Sky vs. Mystics - Last Second Call Thoughts

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by btaylor64

I'm actually astonished no one thinks this was a fou or maybe I shouldn't say foul, but at least that she got hit. She gets her left hand knocked away from the ball causing her to have to throw it one handed, but to say ZERO contact occurred on her arm is baffling.

All I can say is it looked like that may have happened given the reaction of the shooter after the supposed contact. However, the moment of possible contact was obscured from the view of the camera by the other defender. The video was inconclusive to me.

The side view provided no better conclusion. It wasn't blocked but was so far away and it could have easily been a swipe and a miss.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

All I can say is it looked like that may have happened given the reaction of the shooter after the supposed contact. However, the moment of possible contact was obscured from the view of the camera by the other defender. The video was inconclusive to me.

The side view provided no better conclusion. It wasn't blocked but was so far away and it could have easily been a swipe and a miss.

Of course the reaction of the shooter is going to be weird. The shooter is trying to throw up a desperation shot with seconds left on the clock. And the reaction to me looked like it was because she had her shot clearly blocked not because of some other obvious contact. I need more than a reaction to call a foul, I need to see some obvious contact and from his angle I am not sure how he would see that. The arm that #22 could have hit was the none shooting arm and that contact would really have to be there for me to simply call a foul. I need a little more than what he saw. And the Lead would have been a better person based on the angle.

Peace

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Of course the reaction of the shooter is going to be weird. The shooter is trying to throw up a desperation shot with seconds left on the clock. And the reaction to me looked like it was because she had her shot clearly blocked not because of some other obvious contact.

The reaction I was talking about was the physical reaction that was before the shot was blocked...not the post shot result.

[QUOTE=JRutledge;782942
I need more than a reaction to call a foul, I need to see some obvious contact and from his angle I am not sure how he would see that. The arm that #22 could have hit was the none shooting arm and that contact would really have to be there for me to simply call a foul. I need a little more than what he saw. And the Lead would have been a better person based on the angle.

Peace[/QUOTE]

Even hitting the non-shooting arm with it still in contact with the ball (and even if it wasn't) before the release on a long range shot is certainly enough to affect the shot and call a foul. However, as I previously said, I can't say that it hit or not from what we have in the video....the lead's angle would have been different but we only have the camera angle to discuss.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

The reaction I was talking about was the physical reaction that was before the shot was blocked...not the post shot result.

Even hitting the non-shooting arm with it still in contact with the ball (and even if it wasn't) before the release on a long range shot is certainly enough to affect the shot and call a foul. However, as I previously said, I can't say that it hit or not from what we have in the video....the lead's angle would have been different but we only have the camera angle to discuss.

I am not saying some contact would not affect the player. But the shooter was lunging and it appeared they were throwing the ball at the goal and nothing appeared to be holding back the other arm from moving. Again, total judgement call, but I do not see the contact that suggested that reaction alone.

Peace