left, observed the activity and "TWEEET!" Because he was anticipating it. Because it really began 5 possessions earlier. Finally JR, you make a big deal outa the L having to observe 7 players if the C is watching the ball. Correct mechanics for a 3 man crew aside, if this was a 2 man crew, wouldn't the L be watching 7 players? Isn't it something you've done a gazzilion times? Then there's the stacked question. I seriously don't believe that a referee has to be 100% in line and stacked on an exact straight line in order to have his vision blocked. Just being close to on exact straight line may be enough to obscure a players arms even though most of the torso is visible, and the arms are what does the pushing. As a coach, whether I was the HC or the VC, I'd just be pleased that it was whistled no matter who did it. Don't care and really does not matter. I also believe there's no way that the T doesn't tweet if he has vision of the initial pushing, indicating 100% stacked or not, he couldn't see it. That's a way more reasonable assumption than to think you know where the C's eyes are looking. Sheesh |
Bookmarks |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Advice needed on "Hands part of the bat" myth | TwoBits | Baseball | 48 | Mon Jun 08, 2009 01:07pm |
ABC's "Nightline" examines "worst calls ever" tonight | pizanno | Basketball | 27 | Fri Jul 04, 2008 06:08am |
The 3 versus 2 fallacies, a mini-rant - "Part deux" | imaref | Basketball | 6 | Thu Jan 04, 2007 11:39am |