The Official Forum
Page 5 of 5 « First 34 5
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)
-   -   Block Charge play (Video) (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/97291-block-charge-play-video.html)

Raymond Thu Feb 20, 2014 08:03pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by stick (Post 923882)
... And fwiw, I'm not debating or challenging anyones version of the call at all. ....
You watched the video and made this statement:

"Tough call to make. The replay does show the defender moving upon impact. The official made a god call afaict."

That's what's your were questioned about. Nobody asked you explain what the official the video was thinking.

Camron Rust Fri Feb 21, 2014 03:58am
Quote:
Originally Posted by stick (Post 923882)
LOL A true funny man you are. And fwiw, I'm not debating or challenging anyones version of the call at all. Only answering what I was asked. No need for you make it personal.
Personal? What was personal about what I said?

What you're doing is defending the indefensible.

stick Fri Feb 21, 2014 10:27am
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadNewsRef (Post 923890)
Of course I have. Anybody official worth their salt has done that. You need to be your own worst critic.
With critics like you around that might not be possible. ;)

stick Fri Feb 21, 2014 10:34am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. (Post 923891)
If I were evaluating you and you called it a block I would have told you were wrong and to review the rule book and referee defense from now on.

MTD, Sr.
That's fine Mark and I appreciate your advice.

stick Fri Feb 21, 2014 10:38am
[QUOTE=Camron Rust;923937]Personal? What was personal about what I said?

Explain what the intent of posting this was:

"You might as well claim he might have seen the defender punch him in the nose, pull his shorts down, and spit in his face."

stick Fri Feb 21, 2014 10:49am
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadNewsRef (Post 923893)
You watched the video and made this statement:

"Tough call to make. The replay does show the defender moving upon impact. The official made a god call afaict."

That's what's your were questioned about. Nobody asked you explain what the official the video was thinking.
And I addressed that, but it's not my problem that it might not satisfy you. FWIW, I never stated what that official WAS thinking, there's no way anyone but him could say what that was. I only stated what he MIGHT have been thinking. And that was in response to a members question.
Now, I'll let you be last word lucy.

Raymond Fri Feb 21, 2014 11:36am
Quote:
Originally Posted by stick (Post 923988)
And I addressed that, but it's not my problem that it might not satisfy you. FWIW, I never stated what that official WAS thinking, there's no way anyone but him could say what that was. I only stated what he MIGHT have been thinking. And that was in response to a members question.
Now, I'll let you be last word lucy.
I'm glad I'll never have to read one of your indecisive, pass-the-buck, game reports. :rolleyes:

Adam Fri Feb 21, 2014 11:53am
Quote:
Originally Posted by stick (Post 923980)
With critics like you around that might not be possible. ;)
Imagine the criticism you'd receive if you actually made this horrible call rather than just tried to find some justification for it.

Camron Rust Fri Feb 21, 2014 12:32pm
[QUOTE=stick;923986]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 923937)
Personal? What was personal about what I said?

Explain what the intent of posting this was:

"You might as well claim he might have seen the defender punch him in the nose, pull his shorts down, and spit in his face."
Not personal, just pointing out the absurdity of the position you're taking.

And if you think that is personal, wow. You must have a tough time being an official.

AremRed Fri Feb 21, 2014 12:48pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by stick (Post 923986)
Explain what the intent of posting this was
Camron didn't say anything personally attacking you. He just used a reductio ad absurdum argument against you. A fallacious argument maybe, but not personal.

Raymond Fri Feb 21, 2014 12:56pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by AremRed (Post 924016)
Camron didn't say anything personally attacking you. He just used a reductio ad absurdum argument against you. A fallacious argument maybe, but not personal.
I'm glad I'm in an ethics class, so I halfway understand this. :cool:

Adam Fri Feb 21, 2014 12:59pm
This one is expired.

Rich Fri Feb 21, 2014 12:59pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by AremRed (Post 924016)
Camron didn't say anything personally attacking you. He just used a reductio ad absurdum argument against you. A fallacious argument maybe, but not personal.
Look at Mr. College making his smarty-pants observation. :D

(Edited to add: Whoops. Looks like I posted just after Adam closed the thread. Sorry, Adam. Let's end on me poking AremRed, k?)


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:48pm.
Page 5 of 5 « First 34 5
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1