Rules Question on strange D1 Ending (Video)

[Rich]

Is anyone here surprised that the supervisor, essentially, threw the official under the bus? He played the "veteran official" card even though he wasn't even on the court.

http://www.pennlive.com/sports/index...bucknell-.html

I wonder what John Adams would feel about this.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Rich

Is anyone here surprised that the supervisor, essentially, threw the official under the bus? He played the "veteran official" card even though he wasn't even on the court.

http://www.pennlive.com/sports/index...bucknell-.html

I wonder what John Adams would feel about this.

I don't trust the context of the interviewer's question. Who knows at what part of the conversation that question was asked.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

I don't trust the context of the interviewer's question. Who knows at what part of the conversation that question was asked.

"We have 890-some referees and they see that. At whatever level of ability they are, they have to process that and say, 'OK, if I see that, what am I going to do with it?'"

Greenwood's quotes don't make him look very good here, regardless of context. And the denigration of "Saturday night specials" in the article is the equivalent of me pointing out that these games are D1 in name only.

Also, note that the same violation was called earlier in the game. There's the warning that Greenwood waxes poetic about.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Rich

"We have 890-some referees and they see that. At whatever level of ability they are, they have to process that and say, 'OK, if I see that, what am I going to do with it?'"
....

I don't see that as a negative statement. That how he processes plays. Greenwood is very much an "official's" supervisor. He backed his officials in the big Cincy/Xavier fight when, IMO, there were a few mistakes made by the officials leading up to, and during, the incident. He also backed his officials in the A10 championship game a few years ago that ended in multiple technical fouls.

I think you are reading way too much into the isolated quotes in the article. Again, we don't know the context of the statements as they relate to the flow and sequence of questions from the interviewer.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

I don't see that as a negative statement. That how he processes plays. Greenwood is very much an "official's" supervisor. He backed his officials in the big Cincy/Xavier fight when, IMO, there were a few mistakes made by the officials leading up to, and during, the incident. He also backed his officials in the A10 championship game a few years ago that ended in multiple technical fouls.

I think you are reading way too much into the isolated quotes in the article. Again, we don't know the context of the statements as they relate to the flow and sequence of questions from the interviewer.

I'll take your word for it. Doesn't matter to me, as I'm not in that world.

I just know that as a HS supervisor I would leave it as "it's a correct call." Our officials take way too much crap for $60.

[KCRC]

Iowa St. vs. Kansas last night. First Kansas possession of the 2nd half. Same play. No call. I don't know how to post the video.

[VaTerp]

Originally Posted by Rich

"We have 890-some referees and they see that. At whatever level of ability they are, they have to process that and say, 'OK, if I see that, what am I going to do with it?'"

Greenwood's quotes don't make him look very good here, regardless of context. And the denigration of "Saturday night specials" in the article is the equivalent of me pointing out that these games are D1 in name only.

Also, note that the same violation was called earlier in the game. There's the warning that Greenwood waxes poetic about.

I don't see anything at all wrong with the quote above from Greenwood. You make an excellent point though about the violation being called earlier in the game. The article certainly glazes over that. Overall though, I found it to be a surprisingly good article that sheds light on some of the finer points of officiating that usually do not get discussed outside the realm of officials.

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

I don't see that as a negative statement. That how he processes plays. Greenwood is very much an "official's" supervisor. He backed his officials in the big Cincy/Xavier fight when, IMO, there were a few mistakes made by the officials leading up to, and during, the incident. He also backed his officials in the A10 championship game a few years ago that ended in multiple technical fouls.

I think you are reading way too much into the isolated quotes in the article. Again, we don't know the context of the statements as they relate to the flow and sequence of questions from the interviewer.

Agreed. I don't really know Greenwood but have had some interaction with him and know some who work for him. I think he is trying to be candid while also supporting his official here. Its a fine line to walk but I don't see it as him throwing him under the bus.

[mutantducky]

I applaud the ref for his courage in making the call especially since it seemed the offensive player gained an advantage. For me this is an issue the refs(NCAA rules) should address because it can be considered unfair for the team that was penalized because this is a play you see without any violation called.

but as the article notes-

"In fact, the same rare call had been whistled against Bucknell earlier in the game by another member of the crew."

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by mutantducky

I applaud the ref for his courage in making the call especially since it seemed the offensive player gained an advantage. For me this is an issue the refs(NCAA rules) should address because it can be considered unfair for the team that was penalized because this is a play you see without any violation called.

but as the article notes-

"In fact, the same rare call had been whistled against Bucknell earlier in the game by another member of the crew."

I'm not agreeing with the bolded comment you keep on making. Players do run OOB a lot, but it is only a violation if they receive the next pass.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by mutantducky

For me this is an issue the refs(NCAA rules) should address because it can be considered unfair for the team that was penalized because this is a play you see without any violation called.

I think the NCAA disagrees with you firmly, considering that enforcing this very rule is a POE this year.