2011 Tournament Discussion Redux

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by Texas Aggie

Second one should have been ignored. Even IF you can make a case for a foul in that situation, the score is tied with little chance of a score absent a call.

That's a piss poor reason not to call a foul on a team, especially when you've just called a foul on the opponent in a similiar situation. That was a foul, whether there's 1.4 or 19:59 left. If you don't call it, you cheat the team that was fouled. I haven't read anything online where anyone said it wasn't a foul.

"Dumb loses more games than smart wins." - Bobby Knight

[Spence]

Kemba had a breakout. #32 for UC attempts to block. Makes body contact from behind while Kemba is in the air and then fouls him going for the block. Both officials signal what I assume to mean excessive and not intentional. Seemed correct to me but I do not know what the wording of the NCAA rule is. Can someone paste it for me?

[BktBallRef]

Google NCAA Basketball Rules.

[eyezen]

The talking heads asked John Adams how do you explain that call to Pitt fans (paraphrasing here) "Don't foul that far away from the basket with little to no time left."

Pretty simple if you ask me.

[Spence]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Google NCAA Basketball Rules.

Got it. It just said "if it's excessive."

Any guidelines/ideas on what you're looking for to determine if it's just a "hard foul" or it qualifies as "excessive?"

[refiator]

Originally Posted by Texas Aggie

There was 1.4 seconds on the clock. Can you give me an example of any teams that have gone full court and scored in 1.3 or less?

The first call was correct. Player was forced into either a travel or OOB by contact. No choice but to call a foul. Second one should have been ignored. .

I disagree. I thought the second foul was much more obvious...But I feel both were warranted.
It is interesting getting different perspectives. I would love to see these same plays replayed, only with a variety officials put in the position of the call/no call.
There would be a huge variation in personal judgements....
I love the human element of officiating.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Spence

Got it. It just said "if it's excessive."

Any guidelines/ideas on what you're looking for to determine if it's just a "hard foul" or it qualifies as "excessive?"

I've had an excessive foul when players try to make that block from behind, but the contact through the back is waaay before the block attempt.

Yes, B1 was playing the ball, but he made no attempt to not go through airborne A1. That's contact that must be curtailed/discouraged.

[JugglingReferee]

Does anyone have a link?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Texas Aggie

There was 1.4 seconds on the clock. Can you give me an example of any teams that have gone full court and scored in 1.3 or less?

The first call was correct. Player was forced into either a travel or OOB by contact. No choice but to call a foul. Second one should have been ignored. Even IF you can make a case for a foul in that situation, the score is tied with little chance of a score absent a call. Leave it alone, play 5 minutes more and then any call or no-call becomes moot.

Had one team been ahead, you can argue the foul. If there's a chance for OT, absent the prevention of a valid scoring attempt, go to OT. There's no advantage gained by grabbing an arm 90 feet from the basket with about a second left. No one here has yet made the case for such an advantage. Ordinarily, without an unfair advantage in a contact situation, we're going to leave it alone.

Without seeing the play, this is the worst argument against a call I've ever read. Players make half-court shots to win regularly, and if he was prevented or slowed from doing that with illegal contact, then it should be a foul. The percentages of the shot don't matter, either.

To shy from the call just because the score's tied and overtime is an option is just, well, Nevada would call it cowardly and I wouldn't disagree.

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by rulesmaven

Can't wait for a week of "swallow the whistle talk."

Amen. A couple of my friends on Facebook have started in with "let the players decide the game" crud. I have half a mind to pick a fight with them.

[refiator]

The players DO decide the game, Fortunately, they have high quality officials present to enforce the rules.

[DGwhistle40]

PLUS! There was also contact to the head, which you could only see on one replay. Definitely the correct call, IMO.

[chymechowder]

rule questions:

1. A1 throws in from his endline. B1 touches ball after it is released; ball deflects down onto the endline. official whistles, points at endline and whistles A1 for a throw in violation.

setting aside the fact that he missed B1 touching the ball, is that just an ncaa rule? that is, in Fed rules, is there anything wrong with inbounding the ball with a bounce pass that first hits a boundary line?

2. do NCAA rules have a different definition for what constitutes a kick? in Fed, the contact has to be intentional right? seems that there are times when a team A player tries to force a bounce pass into traffic. the ball strikes a team B player's foot and they call it a kick.

of course, I could be missing the intentional leg movement. but it seems there are times when it happens so fast that the team B player doesn't move his leg at all. (doesn't even have time to react, in fact.) just wondering if NCAA doesn't require the intent.

[Texas Aggie]

Players make half-court shots to win regularly

So untrue, its ridiculous. There is no regularity with a HALF court made shot and maybe one or two ~80 foot shot PER YEAR in all of basketball -- high school and college. Its extremely rare, especially in championship play. When it does happen, the shooter is almost always facing the basket and has both hands and arms available, unlike this situation where the player had only one. I have called a 3/4 court shot attempt shooting foul before when the guy almost got tackled when trying a late shot. I'm well aware that such a foul can happen.

he was prevented or slowed

He wasn't. Watch the tape: he quickly realized there was going to be a foul called and he just heaved it. The foul called was a common foul, not a shooting foul, so even the official realized he wasn't in the act of shooting.

call it cowardly

You can name call all you want, but I stand by my point: there was no advantage gained and the call shouldn't have been made. If the NCAA director thinks there was, fine. We disagree. But I'm not going to support the call just because an official made it and it was supported by the brass. I've had missed calls supported publicly.

My point about OT was simply a "when in doubt" decision tree. It wasn't meant to justify not making a call that SHOULD be made. We don't run from correct calls. If you thought that's what I meant, you were mistaken. What I meant was, if you are in doubt -- and 90 feet from the basket, you should have at least a little doubt on an arm grab with less than a second when there is significant body contact in the lane that goes uncalled all game -- you can pass on the call, we go to OT, and we start all over.

I have made calls 90 feet from the basket before VERY late in the game. I wish I had some (1-2) back, but I stand by others (2-3). Had this been me, I would have wanted this one back.

The percentages of the shot don't matter

I agree. But this has nothing to do with my point.

Everyone that has argued with my post has still not made a good case for there being an advantage gained with the late arm grab. Do you call a shooting foul when a an out of control offensive player drives the lane, throws up a prayer, goes down mainly due to being out of control, but there was contact on the play? I don't. There are many other times we let contact go uncalled. Why must this arm grab be called? What advantage was gained?

RE: Duke/Kentucky: several problems with this comparison:

-- Duke had a timeout; neither team here did.
-- Duke was inbounding the ball with players in Duke's frontcourt; there was few or no Butler players in Butler's frontcourt.
-- Duke's clock started when touched inbounds AFTER the pass down court; Butler's clock started on the touch and would have run out with ball being passed.

Not saying it hasn't happened, but you will be hard pressed to find an example of a team winning from 90 feet with a running clock starting at 1.4 on the tip.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Texas Aggie

There was 1.4 seconds on the clock. Can you give me an example of any teams that have gone full court and scored in 1.3 or less?

The first call was correct. Player was forced into either a travel or OOB by contact. No choice but to call a foul. Second one should have been ignored. Even IF you can make a case for a foul in that situation, the score is tied with little chance of a score absent a call. Leave it alone, play 5 minutes more and then any call or no-call becomes moot.

Had one team been ahead, you can argue the foul. If there's a chance for OT, absent the prevention of a valid scoring attempt, go to OT. There's no advantage gained by grabbing an arm 90 feet from the basket with about a second left. No one here has yet made the case for such an advantage. Ordinarily, without an unfair advantage in a contact situation, we're going to leave it alone.

If you believe your statement in red above, you have to argue to not call the 1st foul either....player was in the backcourt with his path cut off with 1.4 seconds on the clock....what possible chance could he have had to score?

The advantage is that the Butler player was actually trying to throw the ball at his basket and was prevented from doing so. If you can tell me that there is no way it could EVER go in, then I'll concede.

However, you should note that I've seen a guy falling/diving OOB near half court in an attempt to save a lose ball....facing the sideine....flip the ball towards his basket with what resembled a football snap (but not between his legs, just to the side) and it went in the basket....after a stunned moment, I signaled a 3.