2011 Tournament Discussion Redux

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

No idea, Zooch.

But I can tell you that it was simply great yesterday to see academia win out.

Great, I tell ya!

I'm referring to the scholar/athletes of Kentucky narrowly besting the scholar/athletes of Princeton in their athletic contest.

If anybody missed it, the replay is on tonight....on Pros vs. Joes.

Trivia question for you...

Which team has the player with the highest GPA?

[Berkut]

BLOWNCALL|GIFULMINATION

I think this falls under my basic rule of contact when the ball gets swatted into the stands is incidental unless I think it is the contact that allowed the ball to get swatted into the stands in the first place.

I think this is an easy no-call.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by Berkut

BLOWNCALL|GIFULMINATION

I think this falls under my basic rule of contact when the ball gets swatted into the stands is incidental unless I think it is the contact that allowed the ball to get swatted into the stands in the first place.

I think this is an easy no-call.

Clearly contact on the shooter's right elbow before the block. Beats the hell out of me why people think such a play is legal.

[Berkut]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Clearly contact on the shooter's right elbow before the block. Beats the hell out of me why people think such a play is legal.

Because the contact was not the reason the shot ended up in row eight.

Also, contact is not necessarily a foul. And while it is clearly before the block when the play is slown down to about 1/4 speed, at full speed the contact and shot pretty much appear to be simultaneous. Certainly close enough to be considered essentially simultaneous.

Finally, look at the position of Williams hand *before* the contact - that ball had zero chance of going in the basket whether there was contact or not.

I am no NCAA official, but I am pretty uninterested in calling blocks like this a foul unless the contact is either severe, or very early, or it is obvious that the contact is what allowed the shot to be blocked to begin with (impedes the shooters ability to get the shot up and over the defender).

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Berkut

Because the contact was not the reason the shot ended up in row eight.

No but the contact clearly disrupted the shot, after which it was swatted into row eight.

[Berkut]

Originally Posted by just another ref

No but the contact clearly disrupted the shot, after which it was swatted into row eight.

You would really call that a foul, seeing it at full speed?

Here it is at full speed. The contact is basically simultaneous with the block.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwRzNFJ67oM

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Berkut

You would really call that a foul, seeing it at full speed?

Here it is at full speed. The contact is basically simultaneous with the block.

YouTube - Derrick Williams game-winning block against Memphis

Probably not, but if the foul had been called, it was justified. As to the "zero chance of going in" part, that is debatable, and, by rule, not relevant.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Clearly contact on the shooter's right elbow before the block. Beats the hell out of me why people think such a play is legal.

Disagree. The shooter is at an angle and leading with his right elbow as his jumps. The contact is from the shooter extending his elbow. The defender does not slap the opponent's arm, rather the leading elbow contacts his body as he is jumping. I don't have a foul on this contact.
We can't penalize a defender when the offensive player extends an arm and contacts him.
The block following that action is definitely clean.

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Trivia question for you...

Which team has the player with the highest GPA?

Ohio State. Diebler's GPA is infinity.