I took mental notes and "beamed them" to Camron to transcribe. Thanks, Camron.

How about the lottery numbers? Stocks to buy? Anything?

#1--Not even close. Bad screen but not something I would call when the defender goes around the screen.

#2--Probably would have called something or addressed this issue for sure. Both players were going at it pretty hard.

3--Not a very good angle and it appears the right player got the ball. I can live with a no call in that game.

4--Looks like a block all the way, but the official gave another signal or called something on someone different. Not sure what the Lead was watching there.

5--I had less problem with that sequence than the first one. It looks like both players moved around each other more than anything. The Lead had a better angle and passed on this, so I can live with that. Not unusual when you have big and physical players in the post in my experience.

6--Something should have been called there.

7--Agreed, illegal screen.

8--No problem with a handchecking foul here.

Peace

On #2 I really can't see coming away with nothing. Someone did something illegal during that sequence and my first observation was the defender started the ball rolling once he started moving A2 up the lane. Putting a whistle on that can prevent headaches as the game moves on. Also, and this is because I watched the whole game, Blue #55 crossed the border from aggressive to rough a few times early on. He's one of those players where the antenna should be up...something to talk about in the pregame or during a time out. Kids who don't have scoring responsibilities always put me on alert.

#3 was of interest because the dribbler was displaced, there was no call...and then there's a missed backcourt violation as a result.

In the first block/charge the foul was called on the contact after the rebound not the initial drive. That's one where the C would probably want to get the crash if he had to do it again.

I know #6 was iffy. That's why I added the context. It was less than 0:15 of game time after Blue 55 picked up a T. Now the kid has two personals, he's not being taken out, he's already had one pretty aggressive sequence in the post and he's at it again. Granted, there was eventually a whistle on the possession against him but if my antenna are up I'm already thinking he and whoever he gets involved with in the post aren't getting a whole lot of rope.

On #7 positioning had a lot to do with it. It's possible the C could have gotten it with a glance at the next action area since the ball wasn't being pressured but that would've been rough and the L was blocked out. The T could've saved things but take a good look: he's not even on the screen until the shot is taken. That means he was near the division line - another 20 feet away - with only two kids in front of him. Getting that play would've helped the game because White went on to set a few more iffy screens. You get a kid for setting up like a football lineman early and the issue goes away.

I think #8 shows the importance of getting the first call. The little nonsense after the whistle eventually blows may not happen if the first act is called. Plus, it didn't appear as though what was eventually called was really a foul.

Take your pick on two..... a smorgasburg of fouls all within 3-4 seconds. Call something. I'm convinced non calls like this only escalated the problems.

This is where you have to read the players and figure out what they're comfortable with. As long as they're both on the same page, you really don't have to have a foul. You can, and it wouldn't be wrong, but it can be passed on just the same. If you're going to pass on it as I suggest is possible, you just have to keep your eye on it to see if either one steps it up and takes it too far.

I can only see it heading in one direction. I see your point on each one individually...but collectively, I understand why this one went in the tank. Even if the players seemed OK and played it through on the same level, one of the coaches would likely use the non-calls to beat ya over the head.

Agreed. I can see doing that on "minor" contact that large players can get through. Play #2 isn't minor. Neither were the two block/charges or, IMO, play #7 (the illegal screen on White). If this or any crew establishes a "we'll let you play through stuff but you're also going to play basketball" mindset then players will adjust. The knuckleheads who don't will sit and having them on the sidelines will help the game.

My feeling was whistles on even half these plays changes the tone of the game.

I don't think it's minor, but I don't think it's really that bad.

Of course I'm not putting it in context with the rest of the action -- I'm just looking at it as an isolated play. You can certainly get something, but I don't think it's over the top.

Shrug.

Agreed. This is the 1st quarter. If this type of thing had been cleaned up early, further problems could have been avoided later by consistently calling this.

I agree and have the following:
2) defender uses the knee to drive the offense 6 ft up the lane
4) i can live with no call, contact was after release and getting foot on floor
6) looks very similar to 2), but this is more Through than To
8) once the offense swipes at the defense, that is likely because the offense cannot move freely as a result of the defense impeding. If I no call it, the defender becomes highly suspect over the next few minutes.

Your point is a good one.

The guys that called the Wisconsin D1 championship called 10 fouls in the first quarter. Good, appropriate fouls. The game never got close to spiraling the way this one did.

These responses most closely match my thoughts.

Well alllllrighty then!!!
 

:eek: :D

Peace

Oh my.

Isn't this one of the signs of the apocalypse? :eek: