Louisville/Baylor (Women)

[bgtg19]

1. I can't figure out what the officials might have been talking about with 16 seconds left. Louisville has a throw in, Baylor knocks the ball out of bounds on the throw in attempt, and then the C comes down to talk to the L. They both then go talk to the T. The lead walks back and then the C goes back to talk to the T. The C then makes one more comment to the L. What do you think may have been the issue they were discussing?

2. With 9.1 seconds left, after the foul on the layup attempt, the referee is ready to administer the free throw and 4 Louisville players are lined up in their lane spaces and where is Baylor? The team without a timeout is huddling up with Coach Mulkey. I thought huddles in the lane aren't allowed - huddles with the coach? Permitting that huddle seemed to give a pretty big advantage to Baylor.

3. With the game tied (after the Louisville player hit the first FT), with just over two seconds left, why wouldn't Coach Walz have two rebounders on the lane. I get that they don't want to commit a foul and put Baylor on the line, but with the game tied, don't you *have* to have some players around just in case the ball comes off the rim strange/long and give your team a chance to score in regulation (because with most of the starting team fouled out, they were NOT likely to win in OT).

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by bgtg19

...2. With 9.1 seconds left, after the foul on the layup attempt, the referee is ready to administer the free throw and 4 Louisville players are lined up in their lane spaces and where is Baylor? The team without a timeout is huddling up with Coach Mulkey. I thought huddles in the lane aren't allowed - huddles with the coach? Permitting that huddle seemed to give a pretty big advantage to Baylor.
...

What rule says offensive players have to occupy their lane spaces? And what prevents them from standing by their coach along the sideline?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Jesse James

Which would have put them up 3, without the PC.

Right or wrong, the call significantly changed the game.

Put them up by 3? They were down by 1. A bad call (IMO) cost them a possession. They immediately regain possession on the ensuing DESIGNATED SPOT throw-in. They were foul and made 2 free throws.

You think the same turnover would have occurred had Baylor scored on the orginial possession? That's a large leap considering the defense they played after the made free throws.

[chapmaja]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

What rule says offensive players have to occupy their lane spaces? And what prevents them from standing by their coach along the sideline?

The only thing I think they could have called was that Baylor appeared to have some players huddles below the the FT line extended. In that case they need to break the huddle or move outside the FT line extended.

Otherwise I agree. Nothing requires offensive team members to be in a lane space, so the officials should not have required to break the huddle up if they were outside the FT extended.

I have had this similar situation occur in middle school games. Late in a game, the offense doesn't want the lane spaces and the coach wants to talk to the players. He calls everyone but the shooter over to talk, and puts a sub at the table for the shooter. She makes two FT's and the horn blows for the sub, which allows the D to get set.

Would have liked to see them scramble had she missed the second FT though.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by chapmaja

....Would have liked to see them scramble had she missed the second FT though.

Why? Why do you care about a coach's strategy and tactics as long as they are legal?

[chapmaja]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Why? Why do you care about a coach's strategy and tactics as long as they are legal?

Because the coach in question in that game was an arrogant AH that was talking to his team from a seated position on the bench because he had been T'ed up already for arguing calls.

Seriously I just think it would have been fun to see his players have to get back on D from the bench area because they were talking. They are a quick team so they likely could have done it, but it would be interesting.

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by bgtg19

1. I can't figure out what the officials might have been talking about with 16 seconds left. Louisville has a throw in, Baylor knocks the ball out of bounds on the throw in attempt, and then the C comes down to talk to the L. They both then go talk to the T. The lead walks back and then the C goes back to talk to the T. The C then makes one more comment to the L. What do you think may have been the issue they were discussing?

I'm 99% sure they were discussing whether there was a kick ball on the first inbound attempt, which I believe there was. A kick would mean a reset of the game clock.

[michblue]

Originally Posted by kdays78

The officials just let the game get out of control and as mentioned earlier looked like a crew that should be doing freshmen/ jv level.

The end of the game Baylor messed up giving a layup with 9 seconds, but the officials (term used loosely) should not see another game of this level. Of course two of them were females so they can write there own ticket to do a final four in the womens side...



Lousville upsets #1 Baylor women, last 16 seconds - YouTube

I can tell you for share all three of these officials will continue to work this level and one them would not shock me seeing them at the Final Four. All three of these officials are guaranteed better then any of us. They work at the highest levels in the toughest of environments. To say some of the comments I have read on here "officials (and I use the term loosely)...or...a crew that should have been doing freshman/jv" is just plain wrong and unprofessional. One of the officials on this game is one of the top 5-10 woman's officials in the country.

Like John Adams said when CBS interviewed him after the Iowa State/Ohio State game..."Officials are going to make mistakes. We have to live with it and move on. They are not going to be perfect. It is a part of the game."

And btw, for all of you who feel this crew from the Louisville/Baylor game should never work another game at that level again....one of the officials who worked the Iowa State/Ohio State mens game with the well talked about charge call against Iowa State worked the Duke/Louisville mens game yesterday.

These men and women working these game are far better trained then we are and may ever be. Thefore, I think we owe them the due respect they have earned whether we agree with calls made or not made in their games.

Just my MHO (my honest opinion)

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by chapmaja

Because the coach in question in that game was an arrogant AH that was talking to his team from a seated position on the bench because he had been T'ed up already for arguing calls.
....

This would be perfect for gojeremy's thread about taking the emotion out of what we do.

[VaTerp]

Originally Posted by michblue

However Rich, both players went to the floor and thus a call needed to be made and I agree with the call. It was a charge.

That play was a prime example of why I HATE this phrase and really think it should be removed from the thinking of officials doing HS varsity level and above.

What this phrase does is essentially say, if bodies are on the floor and you don't know what to call, just call something and guess. And that's what IMO the T did here. The other two officials, who were in much better position to referee the defense, passed for a reason.

It was a BIG time flop. At the point of contact the offensive player's movement is going up. The defender throws her upper body back to draw the call and was rewarded for her acting job by the official in the worst position to see it. BIG time flop.

I guess the phrase is fine for lower levels of play where you need to remind less experienced officials to put air in the whistle on some plays. But there is no reason that experienced officials should feel the need to HAVE to have a whistle simply b/c bodies are on the floor. As long as they know how they got there and refereed the defense they should be fine.

[chapmaja]

I stand by my opinion that the PC foul call was correct. I also think Baylor's coach was very lucky not to get a T in that situation.

I have no idea what the officials were discussing when the they were talking about prior to the throw in. As one of the other posters said, it very well could be a kicked ball issue. That was my first thought when I watched it live.

As for the administering official whistling at the Baylor bench prior to the free throws. Several of the huddled players were below the FT line extended during the huddle, thus they were not in legal position when the whistle was blown. The other thing I just noticed was a possible mis-communication by the crew. It appears they are still in the process of administering the replacement of a disqualified player when Hammond fouled out, but the official is trying to get Baylor to the FT lane. I'm not sure if the L realized the player had fouled out.

The last call is the one that actually worries me as much as anything. The official definitely looks scared to make a call in that situation. It was a very late call and a massive double clutch before the call was made. At least he got the call correct.

Just what I saw of that portion of the game makes me seriously question the officiating of this game. Hearing comments about earlier in the game makes me think the officials never really had control of the game from the outset.

[michblue]

Originally Posted by VaTerp

That play was a prime example of why I HATE this phrase and really think it should be removed from the thinking of officials doing HS varsity level and above.

What this phrase does is essentially say, if bodies are on the floor and you don't know what to call, just call something and guess. And that's what IMO the T did here. The other two officials, who were in much better position to referee the defense, passed for a reason.

It was a BIG time flop. At the point of contact the offensive player's movement is going up. The defender throws her upper body back to draw the call and was rewarded for her acting job by the official in the worst position to see it. BIG time flop.

I guess the phrase is fine for lower levels of play where you need to remind less experienced officials to put air in the whistle on some plays. But there is no reason that experienced officials should feel the need to HAVE to have a whistle simply b/c bodies are on the floor. As long as they know how they got there and refereed the defense they should be fine.

L passed on this play because the play did not start in her primary so she is not looking at that play from start but seeing the end of it. So it is C's primary and T's secondary. I still stand behind the T's decision to blow the whistle on this play. T gave C every chance to make a call and C did not. I still feel T did the right thing by saving the crew and making the call and I still feel and believe T got the call correct.

[stripes2255]

Originally Posted by chapmaja

Because the coach in question in that game was an arrogant AH that was talking to his team from a seated position on the bench because he had been T'ed up already for arguing calls.

Forgive me if I am wrong, but I don't believe NCAA seat belt rules apply to HC's T'd up like they do in NFHS. Can someone help?

[chapmaja]

Originally Posted by VaTerp

That play was a prime example of why I HATE this phrase and really think it should be removed from the thinking of officials doing HS varsity level and above.

What this phrase does is essentially say, if bodies are on the floor and you don't know what to call, just call something and guess. And that's what IMO the T did here. The other two officials, who were in much better position to referee the defense, passed for a reason.

It was a BIG time flop. At the point of contact the offensive player's movement is going up. The defender throws her upper body back to draw the call and was rewarded for her acting job by the official in the worst position to see it. BIG time flop.

I guess the phrase is fine for lower levels of play where you need to remind less experienced officials to put air in the whistle on some plays. But there is no reason that experienced officials should feel the need to HAVE to have a whistle simply b/c bodies are on the floor. As long as they know how they got there and refereed the defense they should be fine.

I understand your opinion, and agree to a large extent. One of my complaints this post-season has been too many games I've watched have had players hitting the floor as a result of contact with another player and nothing is being called. A lot of these plays have been pretty clear blocks or PC's but nothing has been called. It's like these officials need to put some air in their whistles. I have seen too many cases this post-season where the officials are allowing offensive players to initiate contact by dropping the shoulder into the defensive player, which is clearing space for the offensive player an nothing is being called. Those need to be called because an advantage is being gained.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by michblue

... I still feel T did the right thing by saving the crew and making the call and I still feel and believe T got the call correct.

I don't see how you are saving the crew by guessing at a call that most officials think you got wrong.

Still waiting on you to state what the offensive player did wrong on this play.