Louisville-Uc Irvine - refs in the press again (Video)

[rsl]

I like the no call.

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2015/03/loui...caa-tournament

[SC Official]

It should be emphasized that a foul call here would not have put UC-Irvine on the line–Louisville was using its remaining fouls to give.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by rsl

I like the no call.

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2015/03/loui...caa-tournament

I liked it, too.

[hbk314]

What made you guys like a no call?

[Referee24.7]

What does it matter even if it was a "TAKE FOUL" (which is what it was), that's an OBVIOUS FOUL

It gives off the perception to many paranoid fans already that the refs are on the scoreboard and are just trying to get out of there. . .

[jpgc99]

I don't see any illegal contact. The defender went for the ball and cleanly knocked the ball loose. A different camera angle might make me change my mind, but from the angle provided I don't see a foul.

Now, the writing of the article? Absolutely terrible. I'm going to look for a sports journalism forum and go bash Chris Chase.

[MechanicGuy]

Originally Posted by Referee24.7

What does it matter even if it was a "TAKE FOUL" (which is what it was), that's an OBVIOUS FOUL

It gives off the perception to many paranoid fans already that the refs are on the scoreboard and are just trying to get out of there. . .

Those kind of fans don't deserve a second thought.

I have no problem questioning a specific call, but using said call to question an official's integrity is outrageous.

FWIW, I would've had a foul on the play. I think the contact came before the defender got to the ball.

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by Referee24.7

It gives off the perception to many paranoid fans already that the refs are on the scoreboard and are just trying to get out of there. . .

I'm sorry, but since when is it our job to care what said "paranoid fans" think?

Good luck in your officiating pursuits if you adjudicate plays based on the perceptions of "paranoid fans."

[Camron Rust]

From the only video I've seen, I can't even say whether there was contact or not. Certainly not good enough to question the call.

Even if there was contact, it is possible that the defender had already poked the ball away making it a lot harder to justify the contact was a foul.

[APG]

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

From the only video I've seen, I can't even say whether there was contact or not. Certainly not good enough to question the call.

Even if there was contact, it is possible that the defender had already poked the ball away making it a lot harder to justify the contact was a foul.

This.

I credit the official for not just automatically calling a foul when the player lunged. Surely they knew that they only had 5 team fouls and were looking for Louisville to commit a foul.

The Irvine player was careless and paid for it. Watching the video it looked like the dribbler lost control on his own before the Louisville player could even try to foul him.

[mutantducky]

no foul.

gawd I hate dumb coaches when they yell at me to call the Reaching Foul on plays like this

[Raymond]

I do not see a foul. Good judgment by Center, he saw the play.

[jpgc99]

After seeing the additional views, this is an outstanding no call.

Lesson for all of us: do not anticipate the foul, do not assume the foul. Referee the contact from start to finish. Very impressive work by the C to make the correct ruling on this!

Looks like a foul to me. Body then ball.