2011 NCAAM Sweet 16

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Wow, after seeing the play, it's an easy int in my games. Of course, I recognize that Rut's area probably has a different effing standard for this play.

But he doesn't even pretend to try to get the ball when he grabs the waist.

Actually I think the first action was to slap at the ball. The other arm was around him, but the foul was on the shooting arm. And no this is not an area thing, this is a judgment thing. I probably call more Intentional Fouls than many people here or in my area, and I call the first action, not the second action or action that did not affect the play. If we call what a player does second a lot, then you will have intentional fouls in almost every end of game situation.

I would rather error on the side of not calling an intentional in this case where it is not "obvious" to everyone then call one that we have to debate.

Peace

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Actually I think the first action was to slap at the ball. The other arm was around him, but the foul was on the shooting arm. ...
Peace

This is what I saw initially also. That's why in the other thread I was surprised not to see an OBVIOUS intentional foul the first time I watched the play after reading about it.

[just another ref]

Not even sure if there was any contact on the arm. The grab around the waist is what stopped the shot.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Not even sure if there was any contact on the arm. The grab around the waist is what stopped the shot.

The official in question had a much better angle on the entire play than we did. So what stopped the shot or not is based on one angle and the angle the official did not have.

Peace

[tref]

Really?! I'll agree that he had a "different" angle, but he hardly had a "better" angle! He was chasing the play down & actually was straightlined when the defender wrapped him with the right arm.

I don't know about you, but I make more CC when I receive the play as opposed to chasing them down.

My point about this particular play is that, time & score obviously matter because the same play at the end of the game or after a hard foul would result in a discussion on double whistles, at the very least.

IMO, the C had the best look, but the L gave him the look like, "I got it, I got it!"

[APG]

Originally Posted by tref

Really?! I'll agree that he had a "different" angle, but he hardly had a "better" angle! He was chasing the play down & actually was straightlined when the defender wrapped him with the right arm.

I don't know about you, but I make more CC when I receive the play as opposed to chasing them down.

My point about this particular play is that, time & score obviously matter because the same play at the end of the game or after a hard foul would result in a discussion on double whistles, at the very least.

IMO, the C had the best look, but the L gave him the look like, "I got it, I got it!"

I think lead had a decent look but the C had the best look at the play, and they both didn't have an intentional even after getting together.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

I think lead had a decent look but the C had the best look at the play, and they both didn't have an intentional even after getting together.

They sure didn't.

Peace

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by tref

Really?! I'll agree that he had a "different" angle, but he hardly had a "better" angle! He was chasing the play down & actually was straightlined when the defender wrapped him with the right arm.

The right arm went for the ball.

Well that was the angle he had and unlike you or me he did not have multiple replays to break down the play. He and his partners had one shot.

Originally Posted by tref

I don't know about you, but I make more CC when I receive the play as opposed to chasing them down.

Maybe, but that is not how many calls are made in my experience. And certainly not on a quick steal and going to the other end of the court. Sorry, I would not use that as an excuse to get a play right or not in this situation.

Originally Posted by tref

My point about this particular play is that, time & score obviously matter because the same play at the end of the game or after a hard foul would result in a discussion on double whistles, at the very least.

IMO, the C had the best look, but the L gave him the look like, "I got it, I got it!"

OK, but that does not mean everyone agrees with that. You can state what you would have done all day long, it was not your call or my call. Easy to sit on my couch and tell others what you would have done or who had the best angle.

Peace

[JugglingReferee]

APG's clip in post 148... INT but I can see if they stick with a regular foul in the NCAA.

[Adam]

Seeing the entire play, even if the initial swipe was at the ball, I'm still int.

At best, you have one player committing multiple fouls against an airborne shooter, the second of which is intentional. I'm penalizing the more severe foul here.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by snaqwells

seeing the entire play, even if the initial swipe was at the ball, i'm still int.

At best, you have one player committing multiple fouls against an airborne shooter, the second of which is intentional. I'm penalizing the more severe foul here.

+1

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

The official in question had a much better angle on the entire play than we did. So what stopped the shot or not is based on one angle and the angle the official did not have.

Peace

He jumped. When he got grabbed around the waist, he stopped going up. That looks the same from every angle.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by just another ref

He jumped. When he got grabbed around the waist, he stopped going up. That looks the same from every angle.

If it was so obvious, why was it not called? Keep in mind the angles we have are different than the officials on the floor too.

Peace

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

If it was so obvious, why was it not called?
Peace

Ya got me. Why were the two obvious travels on the other play not called?

Perhaps things are different in their area.

[tref]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

I think lead had a decent look but the C had the best look at the play, and they both didn't have an intentional even after getting together.

Hmmm never saw them get together... the C held up for some reason, maybe the L was the R?

Originally Posted by JRutledge

OK, but that does not mean everyone agrees with that. You can state what you would have done all day long, it was not your call or my call. Easy to sit on my couch and tell others what you would have done or who had the best angle.

Peace

Obviously...

Not saying what "I" would do. I posed 2 questions:
Are we thinking INT?
Should time & score matter?
for discussion & AS USUAL, when you dont agree you change words around &/or focus on terminology to get your point across.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

If it was so obvious, why was it not called?

Because it was too early in the game to make that the standard for INTs... time & score obviously do matter in managing a game properly.