![]() |
|
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
The Trail is looking for goaltending, a hit to the head, or contact to the forearm and wrist on this play. He's going to let the Lead determine body contact.
__________________
A-hole formerly known as BNR |
|
|||
Yes, of course. Duh me...
|
|
|||
![]()
It's these types of sequences that drive me nuts when watching college games (and my verbal spewage leads to my wife being driven nuts too), and also give me an appreciation of why inconsistency in calls drives coaches bananas.
I saw this live and was explaining to my wife about how that sequence of the non-foul and then foul was bad officiating, if for nothing else it was not consistent rulings on back-to-back similar plays. FWIW - I agree with the "should have been a foul" on the Syracuse defender and "should have been a no call" on the Dayton player. |
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
What if he saw the body contact? Is this crew-saver territory? Especially considering the double whammy Syracuse gets on the next play on the other end? Not trying to be argumentative and all, just curious, having most of my experience in two whistles... (For the record my guess: it's not CS territory.)
|
|
|||
I don't think the lead had a good angle on that play...in fact it was a poor angle. The trail had the best view through the players here and should come get that if the lead doesn't.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association |
|
|||
I think this is the right answer. Someone has to get this. Especially since they go to the other end and really, really reach for one there.
|
|
|||
The travesty is the foul call on the other end. The first play was clearly seen by the Lead and he passed on it. The Trail is trusting his partners' judgment and ref'n his portion of the play, which is the stuff going on at or above the rim. The first play was not a crew-saving call that needed to be made.
__________________
A-hole formerly known as BNR |
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'” West Houston Mike |
|
|||
What I mean is, the first one needs a whistle. But if for whatever reason it is passed on, no way does the second play need a whistle.
|
|
|||
Quote:
So ... you've never had an evaluator at a camp or a supervisor jump your shiza for not making a call, then making a bad call on the other end? Or riding you about calling a travel on A1 and then calling a foul on B1? Or whatever call, that in conjunction with another bad call, made the two plays stand out. What prognostic powers did he have? My turn... Really? |
|
|||
Quote:
I tend to agree with your implication. I find it comical when, with the advantage of hindsight, as in the situation you proposed, an evaluator criticizes actions which were unrelated, except forensically/rhetorically, and post-occurence. It always smacks of the fallacy of the basic scientific method of evaluation - "A exists, and then B exists, therefore A must have caused B." Or, in this case, "therefore, both A and B must be the results of a similar cause."
__________________
To be good at a sport, one must be smart enough to play the game -- and dumb enough to think that it's important . . . ![]() |
![]() |
Bookmarks |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Jet Man: Video Request for Dayton-Ohio State (Video) | Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. | Basketball | 27 | Sat Mar 22, 2014 07:27pm |
Video Request - Syracuse vs Duke (Video) | grunewar | Basketball | 127 | Fri Feb 28, 2014 09:08pm |
Syracuse/UM Carter-Williams video request | Raymond | Basketball | 6 | Mon Apr 08, 2013 04:13pm |
Marq/Syracuse Video please (Video Added) | justacoach | Basketball | 19 | Sun Mar 31, 2013 08:50pm |
Video Request: Syracuse v. Indiana | JRutledge | Basketball | 23 | Fri Mar 29, 2013 09:51am |