|
|
Post by Problem of Dog on Apr 7, 2019 14:07:24 GMT -5
Let me put it this way - it was a foul by definition. I'd be more livid about it not being called for my team's benefit than I would about it being called against my team. It's hard to complain about someone blowing the whistle for "breaking the rules" (i.e., fouling) and then saying "but someone else got away with something similar at some point in the game even though others got called for similar contact." You committed the foul. You know the rules. I guess I'm the the minority but I wouldn't be nearly as mad if our shooter did not get the shots in that situation. Particularly on off balance looks at the buzzer, you rarely get a call unless it's a hard slap. It's like calling pass interference on a hail mary. |
|
blueandgray
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,762 
|
Post by blueandgray on Apr 7, 2019 14:14:41 GMT -5
The shooter was fouled on the three and there is no way anyone can deny that. The problem is...it never should have gotten to that because of the double dribble. Feel terrible for auburn fans. You absolutely can deny he got fouled on the three. That foul is not consistently called and was not called all night. He landed just fine. Did not effect the shot one bit. It's a matter of degree. He knocked his leg out from under him. Can’t argue with someone who disputes video evidence. |
|
swhoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,137
|
Post by swhoya on Apr 7, 2019 14:23:40 GMT -5
Sheeeeesh. All this discussion of whether it was a foul, did the refs call it consistently, should they have called it in that situation, etc etc etc. Good luck, you're never going to come to a consensus on that.
Here's what no one is discussing: maybe they should or should not have called it, BUT: the defender shouldn't have jumped into the shooter. Bottom line. The defender didn't jump into the shooter, didn't make contact, then the guy (heh, heh) probably still misses a low percentage turn-around desperation heave at the buzzer.
Try and put it on the refs all you want (and yes, I know, the double dribble, and MAYBE a foul with 0.6 seconds left on the other end). The defender put the ref into a situation of either sitting on his whistle so that the call didn't decide the game, or call the contact and have him shoot FTs.
Don't jump into a 3 point shooter, especially in that situation, and it's highly likely Auburn was in the final game. Debate the rest of it all you want, it woudn't be an issue if he hadn't jumped into him. Seems silly to blame the ref for having to make a decision that was caused by the defender.
|
|
swhoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,137
|
Post by swhoya on Apr 7, 2019 14:25:15 GMT -5
Let me put it this way - it was a foul by definition. I'd be more livid about it not being called for my team's benefit than I would about it being called against my team. It's hard to complain about someone blowing the whistle for "breaking the rules" (i.e., fouling) and then saying "but someone else got away with something similar at some point in the game even though others got called for similar contact." You committed the foul. You know the rules. I guess I'm the the minority but I wouldn't be nearly as mad if our shooter did not get the shots in that situation. Particularly on off balance looks at the buzzer, you rarely get a call unless it's a hard slap. It's like calling pass interference on a hail mary. Sorry, missed this before I posted. Again, DON'T JUMP INTO THE SHOOTER. Then we don't have to argue over whether the ref should or shouldn't call it. |
|
Hoyas4Ever
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
A Wise Man Once Told Me Don't Argue With Fools....
Posts: 5,448
|
Post by Hoyas4Ever on Apr 7, 2019 14:28:09 GMT -5
He bumped him before he got the shot off so to me you can't say it didn't have any effect on the shot... If Guy had released the ball, I'd agree with you... It's not a call you make then, especially, but it wasn't made all game. It was a bad call, given the circumstances. It was a bail out call. That's not big boy basketball. We'd be livid if it went against us. POD is right and wrong at the same time! By rule and watching it was absolutely a foul. There was lower body contact on the shot, Guy didn't have space to come down, it was absolutely a foul. But on a broader look at this particular game and the way the refs had called (or not called) contact all game long, POD has a very valid argument. After the first five minutes of the game of me yelling at the screen that's a foul multiple times, I quickly realized the refs are letting both teams play physical basketball. So if the refs are going to allow all kind contact early and throughout the game that should have been foul calls and free throws (which would have changed the game entirely), its hard to automatically say that the ref made the right call on Guy's corner three ball attempt just because it was the end of the game. I've never agreed with the premise that the refs should swallow their whistles at the end of the game and let the players beat each other up and decide it on the court. I've always believed that refs are their to set the tone of how the game is going to be played and the players have to adjust. Some refereeing crews call the game very tight where if you breathe on the player to hard (Akinjo at the end of the Harvard game) it's a foul. Some crews like last night's allow all kind of contact without blowing the whistle. As a player and coach all you want from the crews is consistency throughout. If it's a foul early in the game, it's a foul at the end of the game and vice versa. That foul call at the end of the game was ABSOLUTELY NOT consistent with the other 39:55 of game play... |
|
madgesiq92
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,400
|
Post by madgesiq92 on Apr 7, 2019 14:34:15 GMT -5
Can anyone point me to an example during the game of a 3 point shooter being bodied while he was in the air before he released the ball?
It is a rhetorical question so don’t bother.
Auburn defender also closed out late in first round against NEw Mex St and should have gone home then. Watching that charlatan Pearl lose should bring enormous pleasure to anyone who cares about the integrity of college basketball.
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,963
|
Post by EtomicB on Apr 7, 2019 14:50:20 GMT -5
It's not a call you make then, especially, but it wasn't made all game. It was a bad call, given the circumstances. It was a bail out call. That's not big boy basketball. We'd be livid if it went against us. POD is right and wrong at the same time! By rule and watching it was absolutely a foul. There was lower body contact on the shot, Guy didn't have space to come down, it was absolutely a foul. But on a broader look at this particular game and the way the refs had called (or not called) contact all game long, POD has a very valid argument. After the first five minutes of the game of me yelling at the screen that's a foul multiple times, I quickly realized the refs are letting both teams play physical basketball. So if the refs are going to allow all kind contact early and throughout the game that should have been foul calls and free throws (which would have changed the game entirely), its hard to automatically say that the ref made the right call on Guy's corner three ball attempt just because it was the end of the game. I've never agreed with the premise that the refs should swallow their whistles at the end of the game and let the players beat each other up and decide it on the court. I've always believed that refs are their to set the tone of how the game is going to be played and the players have to adjust. Some refereeing crews call the game very tight where if you breathe on the player to hard (Akinjo at the end of the Harvard game) it's a foul. Some crews like last night's allow all kind of contact without blowing the whistle. As a player and coach all you want from the crews is consistency throughout. If it's a foul early in the game, it's a foul at the end of the game and vice versa. That foul call at the end of the game was ABSOLUTELY NOT consistent with the other 39:55 of game play... It wasn't that he didn't have space to come down, Doughty bumped Guy while he still had the ball in his hands, that's clearly a foul... |
|
Hoyas4Ever
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
A Wise Man Once Told Me Don't Argue With Fools....
Posts: 5,448
|
Post by Hoyas4Ever on Apr 7, 2019 14:56:50 GMT -5
POD is right and wrong at the same time! By rule and watching it was absolutely a foul. There was lower body contact on the shot, Guy didn't have space to come down, it was absolutely a foul. But on a broader look at this particular game and the way the refs had called (or not called) contact all game long, POD has a very valid argument. After the first five minutes of the game of me yelling at the screen that's a foul multiple times, I quickly realized the refs are letting both teams play physical basketball. So if the refs are going to allow all kind contact early and throughout the game that should have been foul calls and free throws (which would have changed the game entirely), its hard to automatically say that the ref made the right call on Guy's corner three ball attempt just because it was the end of the game. I've never agreed with the premise that the refs should swallow their whistles at the end of the game and let the players beat each other up and decide it on the court. I've always believed that refs are their to set the tone of how the game is going to be played and the players have to adjust. Some refereeing crews call the game very tight where if you breathe on the player to hard (Akinjo at the end of the Harvard game) it's a foul. Some crews like last night's allow all kind of contact without blowing the whistle. As a player and coach all you want from the crews is consistency throughout. If it's a foul early in the game, it's a foul at the end of the game and vice versa. That foul call at the end of the game was ABSOLUTELY NOT consistent with the other 39:55 of game play... It wasn't that he didn't have space to come down, Doughty bumped Guy while he still had the ball in his hands, that's clearly a foul... Etomic you obviously didn't read my entire post or even the next sentence. The next sentence of my post clearly states it was absolutely a foul! |
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,963
|
Post by EtomicB on Apr 7, 2019 15:24:21 GMT -5
It wasn't that he didn't have space to come down, Doughty bumped Guy while he still had the ball in his hands, that's clearly a foul... Etomic you obviously didn't read my entire post or even the next sentence. The next sentence of my post clearly states it was absolutely a foul! I did read your entire post, I just didn't agree with your description of the foul that took place at the end of the game 4Ever... It wasn't a foul because he didn't give him room to land, it was a foul because he bumped him before he shot the ball... if the foul occurred after the shot it would fit into the "physicality of the game" theory better... |
|
|
|
Post by Problem of Dog on Apr 7, 2019 16:15:54 GMT -5
It's not a call you make then, especially, but it wasn't made all game. It was a bad call, given the circumstances. It was a bail out call. That's not big boy basketball. We'd be livid if it went against us. POD is right and wrong at the same time! By rule and watching it was absolutely a foul. There was lower body contact on the shot, Guy didn't have space to come down, it was absolutely a foul. But on a broader look at this particular game and the way the refs had called (or not called) contact all game long, POD has a very valid argument. After the first five minutes of the game of me yelling at the screen that's a foul multiple times, I quickly realized the refs are letting both teams play physical basketball. So if the refs are going to allow all kind contact early and throughout the game that should have been foul calls and free throws (which would have changed the game entirely), its hard to automatically say that the ref made the right call on Guy's corner three ball attempt just because it was the end of the game. I've never agreed with the premise that the refs should swallow their whistles at the end of the game and let the players beat each other up and decide it on the court. I've always believed that refs are their to set the tone of how the game is going to be played and the players have to adjust. Some refereeing crews call the game very tight where if you breathe on the player to hard (Akinjo at the end of the Harvard game) it's a foul. Some crews like last night's allow all kind of contact without blowing the whistle. As a player and coach all you want from the crews is consistency throughout. If it's a foul early in the game, it's a foul at the end of the game and vice versa. That foul call at the end of the game was ABSOLUTELY NOT consistent with the other 39:55 of game play... I'm fine with this take. It wasn't a foul call for 39:59, why is it a foul call then? Much less on an off balance corner three to decide the game? Now you assert yourself as a ref? It was a bail out call. |
|
Hoyas4Ever
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
A Wise Man Once Told Me Don't Argue With Fools....
Posts: 5,448
|
Post by Hoyas4Ever on Apr 7, 2019 22:35:39 GMT -5
Etomic you obviously didn't read my entire post or even the next sentence. The next sentence of my post clearly states it was absolutely a foul! I did read your entire post, I just didn't agree with your description of the foul that took place at the end of the game 4Ever... It wasn't a foul because he didn't give him room to land, it was a foul because he bumped him before he shot the ball... if the foul occurred after the shot it would fit into the "physicality of the game" theory better... Then you didn't comprehend it because I said there was lower body contact on the shot and it was absolutely a foul! I never said it was only a foul because he didn't give him room to land. You also absolutely misunderstood my entire post and focused solely on that one sentence that you misconstrued... |
|
tashoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 12,332
|
Post by tashoya on Apr 7, 2019 22:40:48 GMT -5
It was a foul. That's not a debate. Consistency is a different question.
That one was an easy call because eyes didn't have to be anywhere else at that point in the game. During the flow of a typical play in the middle of a game, eyes are all over the place. Ballhandler. Guys in the paint. Screens. There was only time for that one shot and so they were focusing on that alone. And it was a foul with the defender jumping into the shooter. BRUTAL way to end a game. Tip of the cap to Guy hitting the freebies.
When commentators often talk about "establishing a tone" with regard to the refs, we know that consistency is an issue. Problem is that we all know that some of the rules have become ridiculous. You can't touch a small guard at all to hem him up a bit? But, late in the game, you can? It's stupid. Call it close or don't. But let it be known right away and don't change it. If it gets chippy, don't change a thing. It's not the refs' job to help play the game. Call it how you call it and let the chips fall. But be consistent throughout.
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,963
|
Post by EtomicB on Apr 8, 2019 8:47:57 GMT -5
I did read your entire post, I just didn't agree with your description of the foul that took place at the end of the game 4Ever... It wasn't a foul because he didn't give him room to land, it was a foul because he bumped him before he shot the ball... if the foul occurred after the shot it would fit into the "physicality of the game" theory better... Then you didn't comprehend it because I said there was lower body contact on the shot and it was absolutely a foul! I never said it was only a foul because he didn't give him room to land. You also absolutely misunderstood my entire post and focused solely on that one sentence that you misconstrued... You’re right I didn’t understand why you added “Guy didn’t have room to come down” when describing the play, it read to me that you were implying that it had an effect on why the foul was called... My bad... |
|
Eurostar
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,094
|
Post by Eurostar on Apr 8, 2019 22:19:09 GMT -5
I think in general these Final 4 games have been well officiated. Not a lot of fouls called. Our games this season seemed to be bogged down by so many foul calls. Probably because 1) officials were worse and more likely to call fouls, and 2) our team is defensively more undisciplined than these teams and fouls a lot away from the basket and on drives.
|
|
DanMcQ
Moderator 
Posts: 30,610
|
Post by DanMcQ on Apr 8, 2019 23:21:54 GMT -5
The crew working the final did a nice job. About time.
|
|
DanMcQ
Moderator
Posts: 30,610
|
Post by DanMcQ on Apr 8, 2019 23:36:19 GMT -5
|
|
Hoyas4Ever
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
A Wise Man Once Told Me Don't Argue With Fools....
Posts: 5,448
|
Post by Hoyas4Ever on Apr 9, 2019 0:18:26 GMT -5
By the book the referees were ok tonight. My beef is how college basketball utilizes their replay rules. Looking at that replay in overtime where the refs deemed that Moretti's pinky glanced the ball after Hunter hit it out of his hands is where instant replay reviews go overboard. First was that undisputed evidence to overturn that call?
Undisputed evidence has to be you looked at multiple angles and it's obvious the call needs to be changed. That play was questionable at best. The crew searched and found one angle that makes you say maybe it did glance Moretti's pinky. All the other angles were at best inconclusive. By definition that call should have remained Texas Tech ball.
More importantly the NCAA has to figure out what the heck are they doing with instant replay and the constant stop, starts and free timeouts they are giving the last 2 minutes/overtime of games with this lets review everything from every angle even down to the millisecond on the clock posture.
Truth be told I'm all for getting the call right, but what makes the Moretti overturn play more important then let's say that exact type of deflection play when it happens with 5 minutes left in the game or 15 minutes left in the first half. In the entire game no possession is bigger then any other possession and it's the grand sum of these possessions that determine the outcome of the game. Also what's reviewable? How come the non call double dribble in the Auburn/Virginia game isn't reviewable? If the reason or intent of having and using instant replay is to get the outcome right, the double dribble and other plays like Tariq Owens block shot and saving the ball when he was out of bounds in the regional final has to be reviewable. If those plays were reviewable, we might be watching two different teams play for National Championshiphas tonight. My point to this is either you start reviewing every play throughout the game, you review none of the plays and go with the call I the floor or you come up with some kind of system where any play can be reviewed upon a challenge by the coaches or 4th referee who watches the game from a monitor at court side.
I actually think the fact that refs have instant replay to lean on has made them worse at their jobs instead of being better. It's become a crutch down the stretch of games. But the genie is out of the lamp and we can't ever go back to not using replay. So the NCAA has to clearly identify their mandate for why they are using replay. If the purpose is to get the call right and avoid an incorrect outcome then they need to come up with a system that reaches that mandate in a fast and organized manner and leads to the correct results of games...
|
|
sweetness
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 839
|
Post by sweetness on Apr 9, 2019 5:59:57 GMT -5
They missed the Kyle Guy 'trip' at 2;45 left in OT, which was a huge call and a key swing moment - down 3 going the other way or down 1.
|
|
smokeyjack
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,300
|
Post by smokeyjack on Apr 9, 2019 7:42:54 GMT -5
They missed the Kyle Guy 'trip' at 2;45 left in OT, which was a huge call and a key swing moment - down 3 going the other way or down 1. Guy got away with murder in that game. He tackled Moretti before the absurd review and overrule. He and Jerome both chicken-wing their way through entire games. The difference is I respect Jerome because he makes amazingly tough shots and is one hell of an all-around player. Guy is that kid we all knew who gets away with murder because of his clean cut looks, pasted on smile and lack of physical maturity. I've coached quite a few baby faced little girls in soccer who parlayed the same advantage into a jersey-tugging, shin-kicking, rib-gouging license to molest the other team. Guy is no different. And I thought the officiating was average at best last night. Missed a handful of obvious walks on both sides. The no-tie up call on Guy was abominable. The Moretti review was absolutely not indisputable. They did a poor job in my opinion distinguishing between charges and blocks on both sides, and they let Guy and Jerome play the entire game with their off hands fully extended into defenders. But, hey, Mike Wise and the CBS bobbleheads said they were great so it must be so. |
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,358
|
Post by prhoya on Apr 9, 2019 7:49:28 GMT -5
They missed the Kyle Guy 'trip' at 2;45 left in OT, which was a huge call and a key swing moment - down 3 going the other way or down 1. Guy got away with murder in that game. He tackled Moretti before the absurd review and overrule. He and Jerome both chicken-wing their way through entire games. The difference is I respect Jerome because he makes amazingly tough shots and is one hell of an all-around player. Guy is that kid we all knew who gets away with murder because of his clean cut looks, pasted on smile and lack of physical maturity. I've coached quite a few baby faced little girls in soccer who parlayed the same advantage into a jersey-tugging, shin-kicking, rib-gouging license to molest the other team. Guy is no different. And I thought the officiating was average at best last night. Missed a handful of obvious walks on both sides. The no-tie up call on Guy was abominable. The Moretti review was absolutely not indisputable. They did a poor job in my opinion distinguishing between charges and blocks on both sides, and they let Guy and Jerome play the entire game with their off hands fully extended into defenders. But, hey, Mike Wise and the CBS bobbleheads said they were great so it must be so. Was the TT player fouled to the end of the 2nd half? Did the Va player hit ball before hand? |
|
