CSU-UNLV

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by rockyroad

but as a result of that the team now loses it's best player and leading scorer in a very tight game...that most certainly does make the situation worse...

How does that make the situation worse? You lose a top player and it is the official's fault?

Remember, you are the one that brought up the issue of the top player being lost. I am still trying to figure out what that has to do with the foul, if the two were not directly related. I am sure there were many other fouls not called in the opinion of CSU. Did having those not called make the sitaution worse?

If you did not want anyone to interpret your comments as being related, then you should have never put them together. Because I really do not see what a player getting injured has anything to do with "unrelated" foul, but you put them together anyway.

Peace

[rockyroad]

What the hell are you talking about??? Of course they are related...there should have been a foul called on the UNLV player for jumping on top of the CSU player who was laying on the floor...now not only was there no foul called, but in the play described CSU loses it's star player, and you have no problem with that??? Of course it wasn't the officials fault he got hurt - NOBODY ever said anything about it being the officials fault the kid got hurt - well, except for you...it was their fault that they didn't call the foul (again, it should have been for the piling on, not the poke in the eye)...I NEVER said the foul should have been called because the kid got hurt - don't know where you pulled that from...and if you can't recognize the fact that CSU was put into a hole because of the no-call, then I don't know what else to say to you...

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by rockyroad


What the hell are you talking about??? Of course they are related...there should have been a foul called on the UNLV player for jumping on top of the CSU player who was laying on the floor...now not only was there no foul called, but in the play described CSU loses it's star player, and you have no problem with that???

No, just wanted to see how the two were related.

Originally posted by rockyroad

Of course it wasn't the officials fault he got hurt - NOBODY ever said anything about it being the officials fault the kid got hurt - well, except for you...it was their fault that they didn't call the foul (again, it should have been for the piling on, not the poke in the eye)...I NEVER said the foul should have been called because the kid got hurt - don't know where you pulled that from...and if you can't recognize the fact that CSU was put into a hole because of the no-call, then I don't know what else to say to you...

Rocky,

What does the foul not being called have to do with a sitaution getting worse because an unrelated player (not directly involved in foul) got injured? You put the two things together, I just wanted to understand why. Simple question. You sound like a coach.

Peace

[rockyroad]

Originally posted by JRutledge

Rocky,

What does the foul not being called have to do with a sitaution getting worse because an unrelated player (not directly involved in foul) got injured? You put the two things together, I just wanted to understand why. Simple question. You sound like a coach.

Peace

I believe the only one confused here is you...how can you refer to an unrelated player?? Where did that come from?? How can you say he was not directly involved in the foul??? He's laying on the floor, someone jumps on top of him and sticks their finger in his eye, but he's not directly invovled in the foul??? I don't have a clue where you are coming from on this...does anyone else??

[A Pennsylvania Coach]

Originally posted by rockyroad

I believe the only one confused here is you...how can you refer to an unrelated player?? Where did that come from?? How can you say he was not directly involved in the foul??? He's laying on the floor, someone jumps on top of him and sticks their finger in his eye, but he's not directly invovled in the foul??? I don't have a clue where you are coming from on this...does anyone else??

I do. Even if the official called the foul, the player would still be injured. So the fact that he's injured has nothing to do with whether or not a foul should be called. We aren't going to start giving out two pity free throw attempts for every injured player. Besides, most of us coaches wouldn't trade our top player for two free throw attempts!

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by rockyroad

I believe the only one confused here is you...how can you refer to an unrelated player?? Where did that come from?? How can you say he was not directly involved in the foul??? He's laying on the floor, someone jumps on top of him and sticks their finger in his eye, but he's not directly invovled in the foul??? I don't have a clue where you are coming from on this...does anyone else??

I am not confused at all. You are equating two unrelated situations and telling everyone that one of the situations has to do with the other. I do not understand how a possible foul call has to do with an injury in any way. You made it sound as if the non-call was the same action that injured the top player, then you admit it was not. I think it is clear what you said, but you are trying to back out of it by saying they are not related. OK, that makes sense.

Peace

[rockyroad]

Originally posted by JRutledge
I am not confused at all. You are equating two unrelated situations and telling everyone that one of the situations has to do with the other. I do not understand how a possible foul call has to do with an injury in any way. You made it sound as if the non-call was the same action that injured the top player, then you admit it was not. I think it is clear what you said, but you are trying to back out of it by saying they are not related. OK, that makes sense.

Peace

When did I say that the two were unrelated??? YOU said that...the piling on and the sticking the finger in the eye were the same play, same action...I never said they were two different things...what I did say (and have repeated several times PA Coach) was that the piling on was the foul, not the sticking the finger in the eye...the fact that the piling on was also the cause of the injury made the situation worse...and PA Coach, are you gonna tell me that you would not blow a major gasket if your star player had someone jump on them, no foul is called, and then you realize they are injured and miss the rest of the game?? Come on...if the foul was called you have no one to be mad at...crap happens in games, we all know that...but your star player gets jumped on, there's no foul call, and then as the defender climbs off your star you see he/she is hurt...not gonna bother you, huh???

[A Pennsylvania Coach]

As an official, if I saw contact I deemed was not worthy of a foul, and it turned out the player was hurt, I wouldn't regret my no call. I made the best decision I could at the time I had to make it.

As a coach, I'd use the fact that the player was hurt to try to convince the official that he kicked it, in the (futile) hope that I could instill enough guilt that a makeup call would be right around the corner. But that's just how us coaches think!

I think you and Rut are looking at the same situation from two different perspectives, both of which are perfectly valid and understandable.

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by rockyroad


When did I say that the two were unrelated???

I am the one that stated that the two were unrelated. You said the foul not being called was not the same action that caused the player's injury. Clear as day to me.

Originally posted by rockyroad

YOU said that...the piling on and the sticking the finger in the eye were the same play, same action...I never said they were two different things...what I did say (and have repeated several times PA Coach) was that the piling on was the foul, not the sticking the finger in the eye...the fact that the piling on was also the cause of the injury made the situation worse.

I did not say that. I clearly was trying to figure out how a foul and a unrelated injury were about the same thing.

Originally posted by rockyroad

Come on...if the foul was called you have no one to be mad at...crap happens in games, we all know that...but your star player gets jumped on, there's no foul call, and then as the defender climbs off your star you see he/she is hurt...not gonna bother you, huh???

Now I am confused. You said that the foul that should have been called was not the same action that injured the player. Now you are saying it was? Which one is it? So if the foul was called the injury would not have taken place? Let us say they called a foul, would that have prevented the injury? If that is the case, to me that is coach speak. I have called fouls and players have gotten hurt and not called fouls and players have gotten hurt (sometimes unrelated to anything I could have called). Coaches always get upset over the injury, despite what actually happen (at least in my experience). I have had players run into teammates and the coach thinks something should have been called. I would assume that the officials that actually did the game, was not concerned about how bad it looked if they felt nothing should have been called. Now you have an opinion and have that right, but they were there and if they felt something should have not been called, that is why nothing was called. And I am sure that the injury did not change their mind. All I am saying, players are going to get injured. Whether something is called or not, they will get injured. If you spend time worrying about players getting injured because you did not call something, to me you have too much to worry about.

Maybe this is my football officials mentality, I have seen very clean hits hurt the one getting hit several times over the years. Basically, sh!t happens. It does not mean that someone did something to cause it, it just means that in a sport were bodies are going to be moving and come in contact with each other, injuries will happen.

Peace

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by A Pennsylvania Coach

As a coach, I'd use the fact that the player was hurt to try to convince the official that he kicked it, in the (futile) hope that I could instill enough guilt that a makeup call would be right around the corner. But that's just how us coaches think!

I really don't think that all coaches think that way.At least,I hope that they don't.I really want to believe that some coaches still believe in sportsmanship!

[A Pennsylvania Coach]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

I really don't think that all coaches think that way.At least,I hope that they don't.I really want to believe that some coaches still believe in sportsmanship!

This word sportsmanship gets thrown around all the time whenever somebody's PC-ness gets wrinkled by someone else's action. Here's the definition:

conduct (as fairness, respect for one's opponent, and graciousness in winning or losing) becoming to one participating in a sport

I don't think that action could be construed as unsportsmanlike. I consider myself and my team to be very sportsmanlike. Friendly with the opponents before and after, doing whatever we can to get an edge WITHIN THE RULES (fairness), and doing my best to be gracious after a win or a loss. After all, it's just a game.

[rockyroad]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by JRutledge

I am the one that stated that the two were unrelated. You said the foul not being called was not the same action that caused the player's injury. Clear as day to me.

I did not say that. I clearly was trying to figure out how a foul and a unrelated injury were about the same thing.

You said that the foul that should have been called was not the same action that injured the player. Now you are saying it was? Which one is it? So if the foul was called the injury would not have taken place?

Peace

I have gone back over everything I posted on this topic, and I can not find anythplace where I said they were unrelated or not the same action...I have stated over and over that they were the same play...and nowhere did I say that the foul being called would have stopped the injury - that's assinine...what I have been trying to say is that the lack of a foul call combined with the injury put CSU at a tremendous disadvantage...in my humble opinion, it was a foul...in my humble opinion, CSU got screwed...not a CSU fan - that was the first time I had seen them play all year...

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by A Pennsylvania Coach

I don't think that action could be construed as unsportsmanlike. I consider myself and my team to be very sportsmanlike. Friendly with the opponents before and after, doing whatever we can to get an edge WITHIN THE RULES (fairness), and doing my best to be gracious after a win or a loss.

Trying to intimidate an official into giving you a make-up call is getting an edge WITHIN the rules?

Yes,coach,you are the epitome of sportsmanship!

That's sad!

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by rockyroad

I have gone back over everything I posted on this topic, and I can not find anythplace where I said they were unrelated or not the same action...I have stated over and over that they were the same play...and nowhere did I say that the foul being called would have stopped the injury - that's assinine...what I have been trying to say is that the lack of a foul call combined with the injury put CSU at a tremendous disadvantage...in my humble opinion, it was a foul...in my humble opinion, CSU got screwed...not a CSU fan - that was the first time I had seen them play all year...

I only wanted to know what the two had to do with each other. Foul call or no foul call, the player got injured. If that appears to you that CSU got screwed, only because a foul was not called, then so be it. They won the game, so whatever happen it motivated them to play without this so called top player. And if all you were saying is that injury put them at a disadvantage, well DUH!!!! The game was not won or lost on that incident. But you will claim it does I guess.

Peace

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

Trying to intimidate an official into giving you a make-up call is getting an edge WITHIN the rules?

Yes,coach,you are the epitome of sportsmanship!

That's sad!

I am not defending this metality, but come on JR. You know that coaches do not b!tch and moan about fouls called against the other team. I have never known a coach to complain when a foul went in their favor. They tend to complain about things that go against them. The attitude that Penn. Coach has seems rather typical. Coaches want things to be called in their favor, that is just the way it is. That is why they ride us over no-calls not matter when they happen.

Peace