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?

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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?

[bgtg19]

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?

Right, except that the *whole* team was huddled with coach, including the player who was supposed to be at the line ready to shoot her FT. Her teammates don't have to be there, but doesn't the shooter have to be there?

A Louisville player did foul out, but in the video you can see all 5 Louisville players standing on the court ready to play (4 of them in their lane spaces) and the ref goes toward the Baylor bench and tweets her whistle to get a shooter....

[Adam]

Originally Posted by bgtg19

Right, except that the *whole* team was huddled with coach, including the player who was supposed to be at the line ready to shoot her FT. Her teammates don't have to be there, but doesn't the shooter have to be there?

A Louisville player did foul out, but in the video you can see all 5 Louisville players standing on the court ready to play (4 of them in their lane spaces) and the ref goes toward the Baylor bench and tweets her whistle to get a shooter....

And what else would you suggest the ref should do?

Besides, which is it?

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.

Were there four or five players huddled with the coach?

[sj]

I'm going to open up a can of worms just to understand better.

Concerning the call at 16 seconds is there any procedure, allowance or mechanic where either the C, or the L, can go to the T to discuss the play?

If I'm a C in a situation like this and I had no foul and I know 100% that the T is wrong can we discuss it, find out what each other had, and then if the T wants to, change the call to nothing?

By asking I'm not saying it should be done but just simply asking to understand the pluses and minuses of doing so.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by sj

I'm going to open up a can of worms just to understand better.

Concerning the call at 16 seconds is there any procedure, allowance or mechanic where either the C, or the L, can go to the T to discuss the play?

If I'm a C in a situation like this and I had no foul and I know 100% that the T is wrong can we discuss it, find out what each other had, and then if the T wants to, change the call to nothing?

By asking I'm not saying it should be done but just simply asking to understand the pluses and minuses of doing so.

I guess you can discuss anything, but what is that going to do? You have an opinion and they have an opinion. And we could do that all day and every call. Not a good way to officiate.

Peace

[Referee24.7]

Since this has still been moving. . .

- The kick-ball call at 16 seconds where they come to talk. You HAVE to do that because by rule, its an illegal touch, nuff said. If I work with any partner and they come and ask me if the ball was kicked and the clock ran, rest assured, after the game, I'm going to thank them for it, and not be upset that they came to talk to me about it. . .

If any of us are working a game like that where every play and situation has impact and could affect the outcome of the game, whether it takes 3 seconds or 3 minutes in talking to get it right, that's what we have to do because its about the game.

Now, that being said, do I feel there should be a time limit when going to look at the monitor like they have in the NFL - that, I believe, will be a discussion that both mens' and womens' committees will have after the tournament is over. . .

All of us have personalities as well and those people that are working those types of games, for the most part, many of them are severely "Type A", so when you put 3 of those Type A's together - sometimes its great for the game, and other times, well. . .(please see Hess-Stuart on Marquette-UConn game), etc etc. . .

Bottom line for me is I'd much rather work with someone who isn't "safe" and says whats in their gut on the floor than to be that person and come into the locker room in postgame and say it after the fact. . .

[bgtg19]

Originally Posted by Adam

And what else would you suggest the ref should do?

Besides, which is it?

Were there four or five players huddled with the coach?

Adam, I'm not sure what you are asking ("which is it?"). There are 5 Baylor players huddled with the coach. There are 4 Louisville players lined up in lane spaces. There is one Louisville player outside the 3-point line, out toward half-court. I never suggested that there were four players huddled with the coach....

As for what to do? I don't know. I thought people here might have some insight as to the right way to handle it. On the one hand, I don't think you can do much other than what she did (step toward the huddle and tweet); a T under those circumstances might be overly officious. On the other hand, to let the whole team huddle (including the shooter) while everyone else is ready to resume play is giving an unfair advantage to Baylor which, as I mentioned, had no time outs left at that point. But the graciousness of the officials toward Baylor was not something Coach Mulkey emphasized in her post-game press conference....

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by bgtg19

Adam, I'm not sure what you are asking ("which is it?"). There are 5 Baylor players huddled with the coach. There are 4 Louisville players lined up in lane spaces. There is one Louisville player outside the 3-point line, out toward half-court. I never suggested that there were four players huddled with the coach....

As for what to do? I don't know. I thought people here might have some insight as to the right way to handle it. On the one hand, I don't think you can do much other than what she did (step toward the huddle and tweet); a T under those circumstances might be overly officious. On the other hand, to let the whole team huddle (including the shooter) while everyone else is ready to resume play is giving an unfair advantage to Baylor which, as I mentioned, had no time outs left at that point. But the graciousness of the officials toward Baylor was not something Coach Mulkey emphasized in her post-game press conference....

Based on the one time that I saw the clip (so this might not be right), Baylor was huddling because the Louisville player had fouled out. Once the player let, and the official let them know that, they came out. The game wasn't delayed.

What the official did appeared to be good game management. Calling an immediate T for the FT shooter not being in the circle at the exact instant the player was replaced would have led to even more Ts.