WNBA: Jacket Removal and Toss

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Some? She almost tore her arm out of it's socket. Wait? Almost? No. She actually did tear her arm out of it's socket, and then waved the detatched arm around to show the crowd. Yeah. That's better.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

If that is the case, why did the player not fall? That is some kind of contact to stay on your feet.

Why did the player not bleed to death?

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

So, your supervisors like to allow the defender to pull the shooter's hand off the ball by hold onto their arm? Really?

If that was what happened, then a foul should be called. But the defender clearly has her hand on the ball and the shooter tries to muscle the ball up through the defenders hand/arm. I'm not punishing the defender for that. If you want to, go ahead. That's A great no-call in my book.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

So, your supervisors like to allow the defender to pull the shooter's hand off the ball by hold onto their arm? Really?

What does that have to do with this play? I'm not calling a foul on a defender just b/c the offensive player can't rip through the defender's capping of the ball.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Not only that, as a state clinician I would love to praise an official that did not call that a foul.

To call that is at best a high school call. Any contact, call the foul no matter how the contact took place.

Peace

I despise the phrase "high school call". It reeks of big-timing.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Rich

I despise the phrase "high school call". It reeks of big-timing.

OK, it is a JV call.

Either way, this is about the only place that call would be acceptable (and not acceptable where I live).

Peace

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Why did the player not bleed to death?

Because the ball does not bleed.

Peace

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by twocentsworth

Nope. That is not egregious enough for me at the college level. It was not directed at the official, was not a prolonged action, and her staff got her under control pretty quickly.

If this is a HS game, then yes....

(Let the criticism begin).....

So by that logic if she turned, picked up a chair and launched it behind the bench you wouldn't have tossed her, either? I mean, it wouldn't have been directed at an official, wouldn't have been prolonged and we can assume her staff would've gotten her to calm down pretty quickly.

As BigBald said, how egregious do you want it to be?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

What does that have to do with this play? I'm not calling a foul on a defender just b/c the offensive player can't rip through the defender's capping of the ball.

The defender didn't cap the ball, they touched it and capped the arm.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

The defender didn't cap the ball, they touched it and capped the arm.

I would suggest either better video quality or a new prescription.

In fact the defender's hand made no downward motion until the ball came loose. Her hand initially moved up with the ball and then when the ball came loose is the first time her hand moved downward. I honestly have no idea what the heck you are looking at.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

I would suggest either better video quality or a new prescription.

In fact the defender's hand made no downward motion until the ball came loose. Her hand initially moved up with the ball and then when the ball came loose is the first time her hand moved downward. I honestly have no idea what the heck you are looking at.

The direction the defender's hand moves is not relevant. The ball continued UP afterwards...not much, but UP while the shooters arm stayed down as a result of behind held down. That is a very reliable symptom of the contact being on the arm instead of the ball. Plus, the defender isn't permitted to contact the arm to get to the ball....that point is indisputable unless you close your eyes when watching the video. They can make contact with a hand that is one the ball, but not the arm.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

In fact the defender's hand made no downward motion until the ball came loose. Her hand initially moved up with the ball and then when the ball came loose is the first time her hand moved downward.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

The ball continued up afterwards, not much, but up while the shooters arm stayed down as a result of behind held down. That is a very reliable symptom of the contact being on the arm instead of the ball. Plus, the defender isn't permitted to contact the arm to get to the ball, that point is indisputable. They can make contact with a hand that is one the ball, but not the arm.

With such a difference of opinion, it's too bad that we don't have video to watch to see who is correct.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I suggest you take up a career in writing fictional novels. You're making stuff up. The direction the defender's hand moves is not relevant. The ball continued UP afterwards...not much, but UP while the shooters arm stayed down as a result of behind held down. That is a very reliable symptom of the contact being on the arm instead of the ball. Plus, the defender isn't permitted to contact the arm to get to the ball....that point is indisputable unless you close your eyes when watching the video. They can make contact with a hand that is one the ball, but not the arm.

The defender didn't contact the arm to get to the ball...the defender got her hand on the ball and then the shooter tried to muscle her way through the defender, undoubtedly hoping she had an official there who would make such a call. Good thing for the game that those officials knew better.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

The defender didn't contact the arm to get to the ball...the defender got her hand on the ball and then the shooter tried to muscle her way through the defender, undoubtedly hoping she had an official there who would make such a call. Good thing for the game that those officials knew better.

Unfortunate for the game that the officials don't call the obvious foul and that there are others that back them up.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Unfortunate for the game that the officials don't call the obvious foul and that there are others that back them up.

Well if it was obvious, why are there many officials saying this should not be called? Why are you correct on this situation and everyone else is wrong? It really should not be a matter how many feel one way or the other, but it is telling when not everyone even can agree on this contact. This is why it is called, "judgment" I guess.

Peace

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Well if it was obvious, why are there many officials saying this should not be called? Why are you correct on this situation and everyone else is wrong? It really should not be a matter how many feel one way or the other, but it is telling when not everyone even can agree on this contact. This is why it is called, "judgment" I guess.

Peace

I'm with you from your earlier posts. H.S. I can see calling a foul but even then I'm iffy. College and Pro? Play on. Defender got the ball first and then it's a case of one strong person trying to hold the ball down (defense) while another tries to raise it towards the goal (offense). At any rate I'm not going to use "obvious" on this situation. If we're all debating it my guess is it really isn't obvious.

I can see the coach being upset because of whatever angle she has and the fact she's a coach but she doesn't get to go berserk, even if I think my partners or I may have missed the call.