The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)
-   -   Tim Higgins (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/64443-tim-higgins.html)

btaylor64 Thu Mar 10, 2011 02:57pm

I like the no call on the dribble drive and on the half court pass. They both look like tweeners to me. I would have been ok with a foul as well. I really like the no call on the rebounding action on the free throws, I just think the ball last goes off the white team player from behind. Just wanted to throw my .02 in on this 13 page thread! ha

Judtech Thu Mar 10, 2011 03:04pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer (Post 738728)
That to me was the second easiest call. I was absolutely shocked there was no call and a bit confused how some are defending the no call on this one.

Even in that picture the defender has a whole lot of ball. The reason I liked it being passed on was b/c of who initiated the contact. The Rutgers player was standing hands up when the SJ player, IMO, jumped into him first. Usually, if I have my hands in the air and someone pokes me in the gut,my hands go down. That is what I think happened on this play.
As for the rebounding foul, the principle of "How did the player end up on the ground" comes into play. IMO, had the State University of New Jersey player not been contacted by the SJ player, he would have NOT gone to the ground. Thus, the SJ player pushed the Rutgers player.

APG Thu Mar 10, 2011 03:11pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Judtech (Post 738744)
Even in that picture the defender has a whole lot of ball. The reason I liked it being passed on was b/c of who initiated the contact. The Rutgers player was standing hands up when the SJ player, IMO, jumped into him first. Usually, if I have my hands in the air and someone pokes me in the gut,my hands go down. That is what I think happened on this play.
As for the rebounding foul, the principle of "How did the player end up on the ground" comes into play. IMO, had the State University of New Jersey player not been contacted by the SJ player, he would have NOT gone to the ground. Thus, the SJ player pushed the Rutgers player.

See I have the defender bring his hands down before the contact occurred. It looked like a whole of arm to me.

Jurassic Referee Thu Mar 10, 2011 03:19pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by mbyron (Post 738727)
That's what I was thinking. A still photo doesn't prove anything, but this one is suggestive:

http://img36.imageshack.us/img36/790...10310at208.png

You're right. A still photo doesn't prove anything. I just watched it again several times and all that did was re-inforce my original impression of the play.

You can't use verticality when a shooter jumps into a defender with LGP. As always, it's a judgment call, bit imo they made the right judgment when they no-called it. You shouldn't bail out any shooter who jumps into their defender imo.

26 Year Gap Thu Mar 10, 2011 03:21pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by biz (Post 738721)
Higgins is in front of the St John's bench.

For clarification:

Jim Burr

http://images1.statsheet.com/images/...jpg?1293797735

Tim Higgins

http://images4.statsheet.com/images/...jpg?1299501652

Thanks. Then we are in agreement. I just had the names mixed up. Higgins was straight-lined and was unable to assist Burr, who should have been in position to see the violation. Walton, for his part, not seeing the first OOB step, surely could have whistled the second. And a whistle, even slightly after 1.7, could have allowed the proper amount of time to be put on the clock.

Judtech Thu Mar 10, 2011 03:22pm

:eek:
Quote:

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee (Post 738753)
You're right. A still photo doesn't prove anything. I just watched it again several times and all that did was re-inforce my original impression of the play.

You can't use verticality when a shooter jumps into a defender with LGP. As always, it's a judgment call, bit imo they made the right judgment when they no-called it. You shouldn't bail out any shooter who jumps into their defender imo.

Apropos of nothing, as I read this there was a bright flash of lightening and a loud crack of thunder. Seriously. Maybe I should change my thoughts on the play and bring the universe back into alignment

26 Year Gap Thu Mar 10, 2011 03:24pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee (Post 738753)
You're right. A still photo doesn't prove anything. I just watched it again several times and all that did was re-inforce my original impression of the play.

You can't use verticality when a shooter jumps into a defender with LGP. As always, it's a judgment call, bit imo they made the right judgment when they no-called it. You shouldn't bail out any shooter who jumps into their defender imo.

+1 Offensive player initiated the contact. And once that happened, to call something on the defender who had LGP would be wrong. It really is not different from a foul cannot cause a violation.

SE Minnestoa Re Thu Mar 10, 2011 03:25pm

I've reffed high school for over 30 years. Never had a desire to be a college ref although I have filled in a few times at the Division 3 level. So I know I am not in these guys league. I am also certain, if there were four TV cameras at every game I have worked and we had this many people reviewing and reviewing, I have likely made awful calls at the end of a close game that would make this one look good.

However since I haven't seen video, ignorance is bliss.

26 Year Gap Thu Mar 10, 2011 03:25pm

That guy looks just like Rut to me. ;)

Camron Rust Thu Mar 10, 2011 03:28pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by 26 Year Gap (Post 738759)
+1 Offensive player initiated the contact. And once that happened, to call something on the defender who had LGP would be wrong. It really is not different from a foul cannot cause a violation.

Only if you judge that the contact by the shooter caused the defender to give up the vertical position. The defender doesn't have the right to collapse on the shooter just because there was legal contact.

fullor30 Thu Mar 10, 2011 03:32pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by 26 Year Gap (Post 738757)
Thanks. Then we are in agreement. I just had the names mixed up. Higgins was straight-lined and was unable to assist Burr, who should have been in position to see the violation. Walton, for his part, not seeing the first OOB step, surely could have whistled the second. And a whistle, even slightly after 1.7, could have allowed the proper amount of time to be put on the clock.



It was Higgin's line and I disagree he was straightlined. If a player blocked his view(which didn't happen since he was on the court by about 5-6 feet) that's different. Straightlined to me is a competitive match up which you are unable to have an angle on offense/defense. This wasn't the case. I don't see how Walton could make an across the court OOB call, it would be a guess, and he did the right thing, he trusted his partners.

fullor30 Thu Mar 10, 2011 03:37pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer (Post 738728)
That to me was the second easiest call. I was absolutely shocked there was no call and a bit confused how some are defending the no call on this one.

I can live with the call either way. To echo others, the dribbler initiates contact.

Raymond Thu Mar 10, 2011 03:40pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by fullor30 (Post 738766)
It was Higgin's line and I disagree he was straightlined. If a player blocked his view(which didn't happen since he was on the court by about 5-6 feet) that's different. Straightlined to me is a competitive match up which you are unable to have an angle on offense/defense. This wasn't the case. I don't see how Walton could make an across the court OOB, it would be a guess and he did the right thing, he trusted his partners.

After St. John's stole the ball it became Burr's line. But Burr was not in position to see the line b/c of how he set up on the initial throw-in. Higgins should have had secondary help on the line.

JRutledge Thu Mar 10, 2011 03:41pm

Darnnit, you beat me to it!!!!
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by 26 Year Gap (Post 738762)
That guy looks just like Rut to me. ;)

I was just about to say "I am surprised no one said I was working the game." After all people say that to me all the time. :D

Peace

26 Year Gap Thu Mar 10, 2011 03:53pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by fullor30 (Post 738766)
It was Higgin's line and I disagree he was straightlined. If a player blocked his view(which didn't happen since he was on the court by about 5-6 feet) that's different. Straightlined to me is a competitive match up which you are unable to have an angle on offense/defense. This wasn't the case. I don't see how Walton could make an across the court OOB call, it would be a guess, and he did the right thing, he trusted his partners.

It appears to me that there were 3 people in the line of sight for Higgins: 1) the St John's player near Higgins, 2) the Rutgers player near the spot of the uncalled OOB violation, and 3) Lavin out of his box. Higgins was not on the line, but without the benefit of his angle, it is difficult to tell if 1, 2 and/or 3 interfered with his view. He did not appear to move to improve. I will defer to college officials as far as whose line it was, as I am not familiar with NCAA PCAs with respect to differences from NFHS. Without knowing it, I think Higgins had secondary responsibility there.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:08am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1