Ohio State v. Michigan

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by scrounge

...with play #2 a foul - defender got him on the arm and top of head before the ball. But a no-call doesn't surprise me in that situation, it wasn't that blatant. But it was a foul.

While I'll agree with you on the arm, the contact with the head was not until after the ball was knocked free.

[scrounge]

Even Michigan players thought it was a foul...

"I saw the ball in my face, so I just tried to wrap it up," Hardaway said. "Probably got his arm or something like that, but like I said, it's up to the refs to call that call, and they let it go."

[sigh]

NCAA College Basketball Recap - Ohio State Buckeyes at Michigan Wolverines - Feb 05, 2013 - CBSSports.com

[bob jenkins]

No FF1.

No foul.

[zm1283]

No F1.

Good no call on the drive to the basket.

[dahoopref]

After talking with an observer from my conference regarding play #2:

Q: Does the UM's defense affect the RSBQ of OSU drive to the basket?
A: Yes. The illegal contact occurs before the ending drive to the basket.

The T is in poor position to officiate the play. The C has a closed look on the defender. The L is too far to make a call without seeming he is "fishing in someone's pond." However, the L should realize where the T is and has the best open look to see the constant riding on the OSU player's hip. I didn't see the whole game, but crew dynamics during the game are sometimes the reason calls are not made.

[VaTerp]

I agree with the judgement of the crew on both a common foul on the first play and a no-call on the second one.

Both close, but I think they were absolutely the correct calls.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by dahoopref

After talking with an observer from my conference regarding play #2:

Q: Does the UM's defense affect the RSBQ of OSU drive to the basket?
A: Yes. The illegal contact occurs before the ending drive to the basket.

The T is in poor position to officiate the play. The C has a closed look on the defender. The L is too far to make a call without seeming he is "fishing in someone's pond." However, the L should realize where the T is and has the best open look to see the constant riding on the OSU player's hip. I didn't see the whole game, but crew dynamics during the game are sometimes the reason calls are not made.

I totally disagree on the drive. For one they are running with each other. Also the OSU has his elbow out, which from my vantage point is not going to get you special consideration. The defender is just running with him. Also the dribble never loses the ball, stops from going where he wants to go or has to change direction. If anything the OSU is causing a lot of that contact.

Peace

[JetMetFan]

BTW...NCAAW just posted a video similar to a play like the last one (defender riding alongside the offensive player on the way to the goal) telling us it should be called since B1 isn't in LGP.

I will say I don't believe that should be applied here because the defender lost contact with the OSU player.

[Multiple Sports]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I totally disagree on the drive. For one they are running with each other. Also the OSU has his elbow out, which from my vantage point is not going to get you special consideration. The defender is just running with him. Also the dribble never loses the ball, stops from going where he wants to go or has to change direction. If anything the OSU is causing a lot of that contact.

Peace

Rut is exactly right when he says that the defender is running with him....ther is no attempt by the Mich player to reroute / impede...etc. the ball
handler. There is no "stayed hand" ( Al Battista lovers back east are laughing,,VA Terp / PG Ref / all you guys). This is a kid driving hard and a kid playin in your face D.

Now as far as me agreeeing with Rut twice in one week....any suggestions ?????