Ohio State v. Michigan

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Again, call whatever you like. BUt you better call any shooter that is hit in the face and falls to the floor and IF every single time if that is the standard. If he was not playing the ball, certainly. He was playing the ball and that is what makes this an average foul for me.

Peace

I agree that hitting the head is not by itself enough for an IF. In this case though, he was pulled to the ground by the head. That is I see continued contact beyond the attempt to get the ball after he touches the head.

I think this particular case is borderline and which way it goes probably has more to do with how chippy the game has been to that point.

Playing the ball shouldn't be a get of jail free card. You can be playing the ball and still use excessive force.

[Tio]

Good discussion here.

Play #1, I like the fact they review it on the monitor. Very close... the contact is excessive and in the face so I would opt for a Flagrant #1.

Play #2. This is not a foul by any stretch of the imagination. If you disagree, i would encourage more tape review of similar plays. This is not a "rulebook" decision but understanding how the game is played. There is zero illegal contact that would merit a defensive foul regardless of the juncture of the game.

I am totally against "swallowing the whistle" because it is the end of the game, but it needs to be a legit, no-doubt foul. You put a marginal one in at this juncture of the game and one's career will be VERY short.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by tomegun

Ouch...that will leave a mark!

Sometimes the truth hurts. Just do not get what this has to do with agreeing with me. I got my games.

Peace

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

I agree that hitting the head is not by itself enough for an IF. In this case though, he was pulled to the ground by the head. That is I see continued contact beyond the attempt to get the ball after he touches the head.

I think this particular case is borderline and which way it goes probably has more to do with how chippy the game has been to that point.

Playing the ball shouldn't be a get of jail free card. You can be playing the ball and still use excessive force.

I did not say it was a get out of jail card. Just saying it appears he was trying to stop the pass and missed arms and got the fact. It happens all the time and I think it was good judgment to only call a common foul. And if that is always a IF or FF1, you will have a long career. It was only seen also in slow motion and in live speed players hit all kinds of things and we never know unless the player acts like they are hit in the face. And if falling to the floor is simply excessive, then that will be a short career if that is the standard. The only reason that Hardaway fell is because he jumped in the air. Not necessarily a typical way to pass the ball. If that happened in the first minute of the game an IF or FF1 would have never crossed my mind.

Peace

[parepat]

Originally Posted by Tio

Good discussion here.


Play #2. This is not a foul by any stretch of the imagination. If you disagree, i would encourage more tape review of similar plays. This is not a "rulebook" decision but understanding how the game is played. There is zero illegal contact that would merit a defensive foul regardless of the juncture of the game.

Are you talking about the drive or the shot. Looks like a foul on the shot to me.

[Sharpshooternes]

Originally Posted by Tio

Good discussion here.

Play #1, I like the fact they review it on the monitor. Very close... the contact is excessive and in the face so I would opt for a Flagrant #1.

Play #2. This is not a foul by any stretch of the imagination. If you disagree, i would encourage more tape review of similar plays. This is not a "rulebook" decision but understanding how the game is played. There is zero illegal contact that would merit a defensive foul regardless of the juncture of the game.

I am totally against "swallowing the whistle" because it is the end of the game, but it needs to be a legit, no-doubt foul. You put a marginal one in at this juncture of the game and one's career will be VERY short.

#1 In HS ball i think I am leaning toward an intentional here, however I do have a question for a third option. Would anyone have a slow whistle on this, see the pass to two of the yellows going the other way and then no call it for an easy bucket and more time off of the clock for the winning team? I think this is easier to do when the foul isn't so hard and involving the head. The caveat to this is, do you no call it this late in the game when you know that the now defensive team is trying to foul to stop the clock?

#2 No call all day long....and night too.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Sharpshooternes

#1 In HS ball i think I am leaning toward an intentional here, however I do have a question for a third option. Would anyone have a slow whistle on this, see the pass to two of the yellows going the other way and then no call it for an easy bucket and more time off of the clock for the winning team? I think this is easier to do when the foul isn't so hard and involving the head. The caveat to this is, do you no call it this late in the game when you know that the now defensive team is trying to foul to stop the clock?

On that one, a no call is only going to lead to something worse than it already is.

And I agree that and IF (F1) is at least in the discussion. Being hit in the face alone is not enough for it, but the follow through and take down takes it to that level.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Sharpshooternes

#1 In HS ball i think I am leaning toward an intentional here, however I do have a question for a third option. Would anyone have a slow whistle on this, see the pass to two of the yellows going the other way and then no call it for an easy bucket and more time off of the clock for the winning team? I think this is easier to do when the foul isn't so hard and involving the head. The caveat to this is, do you no call it this late in the game when you know that the now defensive team is trying to foul to stop the clock?

No, game situation they need to foul to stop the clock. Just call the foul like you would any other situation near the end of the game with the losing team.

Peace

[Scuba_ref]

Originally Posted by Sharpshooternes

#1 In HS ball i think I am leaning toward an intentional here, however I do have a question for a third option. Would anyone have a slow whistle on this, see the pass to two of the yellows going the other way and then no call it for an easy bucket and more time off of the clock for the winning team? I think this is easier to do when the foul isn't so hard and involving the head. The caveat to this is, do you no call it this late in the game when you know that the now defensive team is trying to foul to stop the clock?

This is a recipe for escalating contact!

[Tio]

You need to get the first foul. If you pass, the contact gets harder. We want to avoid any escalation of rough play.

There is NO foul on the drive. It is marginal contact at best especially given the end of game scenario.