The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Sat Mar 21, 2015, 03:13pm
APG APG is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 5,889
Cincinnati vs Kentucky Contact Dead Ball Technical Foul (Video)

Regarding an earlier discussion on the merits that the exact same standards of a(n) intentional/flagrant technical foul (dead ball contact) must mean the exact physical requirements for a(n) intentional/flagrant personal foul (live ball contact)...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevadaref View Post
That is merely your opinion. You have nothing written in the rules to support your personal stance that there is a difference between live and dead ball intentional/excessive contact.
Furthermore, my opinion is that you are incorrect. The standard is the same by rule.

Quote:
Originally Posted by APG View Post
Nothing I said is not supported by rule...I just stated the real world expectation/interpretation. Contact being ignored unless it's intentional or flagrant almost always deals with deciding whether to T or ignore contact that occurs at or near the time the ball becomes dead.

Watch any college game where there's a dead ball contact T...I guarantee you that a good percentage of those plays, the contact, if it would have occurred during a live ball would NOT be called a FF1...but they would be backed up by rule and their supervisors cause the contact was excessive for the situation...even if it wouldn't be for a live ball.

Cincinnati vs UK

Contact dead ball T...perfect example of contact that would be a common foul during live ball play....but called a T during a dead ball.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BadNewsRef View Post
You beat me to it. Per Nevada's interpretation, this should be ignored in both NFHS and NCAA.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam View Post
Can't wait to see that video.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadNewsRef View Post
It was basically a shoulder bump while crossing paths.
__________________
Chaos isn't a pit. Chaos is a ladder. Many who try to climb it fail and never get to try again. The fall breaks them. And some, given a chance to climb, they refuse. They cling to the realm, or the gods, or love. Illusions.

Only the ladder is real. The climb is all there is.

Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 23, 2015, 06:08am
APG APG is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 5,889
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fL976eQ6juQ

__________________
Chaos isn't a pit. Chaos is a ladder. Many who try to climb it fail and never get to try again. The fall breaks them. And some, given a chance to climb, they refuse. They cling to the realm, or the gods, or love. Illusions.

Only the ladder is real. The climb is all there is.

Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 23, 2015, 07:49am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 3,505
It was starting to get chirpy, and I think this was a good T to settle everyone down.
__________________
in OS I trust
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 23, 2015, 09:21am
Stubborn Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 1,517
Why did Ellis (Cin) get away with all that instigating? What Harrison (Ken) did isn't right, but how can the officials ignore the fact that Ellis was the root of the problem (at least here, as I don't know what happened before this sequence)?
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 23, 2015, 09:42am
Courageous When Prudent
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Hampton Roads, VA
Posts: 14,839
Quote:
Originally Posted by BryanV21 View Post
Why did Ellis (Cin) get away with all that instigating? What Harrison (Ken) did isn't right, but how can the officials ignore the fact that Ellis was the root of the problem (at least here, as I don't know what happened before this sequence)?
Officials should have had a quick trigger on Ellis, IMO. He had just been tossed from the previous game for a FF2.
__________________
A-hole formerly known as BNR
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 23, 2015, 12:03pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Earth- For Now
Posts: 872
Quote:
Originally Posted by BryanV21 View Post
Why did Ellis (Cin) get away with all that instigating? What Harrison (Ken) did isn't right, but how can the officials ignore the fact that Ellis was the root of the problem (at least here, as I don't know what happened before this sequence)?
Agreed. The Cincy player was the troublemaker here and got away with a lot of instigating.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 23, 2015, 12:04pm
Esteemed Participant
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Vancouver, WA
Posts: 4,775
This is a great example of how "talking" to the players doesn't always work. We (including myself here) think we can talk to players and get things settled down in these types of situations. Most of the time that works great...but when dealing with known knuckleheads, maybe talking isn't the best way to handle things. If Ellis gets a DB Contact T in the first play, the second probably never happens.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 23, 2015, 08:15pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 1,742
Ellis is some of the most problematic baggage I've seen a coach have to deal with in a long time. To be humbled by the FF2 he had 2 days before and then come back as if nothing had happened....and act with the same shenanigans? Holy smokes.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 23, 2015, 08:20pm
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by crosscountry55 View Post
Ellis is some of the most problematic baggage I've seen a coach have to deal with in a long time. To be humbled by the FF2 he had 2 days before and then come back as if nothing had happened....and act with the same shenanigans? Holy smokes.
Tells me he may not have really been as "humbled" as he tried to appear.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 23, 2015, 09:19pm
In Time Out
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 794
shades of Dennis Rodman come to mind.
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 24, 2015, 01:19pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 14,995
Following the first personal foul the Kentucky player took a swipe at the Cinci player. The Cinci player was no angel, but that action by the Kentucky player meets the definition of a Class A unsporting technical foul. I would penalize him right then. I don't see the actions of anything else in this clip rising to that level. I do not agree with the technical foul that was eventually assessed to the Kentucky player following the second personal foul. Ellis of Cinci actually moved to his right to pick off Harrison as he walks by and makes his shoulder bump look worse. I would tell those two to knock it off and keep an eye them for further issues.

Lastly, please compare the language in 10-3-1d with the text of the new 10-3-2i. Curious that one uses "and" and the other "or" when they are basically the same in the rest of the rule. Why the difference for players versus bench personnnel?

Last edited by Nevadaref; Tue Mar 24, 2015 at 01:29pm.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 24, 2015, 01:55pm
Courageous When Prudent
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Hampton Roads, VA
Posts: 14,839
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevadaref View Post
...I do not agree with the technical foul that was eventually assessed to the Kentucky player following the second personal foul. Ellis of Cinci actually moved to his right to pick off Harrison as he walks by and makes his shoulder bump look worse. I would tell those two to knock it off and keep an eye them for further issues.
...
And if Ellis did the exact same thing later on, would you call a T or tell him to knock it off again? If you would call a T, what would it be for?
__________________
A-hole formerly known as BNR
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 24, 2015, 02:00pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 14,995
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadNewsRef View Post
And if Ellis did the exact same thing later on, would you call a T or tell him to knock it off again? If you would call a T, what would it be for?
No.
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 24, 2015, 02:05pm
Courageous When Prudent
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Hampton Roads, VA
Posts: 14,839
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevadaref View Post
No.
Hmm, "no" to 3 different questions. So if he did it again, just ignore it?
__________________
A-hole formerly known as BNR
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 24, 2015, 02:18pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 14,995
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadNewsRef View Post
Hmm, "no" to 3 different questions. So if he did it again, just ignore it?
I believe that you are confused. Ellis didn't get T'd for anything during the game. I have stated that I would not have T'd him either. I would continue to observe him though in case his antics cross the threshold for an unsporting technical foul. You inquired if I would T him for the exact same thing again later in the game. The answer is no. His action is below the level of a technical foul no matter how many times he does it. He simply has my attention for the rest of the game so that I don't miss something that he does which does warrant a T.

Apparently, you would have T'd Ellis during this contest. I don't agree with your assessment.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
UGA/Bama Incidental Contact/Technical Foul (Video) SC Official Basketball 35 Sat Feb 28, 2015 12:12pm
Oklahoma/Butler Foul and Contact Dead Ball T (Video) bballref3966 Basketball 21 Tue Dec 02, 2014 10:19am
Dead ball contact (Video) JRutledge Basketball 29 Mon Mar 10, 2014 12:42pm
St. Johns v. Villanova: Dead Ball Contact Technical Foul APG Basketball 14 Mon Jan 07, 2013 12:13pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:56pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1