The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)
-   -   Kentucky vs Michigan (Video) (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/97651-kentucky-vs-michigan-video.html)

Nevadaref Sun Mar 30, 2014 05:03pm

Kentucky vs Michigan (Video)
 
Block/Charge with 44.5 seconds left in the first half.
(I have it as a blatant charge.)

Nevadaref Sun Mar 30, 2014 05:07pm

BI no-call on Kentucky follow-up dunk about 2:31 in the first half.

JRutledge Sun Mar 30, 2014 05:33pm

I was surprised that the BI was missed.

Peace

bballref3966 Sun Mar 30, 2014 05:37pm

Anyone catch the staredown/taunt by the Kentucky player under the basket after his big blocked shot? I thought that was an easy T that was missed.

JRutledge Sun Mar 30, 2014 05:42pm

If I am thinking about the play you are talking about, I had no problem with that situation. I would like to see it again, but there is always some emotion after a big play. If it is prolonged, then that is a different story from my point of view.

Peace

Nevadaref Sun Mar 30, 2014 05:48pm

Similar BI called at 9:47 of 2nd half.

JRutledge Sun Mar 30, 2014 05:51pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nevadaref (Post 929911)
Similar BI called at 9:47 of 2nd half.

I thought the first one was easier and more obviously missed.

Peace

canuckrefguy Sun Mar 30, 2014 05:53pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by jrutledge (Post 929908)
i was surprised that the bi was missed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jrutledge (Post 929912)
i thought the first one was easier and more obviously missed.


+1

Quote:

Originally Posted by bballref3966 (Post 929909)
anyone catch the staredown/taunt by the kentucky player under the basket after his big blocked shot? I thought that was an easy t that was missed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jrutledge (Post 929910)
if i am thinking about the play you are talking about, i had no problem with that situation. I would like to see it again, but there is always some emotion after a big play. If it is prolonged, then that is a different story from my point of view.

+1

bballref3966 Sun Mar 30, 2014 06:00pm

I don't know where staring down an opponent on the ground is considered acceptable, and I know John Adams has made his stance on unsportsmanlike behavior clear. However, I would like to see the play again as well and maybe I'll think differently. But, at least initially, I had a T or at the absolute least a stern "that's enough" when I was watching.

JRutledge Sun Mar 30, 2014 06:03pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by bballref3966 (Post 929914)
I don't know where staring down an opponent on the ground is considered acceptable, and I know John Adams has made his stance on unsportsmanlike behavior clear. However, I would like to see the play again as well and maybe I'll think differently. But, at least initially, I had a T or at the absolute least a stern "that's enough" when I was watching.

I did not say it was acceptable. But there are elephants and there are ants. I think that was an ant at best. And yes at the higher levels or even good HS games some emotion is expected. And if that is a T, any other level of emotion is a T too IMO. Again, I said I would like to see it again to be sure, but I did not think that was over the top or a slam dunk that it should have been called. I have seen a lot worse that was not penalized.

Peace

Nevadaref Sun Mar 30, 2014 06:08pm

No whistle with 1:15 remaining in 2nd half.

bballref3966 Sun Mar 30, 2014 06:53pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 929915)
I did not say it was acceptable. But there are elephants and there are ants. I think that was an ant at best. And yes at the higher levels or even good HS games some emotion is expected. And if that is a T, any other level of emotion is a T too IMO. Again, I said I would like to see it again to be sure, but I did not think that was over the top or a slam dunk that it should have been called. I have seen a lot worse that was not penalized.

Peace

Understandable and I agree, but there is a difference between self-motivation (chest pounding, screaming "let's go," etc.) and emotion that is directed at an opponent. Even of the Kentucky player's staredown was not T-worthy, it was still clearly directed at an opponent and that I why I think at least a "knock it off" would be appropriate. I have no problem with emotion, but I do have a problem with taunting and unsportsmanlike behavior directed at an opponent, especially one on the ground. The blocked shot itself did all the talking, no reason to risk costing your team two points.

JRutledge Sun Mar 30, 2014 08:53pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by bballref3966 (Post 929921)
Understandable and I agree, but there is a difference between self-motivation (chest pounding, screaming "let's go," etc.) and emotion that is directed at an opponent. Even of the Kentucky player's staredown was not T-worthy, it was still clearly directed at an opponent and that I why I think at least a "knock it off" would be appropriate. I have no problem with emotion, but I do have a problem with taunting and unsportsmanlike behavior directed at an opponent, especially one on the ground. The blocked shot itself did all the talking, no reason to risk costing your team two points.

Well not all officials have the same judgment or feeling about these things. And if you work that level you might have a different position as your judgment will be questioned more. And for all you know, they could have said something to the player or the coach. There were no problems in the game after that moment.

Peace

yooperbballref Sun Mar 30, 2014 09:24pm

Just watched the second half on the DVR.
Would have been interesting if Michigans final shot went in. On the inbound the pass was tipped but the clock did not start. Officials would have had to get out the stopwatch.

Nevadaref Sun Mar 30, 2014 11:29pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by yooperbballref (Post 929931)
Just watched the second half on the DVR.
Would have been interesting if Michigans final shot went in. On the inbound the pass was tipped but the clock did not start. Officials would have had to get out the stopwatch.

I too didn't think that the clock started properly on that play.

Camron Rust Mon Mar 31, 2014 01:25am

Quote:

Originally Posted by yooperbballref (Post 929931)
Just watched the second half on the DVR.
Would have been interesting if Michigans final shot went in. On the inbound the pass was tipped but the clock did not start. Officials would have had to get out the stopwatch.

Another reason for Precision Time (where the officials start the clock too) and not depend on the table to start it.

AremRed Mon Mar 31, 2014 04:13am

Best thing about this game? Zero clock reviews.

JetMetFan Mon Mar 31, 2014 10:39am

video added
 
Yes, I'm alive. Thank you, APG, for handling the mail this weekend.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nevadaref (Post 929906)
Block/Charge with 44.5 seconds left in the first half.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nevadaref (Post 929916)
No whistle with 1:15 remaining in 2nd half.


<iframe width="853" height="480" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/8ZG7MvCwbes?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>



Quote:

Originally Posted by Nevadaref (Post 929907)
BI no-call on Kentucky follow-up dunk about 2:31 in the first half.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nevadaref (Post 929911)
Similar BI called at 9:47 of 2nd half.

<iframe width="853" height="480" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/DXWtKzHtamA?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>


Quote:

Originally Posted by yooperbballref (Post 929931)
Just watched the second half on the DVR.
Would have been interesting if Michigans final shot went in. On the inbound the pass was tipped but the clock did not start. Officials would have had to get out the stopwatch.

<iframe width="853" height="480" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/QdI40gc7B5A?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Camron Rust Mon Mar 31, 2014 11:19am

B/C....I thought both were charges on the initial viewing live. Watching the replay now, it seems both defenders changed direction to move forward just a bit right before contact. It is very small but I think they gave up LGP by the forward movement. The C was in perfect position on the first one to make the call. That must be what he saw. On the 2nd, I don't think either the L (just rotating) or the C becoming T had that great of an angle...and didn't put a whistle on a play they couldn't see well.

BI's....both should have been BI.

Overall, I thought it was a very well officiated game....distinctly better (more consistent) than the UL/UK game two days before.

MathReferee Mon Mar 31, 2014 03:10pm

B/Cs I thought the first was PC. We have had lots of discussion about whether defensive players are moving forward at point of contact, but at what point are we splitting hairs? The way I see it, B52 had LGP, moved laterally, and then contact. Would anyone approach these plays with the ant/elephant mentality of the ant being slight forward movement (I did not notice any on first watch, but will rewatch to see) and elephant being lowering of shoulder and, IMO, the creation of the contact by A30?

I am fine with a no call on the second. I cannot tell how much contact there was from this angle.

Both BI.

Raymond Mon Mar 31, 2014 03:21pm

I have a PC on the first play, and probably a block on the 2nd one.

Both basket plays were BI.

The C actually acknowledges that the throw-in pass was tipped, but I doubt the clock operator was looking at him.

JetMetFan Mon Mar 31, 2014 04:17pm

On the first Block/PC play I can't see any movement forward by the defender. His feet moved away from the BH/dribbler until there was contact, at which point his feet stopped.

If there's any forward movement with his upper body - and I don't think there is - to me it falls in the category of firming up. As Debbie Williamson put it, "he's taking a breath because he thinks it's the last one he's ever going to take."

As to where the C was looking, I tried to watch his head and I think he just picked up the defender late.

Camron Rust Mon Mar 31, 2014 04:57pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by MathReferee (Post 930011)
B/Cs I thought the first was PC. We have had lots of discussion about whether defensive players are moving forward at point of contact, but at what point are we splitting hairs? The way I see it, B52 had LGP, moved laterally, and then contact. Would anyone approach these plays with the ant/elephant mentality of the ant being slight forward movement (I did not notice any on first watch, but will rewatch to see) and elephant being lowering of shoulder and, IMO, the creation of the contact by A30?

I am fine with a no call on the second. I cannot tell how much contact there was from this angle.

Both BI.

I would have been fine with a PC on the first, any foward movement was incredibly small. I was just looking for something that the C may have seen that led him to a block.

That said, forward is forward. You have to decide one way or the other if you're going to blow a whistle. If the defender, on such a play, is not legal, why call the foul on the player who was legal over the one who wasn't. It is the defender that has the responsibility for being in a legal position, not the offense.

AremRed Tue Apr 08, 2014 02:08am

With Ed Corbett and Randall McCall, this game was truly a celebration of old-school mechanics.

Multiple Sports Tue Apr 08, 2014 09:58am

Ed Corbett seems as though he has always stuck to his roots and has used IAABO mechanics and even an occasional bird dog.......


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:01am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1