Kentucky-Belmont Women 2:40 left in game Continuous Motion (Video)
Continuous motion ???? Travel????
Thanks I believe this was on the SEC Network |
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/5KFFZW4ZUjQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
|
Looks good to me. She had picked up the ball about the same time as the contact.
|
On the Men's side, that would not be a shooting foul because upward motion had not started yet.
|
Contact occurs before gather, no shot.
|
Try hadn't begun, in my opinion. "Before the shot."
|
There's contact at all?
|
Quote:
|
First, a big thanks to jeschmit for finding and posting the clip.
The reason I was interested in this clip is due to the fact that recently in my observations provided to me by certified officials they have commented on how they think I am too liberal with my continuation rulings. I just happened to be flipping through games and by luck caught this play. I believe I would have made the same ruling, but was interested to see what others thought. I believe there was also a follow up replay of this which showed the angle from the endline and it brought up another issue which you can't see too well from the currently posted clip. The issue concerns a potential travel. I would be interested in hearing other thoughts on this. If a player travels on a continuation play then the goal could not count, is that correct? Of course, the player would then be entitled to two free throws, right? |
Quote:
|
If there was contact, and I do mean IF, the contact was while White-3 was still dribbling. And if there was contact, and I do mean IF, I have a charge by White-3 against Blue-12.
MTD, Sr. P.S. I do not wish it denigrate our members who are currently officiating women's college basketball, but please do not bring the LDB in to the discussion of this play, because I am getting ready to leave for a game and I currently do not have time to prove the ignorance of the people on the NCAA-W Rules Committee of the history and reasoning behind the definition of Guarding, who are trying to hoist a piece of horse manure upon the game of basketball. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Don't worry about it. Sometimes MTD has a hard time refraining from editorializing while giving history lessons. |
Edmund Burke ...
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
Foxtrot, Lima, Oscar, Papa.
|
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/TmolqFC_oEM" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
|
I still see a foul. I still don't see how you count the basket.
|
Blocking foul for really poor acting, no travel, and count the basket, plus award one FT as this gives the defender the maximum punishment.
Can you tell that I don't like attempts to deceive the officials? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
From that angle I see a block. But W3 was still dribbling the ball when the foul occured. MTD, Sr. |
From the tape:
If its in may game its probably a no call and count the hoop. If I am calling a foul its a block on the defender and ball out of bounds. |
At full speed I see a block for the defender's left knee contact and reroute of the B/H. Also at full speed I thought she had not ended her dribble. She does catch it right after the contact so i can see why the continuation. IMHO, she had not completed the dribble and should have been ball out of bounds on the endline to white. I talked with one of the partners on the game and he told me they were all fine with the call. In fact they thought it was "an easy one" and were fine with the continuous motion ruling.
|
Quote:
|
I do not even see a foul. I see a flop that hardly resulted in any contact. The dribbler kept going and did not seem to be altered in any way because of the contact.
Peace |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:09pm. |