Vid request-Uconn BC First half 1:55 (Clip Added)

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by zm1283

You all just don't have the experience and perspective that JRut has.

If you have not seen that play many times in different forms, then NO YOU DO NOT have the experience. That is why we get paid the big bucks.

Peace

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

If you have not seen that play many times in different forms, then NO YOU DO NOT have the experience. That is why we get paid the big bucks.

Peace

And yet you still get it wrong. Being confident about your mistakes doesn't make them correct.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

And yet you still get it wrong.

Oh, based on whom? You? Since when did I work a single game for you?

Thanks for that laugh on that one.

Peace

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Oh, based on whom? You? Since when did I work a single game for you?

Thanks for that laugh on that one.

Peace

Every single person in this thread except you.

If I were assigning, I probably wouldn't use officials who make up stuff to justify incorrect calls so you would never be working for me.

[rockyroad]

It is because of blown calls like this one, and the refusal of officials such as Mr. Rutledge to make a call on plays like this one, that we have such strong directives coming down from the NCAA.

And of course, none of us have ever worked anything even remotely close to the level of ball that takes place in that one certain area of the country where things are done in the only correct way.

Oh well.

[johnny d]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

It is because of blown calls like this one, and the refusal of officials such as Mr. Rutledge to make a call on plays like this one, that we have such strong directives coming down from the NCAA.

I am just curious as to how you think a call (correct or incorrect) or non-call on this type of play is in any way remotely related to the "strong" directives coming from the NCAA on the men's side? Perhaps the NCAA-W directives are different (I wouldn't know), but this type of play has nothing to do with the directives on the men's side. Your statement above is pure hyperbole.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by johnny d

I am just curious as to how you think a call (correct or incorrect) or non-call on this type of play is in any way remotely related to the "strong" directives coming from the NCAA on the men's side? Perhaps the NCAA-W directives are different (I wouldn't know), but this type of play has nothing to do with the directives on the men's side. Your statement above is pure hyperbole.

He doesn't know because he does not work Men's College ball. And if anything if this was about the directives from the NCAA Men's side, this was properly called. After all there was contact with a dribbler and you could make a case that the contact was illegal on the defender's part based on the "Freedom of Movement" philosophy. But I do not think RSBQ was affected by the defender and why I think at most this is a no-call.

Peace

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by johnny d

I am just curious as to how you think a call (correct or incorrect) or non-call on this type of play is in any way remotely related to the "strong" directives coming from the NCAA on the men's side? Perhaps the NCAA-W directives are different (I wouldn't know), but this type of play has nothing to do with the directives on the men's side. Your statement above is pure hyperbole.

Contact on/by the ball handler is not one of the directives from the NCAA???

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by johnny d

I am just curious as to how you think a call (correct or incorrect) or non-call on this type of play is in any way remotely related to the "strong" directives coming from the NCAA on the men's side? Perhaps the NCAA-W directives are different (I wouldn't know), but this type of play has nothing to do with the directives on the men's side. Your statement above is pure hyperbole.

Just because I felt left out…

On the NCAAW side there would be a call here. I’m not going to jump into the debate on what the call would/should be but yes, NCAAW would expect a whistle on this play.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Every single person in this thread except you.

If I were assigning, I probably wouldn't use officials who make up stuff to justify incorrect calls so you would never be working for me.

It is obvious to me based on your comments, you are not in an area that really breaks down plays. We break down plays here. This kind of play is talked about in detail and if the defender did anything wrong and if the arm was illegal. And I am confident that a lot of people would have had different opinions as to the level of contact and advantage. And that is why I used the football example because in PI plays, there is a lot of debate of when or if contact influenced the play and a foul should be called. And in those videos there are situations where officials have been accused of being "too technical" in their calling such fouls. Sorry, you do not understand that fact or even want to discuss. I never said you were wrong, I just said that I do not think the arm was the result of the contact being illegal. Oh well.

Peace

Originally Posted by JRutledge

It is obvious to me based on your comments, you are not in an area that really breaks down plays. We break down plays here.

Officials break down plays everywhere, JRut. Including on this Forum. Including right now in this very thread. This is an ad hominem attack.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

The official called a "block" against the defender. He did not call a push off PC foul. Now what are you going to do, tell him he cannot work anymore?

No one is saying this, and it is absurd to suggest that anyone here is saying this. In fact, this is a Slippery Slope argument.

JRut, I have noticed you tend to defend officials based on the level that they work. I have rarely, if ever, seen you disagree with a D1 official on what he called. In cases like these, you seem to try to find justification for what he saw and why he called what he did. You are doing that in this very thread.

I have yet to see a poster in this thread agree with your defense of the block call. Numbers alone cannot quantify who is right, but with 1 person in this thread defending block and 8 or 9 defending PC this seems to suggest you are alone in your belief.

[Adam]

Sigh.

Keep it from getting personal, folks.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by AremRed

Officials break down plays everywhere, JRut. Including on this Forum. Including right now in this very thread. This is an ad hominem attack.



No one is saying this, and it is absurd to suggest that anyone here is saying this. In fact, this is a Slippery Slope argument.

JRut, I have noticed you tend to defend officials based on the level that they work. I have rarely, if ever, seen you disagree with a D1 official on what he called. In cases like these, you seem to try to find justification for what he saw and why he called what he did. You are doing that in this very thread.

I have yet to see a poster in this thread agree with your defense of the block call. Numbers alone cannot quantify who is right, but with 1 person in this thread defending block and 8 or 9 defending PC this seems to suggest you are alone in your belief.

You seem obsessed with the level we are talking about on more than one occasion. Even in basic plays you talk about, "Well in high school that is a foul......" Well I can tell you I do not call anything differently from the college level to the high school level as it relates to contact. I have the same approach and call the same game. The difference is often the overall training that officials at the college level tend to have and the philosophies they subscribe to. The only thing I ever worry about when working a college game or a high school game is the rules that might apply which is a minimal difference. Actually this year there is a major difference and that is only with the block/charge with an airborne shooter. But how I called hand-checking, illegal screens and other things the NCAA talked about was never that different for me. And if those I worked for did not like it, they could hire someone else. Well I have never been fired for calling my game and in many cases got more games as a result of my approach. Our state now has started to adopt the RSBQ philosophy and we have been doing this for years and talking about for years as clinicians at the high school level. So honestly, I have no idea what the hell you are talking about.

BTW, this was my very first statement on this play in this very thread.

I do not have anything on the defender for sure. I probably do not have a PC foul either at any level either. The extended arm does not appear to be the reason their is separation, it looks like the momentum of the players is what caused the separation, not an illegal action. Play on IMO.

Where did I defend the official in this play?

Reading is fundamental.

Peace

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by AremRed

JRut, I have noticed you tend to defend officials based on the level that they work. I have rarely, if ever, seen you disagree with a D1 official on what he called. In cases like these, you seem to try to find justification for what he saw and why he called what he did. You are doing that in this very thread.

I have yet to see a poster in this thread agree with your defense of the block call. Numbers alone cannot quantify who is right, but with 1 person in this thread defending block and 8 or 9 defending PC this seems to suggest you are alone in your belief.

I've noticed this as well. You just said it better then I was going to.

Seems to be a pretty clear offensive foul to me.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

It is obvious to me based on your comments, you are not in an area that really breaks down plays. We break down plays here. This kind of play is talked about in detail and if the defender did anything wrong and if the arm was illegal. And I am confident that a lot of people would have had different opinions as to the level of contact and advantage. And that is why I used the football example because in PI plays, there is a lot of debate of when or if contact influenced the play and a foul should be called. And in those videos there are situations where officials have been accused of being "too technical" in their calling such fouls. Sorry, you do not understand that fact or even want to discuss. I never said you were wrong, I just said that I do not think the arm was the result of the contact being illegal. Oh well.

Peace

What is clear is that you live in an imaginary world and only see what you want to see on videos. Your descriptions of the play in this case and all too many other cases just don't match what is in the video...sometimes to the point of absurdity. It isn't even a matter of breaking down the play, you actually have to be honest about what is clearly visible on the video before you can properly break down plays. When you fabricate things that just aren't there to make your point, you lose all credibility. I know things are different in Chicago and maybe that is the way things are done in your area but the rest of the country calls plays based on what really happened.


I had typed a bunch more stuff here but decided to delete it. The obvious doesn't need to be posted.