Kentucky vs. Louisville (Video)
 

A couple no-calls (push at 16:06 and hit on the arm at 12:46) have caused Calipari to go into a tizzy. He has been warned.

Clear stepping out of bounds violation missed by the Lead around 10:24 of first half.
I'm going to blame the silly design of the floor marking. Never understood the 2-inch line inside of the thick and solid OOB area. Just paint the entire thing!

I like how the officials passed on the contact at 11:05 and then the same exact contact on the other end at 10:57. Perhaps both were fouls, but treated consistently.

I missed an OOB call very similar this season. Not sure the double marking has anything to do with it, I think the official just looked down late.

Harrell called for PC at 2:17, I thought he stayed under control and went to the (legal) defender but not through him.

NevadaRef:

I agree with you about the silly design of the floor marking. I am finding it at all levels on new courts. That said, I do not know how he missed the call because he was looking down right at the player's feet. I would have thought he would have called a foul if he thought the player was pushed out of bounds.

My "Better Half" called out of bounds when she watched the play has it happened live (of course it helps to have a 46" HD screen on which to watch the game, :D).

MTD, Sr.

I believe that when the player's foot came down it completely covered the 2-inch line, but did not touch the fat painted area outside of that. If the official was solely focused on the foot in that small area and while looking in that small spot sees inbounds-colored court to the side of the foot, it would appear that the player was inbounds.

He displaced the defender. That's all which is required by rule. PC was the proper call. Even Pitino said so in his halftime interview!

I don't think he displaced the defender, the "through" I mentioned. I thought the offensive player maintained control and stopped at contact, making the contact with the defender incidental.

You are using screening principles to judge a guarding situation. Hence, you are reaching the wrong conclusion.

Stopping at contact is only sufficient with a blind screen when the player with the ball is not involved. I haven't seen the play, but it's not the right way to judge whether there's a PC foul or not.

Same play at 13:07, this time no-called.

I sure whatever adult beverage Mrs. MTD has had this evening also helped in her judgment :D:D:D

+1

It reminded me of the thread earlier in the week about the plays in the Syr / Dayton game.

Incorrect whistle for GT (perhaps BI depending upon angle) against Kentucky at 8:00 of 2nd half.

Jet Man: Video Request
 

Jet Man:

Can you get a video from 8:30 to the 8:23 of the 2nd half? Thanks.

MTD, Sr.

Joe DeRosa
 

Putting Joe on this game was really smart. Both coaches had him in their NBA days.....this was a good call by Adams.

If you think that John Adams considered something from 15 years ago when making an assignment, you are giving him a great deal of credit.

Calipari was last a HC in the NBA in 1999.

Missed PC at 5:08.

1:30 2nd half. Anyone have a PC foul before the foul called on Louisville?

Not me. If a foul was called on that, it was a block. Fine with the no call. The defender didn't have LGP.

Harrell's 4th Foul....
 

That was a pretty marginal "and 1" for a fourth foul in this game....

I need Louisville in my pool.....

Yes. 100%.

14.2 seconds. That looked clean, my a$$. Easy shooting foul, good patient whistle.

Verticality !!!!!
 

Start the debate !!!!

Randle's foul with 14.2 left? I thought he maintained verticality pretty well.

Looked to me like the defender maintained a legal guarding position.

JM

He wasn't vertical. Jumped into the shooter.

Hmm. Would like to see the video on that one. The replays they showed looked pretty vertical. :confused:

To me, it looked like the shooter jumped into him.

(Of course, I don't even DO basketball, and you just worked a state final so...)

JM

No foul at 14.2 seconds. Defender stayed legal and moved with vertical plane. Not a huge miss though.

I'm not saying the shooter didn't initiate the contact to a certain degree. I'm saying that the defender wasn't entirely vertical, that he moved into the shooter.

I'm a big believer in verticality - I just think it's a stretch to say this defender was vertical.

I thought the same thing when I saw this one. Arm was down a bit, but I didn't think the contact warranted a whistle at all. No disadvantage.

Or maybe not a miss at all.

I don't have "a dog in this fight".....to the officiating crew in the UK v U of L game - you gotta be better than that!

That is a vertical defender in my opinion. If the Louisville player had made both FTs the call would have had a substantial impact. As it turned out he only made 1 of 2 and still being behind Louisville had to foul.

Watch the defender's hands while he's in the air in the view from the endline. That'll tell you which direction the defender was moving (into the shooter).

This is where I wish more of us really took a firm grasp of the NBA school of thought.....if that ball rolls of rim and you really want a foul come get it late....

Someone will post a video. I'm guessing that it's unlikely people will move off their opinions, though.

I'd like the no call at 1:30, too, if anyone can grab it. That one, I also suspect, will have disagreement that the video may not settle.

Watching high lites on TBS....
somebody please shut up Doug Gottlieb!!!!

Doug is actually the only one making sense.

I think that was the most physical game of the season, hands down.

I also thought there were four or five handchecks that went uncalled on Louisville during their full-court pressing.

Guess your a Dorris Burke fan as well.....:D:D:D

Versatility? He was straight up and down in his orientation, but not in his direction of movement. He jumped into the shooter.

I thought it was very physical at times and very tightly called at others....seemed like the level of contact that drew a whistle varied substantially throughout.

I agree with you Camron.

MTD, Sr.

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/2YtCHgqhz8s" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/n33O4DOEaL4" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/r5AY66rIh1s" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/UFAuaHxZniw" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/4BxgWlLGpQY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/boNGsnyB3Cc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/zwcce-DrWx0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/TJNdesgrkXo" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/OFVt8tnoxnQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/J-uF3_N8dNU" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Endline camera angle shows it...you can see body contact before the block, and there is non-vertical movement. But I disagree that the contact is due completely to the defender "moving into" the shooter. A 50/50 bargain there, I think.

But I'm going to change my mind on this one - gotta protect the shooter.

APG, can we get the pregame, too?

Pretty much the exact same play and it wasn't called consistently. This is when coaches are right when they complain about the same play not being called the same of both ends of the court. And yes, I expect as a crew to remember what we called earlier in the game.

Play #1: Looks to me more like a mistimed jump. I saw this live and I did not think it was a foul.

Play #2: It looked like it went off of UL player. But that is the benefit of replay. ;)

Play #3: Clearly out of bounds, but I understand how it was missed. It is sometimes hard to see all of this coming at you and catch the feet. I know I have missed a call or two like this in my lifetime.

Play #4: First play on the Kentucky end, I think that is nothing. Good defense and no displacement.

Play #5: Good charge call IMO.

Play #6: I think this is a charge, but an embellishment which is why the call was likely not made.

Play #7: That was not GT. The ball was blocked then touched with no chance to go in the basket. But that is a touch call and easier to see on replay.

Play #8: PC Foul and an easy one IMO.

Play #9: I think this is also a PC foul for the same reason in play #8. But I think this was probably a tougher call because of how the players came together. I can see why this one was not called and the other should have been.

Play #10: Seeing this after the fact. I first thought this was a foul live. I see it now and it was IMO a vertical defender. And the shooter throws himself into the defender.

Peace

#1...back push...i think the UK player exaggerated the contact, good no call.
#2. I think the ball brushed the defender's shorts as it went by. Should have been UK ball.
#3. OOB...should have been OOB, pretty obvious....but the lines could be confusing.
#4. Two B/C plays. I thought the UL defender was legal, no call there. I thought the UK defender on the other end was not legal, block.
#5...B/C....embellished to some degree, but still a charge.
#6....B/C....wrong camera angle to tell either way.
#7...GT...correct call. It was on the way down and looked like it was still outside the cylinder (but that was very close). It may very well have missed after the first tip (making it no longer a GT), but that would be hard to tell that close to the basket and live. It went in anyway so it doesn't really matter. And even if it was BI, it doesn't really matter either as the penalty is the same.
#8...B/C.....PC.
#9...nocall before foul...no call was fine...defender wasn't legal, but the contact was marginal.
#10...block call on blocked shot...good call. Defender jumped into shooter taking away his elevation allowing him to get to the block.

Play 1: Pushing foul. Tough though, cuz the pass is so far over his head.

Play 2: Foul. OOB cuz I don't see a shooting motion.

Play 3: OOB.

Play 4: Good job officials!

Play 5: No call.

Play 6: No call.

Play 7: Not GT due to the block.

Play 8: Charge.

Play 9: Charge.

Play 10: Probably a foul.

play #9 b/c involving Hancock - I thought if anything it was a block. He wasn't able to maintain his LGP. I was fine with the no call.

play 10 - thought this was a great block live, and slow mo shows that it was. Vertical defender with a clean block up top. Offensive player creates the contact by jumping into defender.

Before any of us are quick to criticize these guys (and I'm not going to do that), I think it's useful to look through the thread and see how we differ on these calls EVEN WITH the benefit of replay and slow motion / stop action.