NC/Kentucky game clincher (2 Clips Added)

[Raymond]

Play 1: gains possession with right foot on ground, then puts left on ground, then elevates off 2 feet. No way, no how, a travel.

[STFD]

Originally Posted by eyezen

Anyone have anything at about 1:25 left in 2nd half

North Carolina Holds Off Kentucky - ESPN Video - ESPN

Anyone have something at the 1:08 mark of the video? Appears the player controls with one foot on the ground, jumps, and starts a dribble. Maybe I'm splitting hairs. What say you?

[bob jenkins]

Play 1: T for hanging on the rim.

Play 2: Foul on blue for a push during the rebound, then a travel on white after obtaining the ball.

OR (and this is tougher because we don't know the post-game evaluation), some or all of what was called was judged to be correct *as "they" want it called* despote some overly technical wording in the book.

Or some combination of the two.

[johnny d]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Play 1: T for hanging on the rim.

No way. Not even a consideration.

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by AremRed

Play #1: Screen by UNC11 is marginal.

I’m thinking a little more than marginal. It was set outside UNC #11’s vertical plane with a stance wider than his shoulders and he extended his right hip into the path of the defender.

I’m all for the new and improved guidelines at the NCAAM & NCAAW levels but with all of the changes to make sure offensive players have freedom of movement – not to mention the change in the NCAAM code on drawing PC fouls on airborne shooters – you’ve got to throw the defense a bone. When a defender is doing what (s)he legally needs to do to stay with an offensive player and is impeded like that we need to get it.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Play 1: gains possession with right foot on ground, then puts left on ground, then elevates off 2 feet. No way, no how, a travel.

It's not as bad as I thought at first, but he has the ball in both hands while his left foot is still on the floor.

[johnny d]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

I’m all for the new and improved guidelines at the NCAAM & NCAAW levels but with all of the changes to make sure offensive players have freedom of movement – not to mention the change in the NCAAM code on drawing PC fouls on airborne shooters – you’ve got to throw the defense a bone. When a defender is doing what (s)he legally needs to do to stay with an offensive player and is impeded like that we need to get it.

I agree with this. I still think it was marginal though. I would not call this at that point in the game if it was going to be the first illegal screen call made during the game. At that point I would prefer to get something more obvious. Especially since they did not even inbound the ball to the player that was being guarded by the person who got screened. If it was called that close throughout, then I have no problem with the call.

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by johnny d

I agree with this. I still think it was marginal though. I would not call this at that point in the game if it was going to be the first illegal screen call made during the game. At that point I would prefer to get something more obvious. Especially since they did not even inbound the ball to the player that was being guarded by the person who got screened. If it was called that close throughout, then I have no problem with the call.

1. Define "more obvious."
2. As to the ball not going to the player who got the benefit of the no-call, until that pass is thrown the C doesn't know whether the UNC player is the first, second or even third option and I'd argue it doesn't/shouldn't matter. The UNC player got free - IMO - the defender was hip-checked while chasing him around a screen.
3. What does "that point in the game" have to do with anything? If it put an opponent at an illegal disadvantage that's their problem.

[johnny d]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

3. What does "that point in the game" have to do with anything? If it put an opponent at an illegal disadvantage that's their problem.

Point in the game is meaningless by itself. In combination with the fact that I thought it was a marginally illegal screen that may have been passed on earlier in the game, then late in the game is not the time to start making that kind of call. If screens were called that tightly throughout, then get that play. If there has been leeway throughout the game, now is not the time to start calling it.

[johnny d]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

1. Define "more obvious."

You really need me to tell you what obvious means in regards to making calls? I know you have way too much experience to be making such a silly statement.

[johnny d]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

2. As to the ball not going to the player who got the benefit of the no-call, until that pass is thrown the C doesn't know whether the UNC player is the first, second or even third option and I'd argue it doesn't/shouldn't matter. The UNC player got free - IMO- the defender was hip-checked while chasing him around a screen.

We can debate whether or not is should or shouldn't matter. I don't see anything wrong with holding a whistle on this play a few extra seconds to see what develops.

[JRutledge]

Play #1: Nothing if the issue is a travel. Touching proceeds possession. He is touching the ball, but not possessing it in my judgment.

Play#2: I did not see a foul live, but then I saw a foul on slow motion. I think the angle was not good for the official, but not because they were out of position, just a quick play to call in that situation. But I think it should have been called by someone, but I see why it was not called.

Peace

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by johnny d

You really need me to tell you what obvious means in regards to making calls? I know you have way too much experience to be making such a silly statement.

In the context of this play, yes. The words "more obvious" were yours, not mine.

Originally Posted by johnny d

We can debate whether or not is should or shouldn't matter. I don't see anything wrong with holding a whistle on this play a few extra seconds to see what develops.

"A few extra seconds?" Waiting a beat - a half-second to a second - is one thing. Waiting a few extra seconds, to borrow the words of an observer I met this summer, amounts to cheating. Again, his words not mine. Regardless, had UNC not gotten off the baseball pass and the throw-in gone to the player who got free due to the screen the time to call a foul is long gone.

Originally Posted by johnny d

Point in the game is meaningless by itself. In combination with the fact that I thought it was a marginally illegal screen that may have been passed on earlier in the game, then late in the game is not the time to start making that kind of call. If screens were called that tightly throughout, then get that play. If there has been leeway throughout the game, now is not the time to start calling it.

We can use the "if..." factor for a lot of plays we watch here because most of us don't see the entire game. I didn't see all of UK/UNC and it would appear you didn't either. We're just going on the merits of what's on the video. I'm still curious as to what was marginal on the contact but to each his own.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by johnny d

I agree with this. I still think it was marginal though. I would not call this at that point in the game if it was going to be the first illegal screen call made during the game. At that point I would prefer to get something more obvious. Especially since they did not even inbound the ball to the player that was being guarded by the person who got screened. If it was called that close throughout, then I have no problem with the call.

Again, my best buddy and I agree.

[JugglingReferee]

I've go nothing on the "travel", and a foul on the other play.

FWIW, I do believe in calling a travel on a breakaway... if the person travels. I didn't see this one as a travel.

The push was excessive. If there was not a push, then I have nothing.