Mike Kitts... B1G Championship

[twocentsworth]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Your opinion. Without additional specific information, such as when the offense gathered the ball, we cannot agree or disagree. And your comment in a previous post about allowing 2 steps has no basis in the rules, as Snaqs has pointed out. This gives you either fanboy status, or, at best, shows your inexperience as an official.

I originally asked APG to post the video of this play (occurred at 11:44am CT on 3/8/12) just prior to the 12 minute media time out (Big Ten Ntwrk)....the Illini player LITERALLY gathered the ball, was bumped (whistle) took two steps and laid the ball in (Kitts incorrectly waved off the basket). If it gets posted, then people will see (make their own judgement) that, by rule, this basket should have been counted.

Why is this wrong? If Mike was trailing the initial fast break players, he would have a great look at the goaltend.

After the play I described above, Iowa stole the ball and missed a lay-up, a second Iowa player got the rebound and put up a lay up (Kitts STILL didn't make it to the baseline as the new lead - remember he was trail from calling the previous foul)...Kitts was the one official to have a whistle for goal-tending.

Really? Literally? So the MSU player had his butt on Sullinger? Another comment that has fanboy written all over it, rather than speaking as an official.

Yes. LITERALLY the starting center mis-timed his jump for an offensive rebound, landed on Sullinger's back/shoulder, stayed there a moment and THEN scored the rebound basket. No hyperbole/exaggeration....

Without describing the specific play, why should we take your word it was an "obvious foul"? As far as the T, if it was deserved, that's a good thing for Mike that he didn't let a (possible) bad call keep him from taking care of business. Whether or not a call or no call is bad does not give the coach an opportunity to act unsportsmanlike. A negative for Mike, in my mind, would be if he had allowed Izzo to go nuts without penalizing him.
This comment pretty much sums up your very likely fanboy status.



Finally, we have to take your word that the above examples were all in Mike's primary, that they were his calls, and that they really were incorrect.

I don't know how long you've been reading this forum, but we have fans come out of the woodwork at this time of year, using pretty much the terminology you've used here, to show how the refs have screwed over their team. Even some part-time officials show their full-time fanboy status this time of year. Or, some lower level officials like to simply crap on the higher level officials, because it makes them feel more important. We all screw up, even the Big Dogs. And we've discussed many of those plays. But your post shows either your inexperience, or your inner fanboy is leaking out.

I work NCAA-M D2 & D3, NAIA D1 & D2, Juco, and about 25% of my schedule is HS.....(49 games total from Nov 1 thru March 1)

You (and anyone else) can call me whatever you want - it doesn't bother me. What I find funny is how much people infer/how quick people are to make a judgement and then....how that judgement gets cemented into the psyche of the posters......

If people view me as a "fanboy"....fine.

Just my two cents.

(rocky, aren't you glad you asked? )

my response to each of your comments are included above (if I was a real fanboy, I would know how to format this differently....)

[fiasco]

What I find funny is how much people infer/how quick people are to make a judgement

Positively dripping with irony...

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by twocentsworth

my response to each of your comments are included above (if I was a real fanboy, I would know how to format this differently....)

Nah, fanboys and regular posters both have issues with formatting.

Maybe the issue is a combination of things, including perhaps your communication skills. Remember, what makes a great official over a good one is not just calling plays; most officials can do that. It's also being able to handle proper communication - both during a game and outside the game.

First, your description of the continuation play still does not determine Mike was wrong. It could be how you're describing the play. Or it could be your lack of rule knowledge. But, as you describe it, if the IL player had one foot on the floor at the time of the gather, the player traveled after the foul which would wipe of the shot attempt. So, it's either a communication issue or lack of rules knowledge on your part, whether or not we actually see the play.

On the Sullinger play, all you said was this was a play that was Mike obviously missed. But you didn't say where the play originated; you didn't mention whether Mike was the L, T or C; you didn't mention why the other officials definitely wouldn't have put a whistle on it if it was sooooo obvious and why it was Mike's fault alone. Communicating the specific play better might make it easier for us to discuss as officials, rather than simply crapping on him.

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Or, some lower level officials like to simply crap on the higher level officials, because it makes them feel more important.

Your mention of your schedule, rather than adressing this comment, seems to almost prove my point. Again, is it how you're communicating?

Finally,

Originally Posted by twocentsworth

What I find funny is how much people infer/how quick people are to make a judgement

Doesn't your own comment speak for itself, especially regarding Mike?

[rockyroad]

Kitts STILL didn't make it to the baseline as the new lead - remember he was trail from calling the previous foul


Wouldn't that make him the C? Don't they call and go opposite the table in NCAA-M? Or was it the previous foul not a shooting foul but a sideline throw-in opposite the table?

[twocentsworth]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

Kitts STILL didn't make it to the baseline as the new lead - remember he was trail from calling the previous foul


Wouldn't that make him the C? Don't they call and go opposite the table in NCAA-M? Or was it the previous foul not a shooting foul but a sideline throw-in opposite the table?

You are correct, they report & go opposite. He was lead opposite table; called foul & became me trail. On turnover, he went from old trail to new lead....

[tomegun]

All of the mistakes mentioned in this thread can happen to all of us...in a gym with 10 people watching. As was mentioned previously, to say that someone making more money should get plays right is absurd.

I would like to see some of these critics work.

[APG]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

First, your description of the continuation play still does not determine Mike was wrong. It could be how you're describing the play. Or it could be your lack of rule knowledge. But, as you describe it, if the IL player had one foot on the floor at the time of the gather, the player traveled after the foul which would wipe of the shot attempt. So, it's either a communication issue or lack of rules knowledge on your part, whether or not we actually see the play.

It would wipe out a made basket, but if they didn't award the shooter two free throws, then the official didn't think he was even in the act of shooting (which was twocentsworth's point). I can't comment on the play as I haven't seen it, and I can't find any replay of the game.

[twocentsworth]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

First, your description of the continuation play still does not determine Mike was wrong. It could be how you're describing the play. Or it could be your lack of rule knowledge. But, as you describe it, if the IL player had one foot on the floor at the time of the gather, the player traveled after the foul which would wipe of the shot attempt. So, it's either a communication issue or lack of rules knowledge on your part, whether or not we actually see the play.

when does the act of shooting begin?

[VaTerp]

Didnt watch entire game but Kitts looked fine to me other than the miss on the oob call.

Unbelievable comeback by BYU.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by VaTerp

Didnt watch entire game but Kitts looked fine to me other than the miss on the oob call.

Unbelievable comeback by BYU.

Same thing I thought.

[Raymond]

It was very amusing watching the contrast in styles of Mike Kitts and Sean Corbin. Corbin has to be the most unaffected, coolest official in the NCAA.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

It was very amusing watching the contrast in styles of Mike Kitts and Sean Corbin. Corbin has to be the most unaffected, coolest official in the NCAA.

I agree. He was that way in the NBA, too. Does anyone here know why Sean left the NBA?

[Multiple Sports]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

It was very amusing watching the contrast in styles of Mike Kitts and Sean Corbin. Corbin has to be the most unaffected, coolest official in the NCAA.

BNR - I like respect many of your opinions and I was wondering if you viewed Corbin's style as cool or apathetic as compared to Scott Foster (#48) in the NBA who looks like he OD on 5 hr energy drinks.....

Somtimes Corbin looks as though he is freakin bored and doesn't want to be there.....

BTW - also heard that Corbin wasn't happy with his post season assignments as he felt he wasn't moving up the ladder fast enough

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by twocentsworth

when does the act of shooting begin?

NCAA 4-73-3.

But that's not the question. You said in your initial post that he wiped off a good layup. Upon further questioning, your backing is that the player took 2 steps between the foul and the layup. As you described, that's neither a good or bad call, without additional information. Someone who understands the rules would know to supply that information so that it's easier for the rest us to follow your reasoning.

The same with the Sullinger play - you have yet to respond to the specifics as to why it was only Mike's bad no-call, and why the rest of the crew was not responsible.

If you notice, I haven't given my opinion as to whether Mike had a bad night. But your descriptions of the plays tend to make me believe the opinions come from a less than knowledgeable source. Maybe it's just how you communicate?