2011 Tournament Discussion Redux

[just another ref]

How can anybody say this is a bad call? Assuming the 4.8 stated above is accurate, what do we expect? If the arm count doesn't match, it is a flaw, sure. But did that have any impact on this particular play? Was the thrower counting the swings out of the corner of his eye thinking "I still have time." I doubt it.

[ILRef80]

Originally Posted by just another ref

How can anybody say this is a bad call? Assuming the 4.8 stated above is accurate, what do we expect? If the arm count doesn't match, it is a flaw, sure. But did that have any impact on this particular play? Was the thrower counting the swings out of the corner of his eye thinking "I still have time." I doubt it.

What do we expect? You don't blow the whistle until you reached 5 visible counts. This is a very basic officiating skill and it's inexcusable to blow that simple of a call at that level. This isn't a judgment call we are talking about...

I have no dog in this fight, but it's ok to acknowledge that the official kicked it.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by ILRef80

What do we expect? You don't blow the whistle until you reached 5 visible counts. This is a very basic officiating skill and it's inexcusable to blow that simple of a call at that level. This isn't a judgment call we are talking about...

I have no dog in this fight, but it's ok to acknowledge that the official kicked it.

Getting the call right and using the correct mechanics are 2 different issues. If he blew the whistle and signaled the violation at 4.8, the call is about as good as it gets. It would have been nice if the arm swings had matched. But this little goof had no impact on this play or this game. jmo

[Berkut]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Getting the call right and using the correct mechanics are 2 different issues. If he blew the whistle and signaled the violation at 4.8, the call is about as good as it gets. It would have been nice if the arm swings had matched. But this little goof had no impact on this play or this game. jmo

If he had signalled the violation at a measure 5.5, with an arm swing at 4, I could maybe see your point.

The fact that he was early AND his arm swing was on 4 makes it a bit problematic. Considering that the player was asking for a TO when he made the call...ugggh. That is very ugly.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Berkut

If he had signalled the violation at a measure 5.5, with an arm swing at 4, I could maybe see your point.

The fact that he was early AND his arm swing was on 4 makes it a bit problematic. Considering that the player was asking for a TO when he made the call...ugggh. That is very ugly.

His arm was on the 5th swing when he put it up for the violation, not the 4th. Not everone swings "0".

[Adam]

Originally Posted by just another ref

how can anybody say this is a bad call? Assuming the 4.8 stated above is accurate, what do we expect? If the arm count doesn't match, it is a flaw, sure. But did that have any impact on this particular play? Was the thrower counting the swings out of the corner of his eye thinking "i still have time." i doubt it.

+1

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

+1

The accepted time so far as per different sources seems to be around 4.3 to 4.4 seconds.

Just saying....

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

The accepted time so far as per different sources seems to be around 4.3 to 4.4 seconds.

Just saying....

What sources? I gave you two that were much less than that.

The only accepted time would be from the NCAA, and they're not going to say anything because it would acknowledge that the official screwed up and had an unacceptable effect on the game.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

What sources?

The only accepted time would be from the NCAA, and they're not going to say anything because it would acknowledge that the official screwed up and had an unacceptable effect on the game.

Yahoo sports and one of the big NY papers....

And as I already said, if you don't see Cartmell's name in a box score next weekend, you'll know what the NCAA thought of the call.

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Yahoo sports and one of the big NY papers....

And as I already said, if you don't see Cartmell's name in a box score next weekend, you'll know what the NCAA thought of the call.

No, actually we won't. If we do see his name, we will know they were okay with it, but not seeing his name doesn't mean this one call is why he didn't move on. It may be but it may not.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Yahoo sports and one of the big NY papers....

And as I already said, if you don't see Cartmell's name in a box score next weekend, you'll know what the NCAA thought of the call.

Disagree.

If that was his only bad call, then he would grade better than other officials, and then would move on by virtue of sucking less.

You're usually known for fact seeking. The best way to know what the NCAA thinks of that call is to hear directly from Adams about that call - and by that I mean either a "correct" or an "incorrect". Anything other than that is supposition.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

If that was his only bad call, then he would grade better than other officials, and then would move on by virtue of sucking less.

OK. And Higgins and Burr could have graded out higher too in that St. Johns/Rutgers game and advanced also in the Big East if that was their only bad call.

There's degrees of bad calls.