The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Sat Feb 01, 2003, 11:13pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Central Wisconsin
Posts: 1,069
14:16 remaining in 2nd half

UCONN player (Name escapes me) attempts shot block, pushes the elbow on the way to the ball, slaps the ball with hand and her forearm smacks the forearm of the shooter.

Male announcer: (UCONN player) is called on a questionable foul.

(Slow-mo replay starts and CLEARLY shows the foul)

Ann Meyer: Yes, three officials on the floor and only one whistled the foul.


Another example of clueless announcers.
__________________
"Stay in the game!"
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Sat Feb 01, 2003, 11:16pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Kaukauna, WI
Posts: 832
Yeah, right. . . .

It was also probably 'over-the-back' and 'reaching in' all rolled into one!
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Sun Feb 02, 2003, 11:14am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Posts: 2,217
I have to agree with that one. I think it was outside the calling official's primary, but it was a clear foul and needed to be called.

It was strange, because Meyer commented on how she got the arm, then proceeded to question why only one official called it. I guess with three, you need a majority?
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Sun Feb 02, 2003, 04:30pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 9,466
Send a message via AIM to rainmaker
Quote:
Originally posted by Hawks Coach
I guess with three, you need a majority?
Unless it's a Quaker school, and then they use consensus!
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Sun Feb 02, 2003, 04:39pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 411
Wesley Dean made the call from "C".
Lisa Mattingly at Lead and Sally Bell at trail.
I think the call came from the right place.
And replay backed him up.
Contact occured on the side away from lead, Lisa would have been guessing.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Sun Feb 02, 2003, 05:42pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 555
Send a message via ICQ to bigwhistle
Question POI after T

My only question for the part of the game that I saw was when the T was called on UCONN for an elbow in retaliation for a Duke girl fouling her....why did they use the POI for this? This would be a dead ball intentional contact T, which does not follow POI.

Am I wrong with this question?
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Sun Feb 02, 2003, 06:34pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 1,517
sounds like the official did not call intentional T. Just called a dead ball foul, which is a T. So, since it is just a T, we have a false double invouling a T. We shoot the T and go to POI.
__________________
foulbuster
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Sun Feb 02, 2003, 10:43pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 555
Send a message via ICQ to bigwhistle
Quote:
Originally posted by Bart Tyson
sounds like the official did not call intentional T. Just called a dead ball foul, which is a T. So, since it is just a T, we have a false double invouling a T. We shoot the T and go to POI.
A dead ball contact T is by definition an intentional T
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Sun Feb 02, 2003, 10:56pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Central Wisconsin
Posts: 1,069
The T was called on UCONN head coach

Geno Auriemma was called for a technical after arguing a foul call against Taurasi.

THERE WERE NO PLAYER T's.
__________________
"Stay in the game!"
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Sun Feb 02, 2003, 11:29pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 555
Send a message via ICQ to bigwhistle
Re: The T was called on UCONN head coach

Quote:
Originally posted by williebfree
Geno Auriemma was called for a technical after arguing a foul call against Taurasi.

THERE WERE NO PLAYER T's.
Hmmmm....then why did the box score list 2 technical fouls...one of which was against a player?
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Sun Feb 02, 2003, 11:54pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Central Wisconsin
Posts: 1,069
Re: Re: The T was called on UCONN head coach

Quote:
Originally posted by bigwhistle
Quote:
Originally posted by williebfree
Geno Auriemma was called for a technical after arguing a foul call against Taurasi.

THERE WERE NO PLAYER T's.
Hmmmm....then why did the box score list 2 technical fouls...one of which was against a player?
I guess it depends where you look... Notice that ESPN.com list NO Techs were issued in their box score and then in the recap comment about the Auriemma T. ????

Box score
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncw/boxscore?gameId=230320150
__________________
"Stay in the game!"
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Mon Feb 03, 2003, 08:43am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Western Mass.
Posts: 9,104
Send a message via AIM to ChuckElias
Re: POI after T

Quote:
Originally posted by bigwhistle
My only question for the part of the game that I saw was when the T was called on UCONN for an elbow in retaliation for a Duke girl fouling her....why did they use the POI for this? This would be a dead ball intentional contact T, which does not follow POI.
You're correct, biggie. A few of us discussed this at length at our association meeting yesterday morning. I didn't see the game, so I don't know if the T was on the player or the coach. But if the T was for the elbow after the play was dead (which is what it sounds like to me), then they should have shot the personal FTs first, then the FTs for the intentional T (dead ball contact), then given the ball at midcourt to the team that shot the technical FTs. I hope the crew was not from the Big East -- again. . .

Chuck
__________________
Any NCAA rules and interpretations in this post are relevant for men's games only!
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Mon Feb 03, 2003, 08:57am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 53
willie - there were two technical fouls on was on a player , and another on Geno.

I agree with Bart, it appears that the official who called the technical on the player called it a direct and they went with the POI, which would be the correct procedure.
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Mon Feb 03, 2003, 09:20am
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Houghton, U.P., Michigan
Posts: 9,953
Re: Re: POI after T

Quote:
Originally posted by ChuckElias
You're correct, biggie. A few of us discussed this at length at our association meeting yesterday morning. I didn't see the game, so I don't know if the T was on the player or the coach. But if the T was for the elbow after the play was dead (which is what it sounds like to me), then they should have shot the personal FTs first, then the FTs for the intentional T (dead ball contact), then given the ball at midcourt to the team that shot the technical FTs. I hope the crew was not from the Big East -- again. . .

Chuck
Rule 10-14.6: After an intentional technical foul, the ball will be returned to play at the closest spot, rather than half court. Rationale: With this change, the ball will now be returned to play from the closest spot to the foul after all technical fouls. It is more consistent.

Chuck,
Is going to midcourt something new, or was that last year?
mick

Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Mon Feb 03, 2003, 09:39am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Western Mass.
Posts: 9,104
Send a message via AIM to ChuckElias
Re: Re: Re: POI after T

Quote:
Originally posted by mick
Rule 10-14.6: After an intentional technical foul, the ball will be returned to play at the closest spot, rather than half court. Rationale: With this change, the ball will now be returned to play from the closest spot to the foul after all technical fouls. It is more consistent.

Chuck,
Is going to midcourt something new, or was that last year?
Darn punk, smart-aleck, kids. Make me go and actually read my rulebook. . . if I can find it. . . Ok, here it is. Blow the dust off it. . .

To be serious, mick, you must have kind of an old rule book. I even looked in last year's NCAA book, and the rule was the same last year as what I mentioned earlier. Intentional technical fouls (which are, by rule, dead ball non-flagrant contact fouls) are penalized by two FTs and possession at midcourt. The reference in the 2003 NCAA book is 10-14-1.

My confusion stems from the fact that the women still use the spot closest to where the foul occured for intentional T's. So in the game we're discussing, the officials were correct NOT to put the ball in at midcourt; however, they still should have given possession after the technical FTs to the team that was on the receiving end of the elbow.

Chuck
__________________
Any NCAA rules and interpretations in this post are relevant for men's games only!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:08am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1