Uncalled Cheap Shots

[tomegun]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

And what did they suggest a proper ruling to be?

In Southern Nevada we covered the video too. Our desired rulings:

1. Intentional
2. Common
3. Flagrant
4. Intentional
5. Flagrant
6. Common

I'm going by memory to recall the fouls.

[fiasco]

Originally Posted by zm1283

I didn't say anything about automatically sending him to the bench. If he's a turd like this and the coach isn't going to take him out, find a way to get him out. Usually kids like this will dig their own grave and be done pretty quickly.

Even with "competent" officials out on the floor, there's nothing to say that there were any other opportunities to get him out of the game.

I understand the general sentiment you're trying to get across (get rid of troublemakers), but based on the information available to us in the video, I'm not entirely convinced #34 wouldn't have still been in the game for #5 if any of us here on this board would have been working that game.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by fiasco

Even with "competent" officials out on the floor, there's nothing to say that there were any other opportunities to get him out of the game.

I understand the general sentiment you're trying to get across (get rid of troublemakers), but based on the information available to us in the video, I'm not entirely convinced #34 wouldn't have still been in the game for #5 if any of us here on this board would have been working that game.

I guarantee you these were not the only times in the game where he had contact or showed bad ability. I am sure the kid tried to set a screen or play in the post or run to a spot. Somewhere he was doing something unskilled and I doubt this was the only possibility for fouls. These players do not just have moments and then go back to showing great skill.

Peace

[fiasco]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I guarantee you these were not the only times in the game where he had contact or showed bad ability. I am sure the kid tried to set a screen or play in the post or run to a spot. Somewhere he was doing something unskilled and I doubt this was the only possibility for fouls. These players do not just have moments and then go back to showing great skill.

Peace

Guarantees sure aren't worth what they used to be...

Not to mention the fact that we have no idea how far apart the fouls were. The could have happened within 30 seconds of each other, with no other actionable behavior by #34 to penalize.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by fiasco

Guarantees sure aren't worth what they used to be...

Not to mention the fact that we have no idea how far apart the fouls were. The could have happened within 30 seconds of each other, with no other actionable behavior by #34 to penalize.

I have been officiating long enough that these players do not reveal themselves on just a couple of fouls. Everything from how they set up on the FT line and during throw-ins can tell a bigger story of this guy. And the tape made it clear the officials did not pay attention to the times they needed to be paying attention when bodies are on the floor, so that tells me they were not aware of the other times that take experience and game awareness to figure out. I have yet to see a game where the jerk of the game only reveals himself when they foul. Even the last foul call on the tape was an example of his behavior and that was not even anything that should have made the tape. That is why I would love to see the rest of the game on film to confirm that or to show how long he played.

Peace

[fiasco]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

That is why I would love to see the rest of the game on film to confirm that or to show how long he played.

Peace

As would I and the rest of us. That would tell us a lot.

I'm just always hesitant about making blanket statements like "any competent official would have had him on the bench" based on a few short edited clips from a 32-minute basketball game.

Stuff happens, even with the most competent officials in the world out on the court.

[VaTerp]

Originally Posted by fiasco

Guarantees sure aren't worth what they used to be...

Not to mention the fact that we have no idea how far apart the fouls were. The could have happened within 30 seconds of each other, with no other actionable behavior by #34 to penalize.

If fouls #1 and #3 happened within 30 seconds of each other I'm probably going flagrant then b/c the kid obviously did not get the message that would/should have been communicated to him after the first one.

And after foul #1, I'm keeping a close eye on #34 and would have called him for a push on the rebound before the eventual foul called on #42 in play #2. So that's video evidence right there of "actionable behavior."

Anybody who believes for a second that what is on this tape is the only "actionable behavior" committed by #34 or that doesnt believe compotent officials would have gotten rid of #34 long before foul #5 either hasnt been doing this very long or is being a contrarian.

[Brad]

Originally Posted by fiasco

I still don't understand this comment.

How would #34 have been on the bench, based solely on the information we have from the video?

Because a competent official would have fouled his a$$ out of the game long before foul #5!!

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by fiasco

As would I and the rest of us. That would tell us a lot.

I'm just always hesitant about making blanket statements like "any competent official would have had him on the bench" based on a few short edited clips from a 32-minute basketball game.

Stuff happens, even with the most competent officials in the world out on the court.

Well I get your point of view, but based on what you have told everyone here about your experience, I would not expect you to have the games under your belt to know how to recognize what happens in many situations which is the point others have made. And we do not even know what other plays took place in the game involving the other team which would also change how long the game would be called as well.

Peace

[Brad]

Originally Posted by VaTerp

And after foul #1, I'm keeping a close eye on #34

Exactly.

Originally Posted by VaTerp

Anybody who believes for a second that what is on this tape is the only "actionable behavior" committed by #34 or that doesnt believe compotent officials would have gotten rid of #34 long before foul #5 either hasnt been doing this very long or is being a contrarian.

Yeah. Pretty much that!!!

[Rich]

Originally Posted by brad

because a competent official would have fouled his a$$ out of the game long before foul #5!!

+1

[VaTerp]

Originally Posted by fiasco

As would I and the rest of us. That would tell us a lot.

I'm just always hesitant about making blanket statements like "any competent official would have had him on the bench" based on a few short edited clips from a 32-minute basketball game.

Stuff happens, even with the most competent officials in the world out on the court.

I love how people keep talking about these "edited" clips as if somebody used camera tricks to make it look like #34's fouls were worse than they were.

I'm sure there is tape of the rest of this 38-37 contest that will show #34 moving his feet beautifully, going above the rim to block shots, and gracefully executing pick and rolls.

Let's be real folks. There is enough video evidence there to show how #34 was playing defense and what he was bringing to the court that night. And regardless of what else is on the game tape, nothing changes the fact that in the exact situations shown on tape, the officials were incompotent in their duties IMO. In fact, I'm quite confident that the rest of the tape could only lead to a lower opinion of the competency of these officials as it likely would point out other opportunities they missed to get #34 out of the game or control rough play in general.

But we can keep playing this game and acting like this video is some sort of fictional short story and not what it is. Indisputable video evidence of officials not properly using the tools at their disposal to control rough, and dangerous, play.

[fiasco]

Originally Posted by VaTerp

But we can keep playing this game and acting like this video is some sort of fictional short story and not what it is. Indisputable video evidence of officials not properly using the tools at their disposal to control rough, and dangerous, play.

Or we could just keep making blanket judgments about how awesome we all would have been at preventing any bad stuff from happening if we had been doing the game, because we're all so much more awesome than the officials in the video.

[fiasco]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

And we do not even know what other plays took place in the game involving the other team which would also change how long the game would be called as well.

That's exactly my point. There's so much not shown on the video, yet everyone with a whistle knows EXACTLY what they would have done in the context of the game overall. Frankly, it's just delusional.

I'm not saying it's unlikely that, with different officials on the floor, #34 wouldn't have been in a position to commit foul #5. I'm merely saying it's foolish to sit here and say "Well, this is absolutely what should have happened" when we don't have 2% out of 100% of what happened in the game.

Can we guess what happened? Yes.

Can we assume what happened? Certainly.

Can we say for certainty what happened, and therefore say what should have happened in the overall context of the game? No, I don't believe we can.

But, if it makes you feel better to say you would have fouled his a$$ out, go for it.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by fiasco

Or we could just keep making blanket judgments about how awesome we all would have been at preventing any bad stuff from happening if we had been doing the game, because we're all so much more awesome than the officials in the video.

I don't think you've been reading very closely. Most posts have not taken that tone at all, respected the fact that we were only looking at a few seconds of a game, and restricted the commentary to what the poster would have done in the same situation.

Are you defending the officiating that we see in the video, or just offering knee-jerk firebacks to the critical comments posted in this thread?