UGA/Bama Incidental Contact/Technical Foul (Video)
 

2:49 second half on ESPN2. Bama player blocks the shot of the Georgia player, and gets him in the face following the block. Looked like incidental contact to me. Few seconds later, Mark Fox gets whacked. Followed by the usual idiocy of the commentator.

Also worth another look is the pass and crash with 4.6 seconds left.

I'd also like to see the change of the call from travel to foul at 1:38 in OT.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/EbGO4FTPeMA" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/9ldphvXGy7M" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/4lJgbCv3dAk" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

#1. Should have been a foul. Getting hit in the face like that should be called.

#2. Good call.

#3. Another good call.

Eh, he got the ball first. I'm not moved.

If it were on the arm, I'd agree. I consider getting hit in the face a little different.....a protecting the shooter kind of situation.

1. He blocks the ball, but the follow through to the face is not allowed and is not incidental.

2. The secondary defender definitely arrived in time, but it seems that most of the contact comes from his teammate who was the primary defender. I don't believe that the offensive player crashed the defender. Strange looking play.

3. Sadly, this was not a double whistle. This was Jamie Luckie deciding to call a foul AFTER his partner had whistled AND signaled a travel. There are plenty of bodies in the way, but from my review of the video it does not appear that the Georgia player rolled up on the rear foot of the player with the ball. He probably did make some contact with it. It seems that he was already off balance and falling before any contact with that rear foot. I prefer the travel call by the primary official. I also can't defend Luckie making a call well after his partner and then running in and taking it. To me that's not helping a partner that's overriding his decision. I also don't believe that he has a clear look from 40 feet away through three other players.

After a 2nd look. I agree.

#2 is a very odd play indeed. From lead, it looks like an easy offensive foul call. From the other angles though, not really sure who caused that collision. Contact with the player taking the charge came from a teammate, but I can't tell how much contact there was between the offensive player and said teammate.

1) I'm not penalizing this great play. He may have gotten him in the head, but that contact was incidental to the blocked shot.

2) The lead is straightlined on this play and not in position to see who initiated the contacr. That looks like a no-call.

3) What is Jamie Luckie doing on this play other than holding up his fist AFTER the travel call, storming in to take the call WITHOUT any concern for his partner, and then pointing at a million different bodies? I'm not convinced a foul was the correct call there, either. I'm also not happy if I'm the lead in that situation, although I realize who I'm working with.

1) A1 was smacked (dictionary definition ) in the head. I call all strikes to the head as fouls no matter how good the block is.

2) B1 actually knocked over B2

3) Rule 9-6-7 -- He maintained his pivot foot. Also, the NCAA wants a foul when a ball handler is contacted from behind and ends up on the ground.

#1- That's a foul every time if a guy gets whacked in the face like that, I don't care if it did come after a great block. Gotta protect the shooters. Follow through on the arm, I probably pass on, follow through in the face, is a foul.

#2- At first look I thought it was a good call, but in looking at it again, it definitely looks like the Georgia player was knocked over by his own teammate. Tough angle for the L to see, but I definitely don't have a team control foul here.

#3- I don't care who I'm working with, if you come storming into MY area like that and overrule MY call without at least talking to me first, then we are going to have a chat in the locker room, and I guarantee it won't be nice. I could be working with an assignor and would still give him a piece of my mind. Granted, I might not be working in that area anymore, but that was a complete bush league move by Jamie Luckie, on a call that I don't think he got correct anyways.

Before or after discussing the wrongness of calling a travel.

I could care less about whether it was a travel or a foul, in fact I'm glad I wasn't the one who had to make that call, and I know the NCAA rules differ from the NFHS rules.

My point is, it was a bush league move by Jamie Luckie, and I would not tolerate it, whether my call was wrong or not. You want to race in and talk to me about it and let ME change it, that's fine, but to come in like that, make both of us look like complete buffoons.. yea that's not going to happen without a major talk in the locker room after the game.

Would be very interested to know exactly how that postgame was.

This is a foul under every single rule set.

Could I do without the theatrics? Sure...not a big fan of it. But I also would have the belief, that at that level, if my partner comes in like this, he saw something that I didn't see and had to be got...like a foul preceding/causing a travel.

Sure, but why did Luckie wait until after the L had gone with a travel to hold up his fist and then storm on in to let everyone know who was in charge? I guarantee that if Luckie had just talked to him instead of flying in like a madman and looking like a buffoon, the L would have acquiesced without any argument.

He probably thought the lead saw the same thing he did and was going to call the foul..then realized that oh **** he went with a travel.

At this point, he's going to have to come up with a fist. And with such a late whistle, he's going to have to sell it a bit. I still don't agree with the theatrics of running in and all the pointing and what not...that I think should have been done without.

Maybe these 2 officials have worked together enough they have an understanding about these types of situations.

I was just going to say that. We work in crews mostly here, so I work with the same 2 officials 25-30 times a season. If one of my guys comes in like that, I thank him.

What was there for the L to change? Luckie had a different call that preceded that travel. He was not saying the travel was incorrect. He, like we are taught to do, watched the entire play from start to finish. The L beat him to the whistle so he held off. But, when he realized that the 2nd infraction was called instead of the first, he came in with what he had. He didn't overrule his partner. Nothing about what he did said the travel didn't happen. He just said he had a foul before the travel. That happens a lot....all without discussion. It is usually done with less theatrics, however.

He may have observed what he believed to be a foul before the travel, but he didn't actually call it before the travel. Instead he waited until after his partner whistled and signaled for a travel to then sound his whistle, put a fist in the air, and come running in like a crazy man.
That foul had better be a smack to the head or a flagrant 1 or 2 for an official to conduct himself like that. Then again we would have to ask why he simply doesn't put a whistle on the play when he observes it. If he is going to be looking there, then call there instead of trying to stay out of it until something he doesn't like occurs. In my opinion, the time for him to get involved had passed. He should have lived with and supported his partner's call.

1) It was not a travel per 9-6.7 and A.R. 198.

2) NCAA-Men's wants a foul called when A1 goes to the ground following contact from a defender who is behind A1.

3) The Lead recognized right away what Luckie was calling, and gave a nod of approval. These guys have known each other for years. They know each others' officiating personalities.

He pointed twice at the offender, and once up court for the free throws.

The lead probably went into the locker room and thanked his partner for not having this mentality and getting the call wrong....especially on a contact emphasized as a foul by the powers that be.

How much should the official have been fined this time?

Honestly, as an assignor, I don't use Luckie for two games for being overbearing towards and embarrassing his partner.

People skills are important in this and Luckie didn't exhibit any in that situation.

His partner wasn't embarrassed.

This...is a two game suspension for you?

Perhaps a talking to, but a two game suspension is over the top. You know it, and we all know it...this is nowhere close to worthy of losing any games...not in the real world.

Then you are terrible as an assigner. End of story.

I think you're right about keeping the pivot in the play. Not travel. AR 198 in latest book.

#1: No call. Blocks the ball and jumps backwards.

#2: PC Foul all the way.

#3: I have more of a travel. I think he falls more on his own. I do not like how far the T had to come the official was to make that call.

Peace

1. Foul

2. TC foul

3. I would never come in like he did and would let my partner live and die with that play right in front of him. I also don't work in the SEC, so they can do things this way if the supervisor is okay with it. There are times to go catch a big fish in someone else's pond, I have a hard time thinking this is one of those times.

I'm fine with #1 being a foul, but if this is called, it should be a common foul, no? The shooter did not release the ball on the try before he lost control of the ball, so he's not an airborne shooter.

#3 So the rules say that as long as you keep your pivot foot in college and go to the ground with a knee or both knees or forearm, this is not a travel? If so, I learned something today.

I think we had a discussion on exactly this point within the past couple of weeks.

Yes, sn important difference from the FED rules.