Tim Higgins

[btaylor64]

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]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

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]

Originally Posted by Judtech

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]

Originally Posted by mbyron

That's what I was thinking. A still photo doesn't prove anything, but this one is suggestive:

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]

Originally Posted by biz

Higgins is in front of the St John's bench.

For clarification:

Jim Burr



Tim Higgins

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]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

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]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

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]

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]

Originally Posted by OldFanDan

Earl Walton

http://images1.statsheet.com/images/...jpg?1299501652

That guy looks just like Rut to me.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by 26 Year Gap

+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]

Originally Posted by 26 Year Gap

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]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

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]

Originally Posted by fullor30

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]

Originally Posted by 26 Year Gap

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.

Peace

[26 Year Gap]

Originally Posted by fullor30

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.