HoyaFanNY
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Never throw to the venus on a spider 3 Y banana!
Posts: 4,995
|
Post by HoyaFanNY on Mar 24, 2007 9:40:32 GMT -5
we won, that's all that matters. nba move, right dfw:))
|
|
Filo
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,920
|
Post by Filo on Mar 24, 2007 10:09:07 GMT -5
please. he pivoted on one foot, then spun to pivot on the other before he jumped to shoot. are you guys that blinded by loyalty that you can't even see the obvious? i saw it right when it happened. it was an nba move. just accept the fact that, for once, we got a break...and we deserved it. HoyaFanNY - c'mon now. You talking about loyalty is a joke. Go back and read some of your asinine posts during the in-game thread. Sure we were all frustrated, but you give up on the team and its players at the drop of a hat. Zero credibility.
|
|
hoyaboy1
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,346
|
Post by hoyaboy1 on Mar 24, 2007 10:10:51 GMT -5
please. he pivoted on one foot, then spun to pivot on the other before he jumped to shoot. are you guys that blinded by loyalty that you can't even see the obvious? i saw it right when it happened. it was an nba move. just accept the fact that, for once, we got a break...and we deserved it. He shot before the pivot foot came back down. If there was a travel, it was when his foot came up off the ground earlier.
|
|
GIGAFAN99
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,487
|
Post by GIGAFAN99 on Mar 24, 2007 10:17:52 GMT -5
Granted cbs coverage hasn't started yet but it looks like this has finally died. ESPN is just offhandedly saying "some thought he traveled." I think this will go the way of the 2.0 second reset in the Memphis game which was the last non-controversial call the talking heads were briefly up in arms about.
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,477
|
Post by TC on Mar 24, 2007 10:20:21 GMT -5
please. he pivoted on one foot, then spun to pivot on the other before he jumped to shoot. are you guys that blinded by loyalty that you can't even see the obvious? i saw it right when it happened. it was an nba move. just accept the fact that, for once, we got a break...and we deserved it. Are you so blind that you won't bother to read any of the officiating.com threads in the response to you, or any of the history of this post? He did not pivot on the other foot (his left). He pivoted with his right, stepped on his left, lifted his right, and shot. His right never hit the floor. Your argument needs his right to hit the floor, before releasing the ball, and that didn't happen. He may have traveled inadvertently by lifting his pivot foot (right foot) before this sequence, but the move to the basket was legal.
|
|
GUJook97
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,445
|
Post by GUJook97 on Mar 24, 2007 10:24:30 GMT -5
We can go on about this forever, but this is it for me....
The thing that cracks me up about all of this is the notion by analysts that a travel is non-discretionary decision that must be called every time it happens. If you slowed down the game to super-slow speed, you can also see Vandy players hand-checking and pushing Jeff. If you want to argue that the refs have no discretion and must call a travel, dont they have to call a foul for the same reason? While all of us may have complained that Jeff got fouled if he missed the shot, do you really think ESPN and CBS anaylsts would have spent 12 hours arguing the injustice of the non-call. In my mind, the travel is the same way. So, shut up ESPN and CBS.
|
|
Eurostar
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,095
|
Post by Eurostar on Mar 24, 2007 10:28:26 GMT -5
Horrendous article on foxsports.com from Keven Hench. msn.foxsports.com/cbk/story/6604346Again demonstrates lack of understanding of the rules of basketball. And makes the absurd case that all of the higher seeds only won last night because of officiating. i just threw up a little in my mouth. packer explained both the foster and the sapp "high dribble". fosters was a carry because his palm was under the ball, sapps was not because it was a high dribble but his hand was still on top of the ball. his other arguments for officiating in the other games were also a stretch. poor journalism.. coming up with BS arguments for shock value to get more hits on your articles. typical of guys on fox's payroll... ignoring the facts
|
|
hoya91
Century (over 100 posts)
Posts: 148
|
Post by hoya91 on Mar 24, 2007 10:34:20 GMT -5
Really surprised this has become a 5 page thread...
could care less...
We got the W. End of story.
|
|
HoyaSC
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 514
|
Post by HoyaSC on Mar 24, 2007 10:35:54 GMT -5
Here's my take: Vanderbilt got lucky with a no-call on the play.
There is a chance Jeff traveled; there's a chance he didn't. But isn't the more likely call on that play a foul on one of the Vandy players who were mugging Jeff?
It is a false choice to say the refs had a decision to call a walk or not. The real choice the refs had was whether to make ANY call or not. Of the potential calls, a foul on Vanderbilt was the most likely.
If I'm a Vanderbilt fan, given that choice, I pick no-call every time. Look at what they got..... Jeff takes an off-balance shot while getting banged by three defenders. They forced a difficult shot-- Jeff just made it. Wouldn't you rather Jeff have to take that shot instead of giving him two chances at the free throw line?
|
|
GIGAFAN99
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,487
|
Post by GIGAFAN99 on Mar 24, 2007 10:39:19 GMT -5
I think worse than the "travel controversy" is Nantz's last call which I didn't see until I got back. The "and NO FOUL called on the shot by Gordon."
So you were looking for a foul on a 37-foot running heave? That would have been a reasonable call? Really? Sorry it just seems like they tried to create a drama at every turn.
|
|
|
Post by grokamok on Mar 24, 2007 10:45:03 GMT -5
I think that:
1) The defender, in inching towards Jeff, pushed his right leg & foot as he was pivoting. This was not called; however, Jeff was called for inching up on a Vanderbilt player and causing him to lose his balance just a short time before.
2) This push led to Jeff's pivot foot moving very slightly as he executed his spin. While this would be called a travel if an official actually saw it (50% chance at best, given it was in traffic and the moment in the game), an official seeing both the push and the resulting lift of the pivot foot might easily swallow his whistle at the end of the game.
3) The net effect was no advantage to Georgetown: Jeff did not have time to gain additional balance from the shift of the pivot foot that he would not have had if he hadn't been bumped and he had to adjust in the air. (Thank goodness he is good at that!)
4) The rules (Rule 4, Section 66, Article 4, Sub-article a) allow pushing off of the pivot foot with the other foot is on the court as one is going up for a shot; thus, the remainder of the play was legal.
Thanks to Dan McQ for pointing most of this out already and to Highsmith for quoting the rule.
That said, I also think that:
5) The rules should never have been amended to allow that kind of move in the first place. To me, once a pivot foot has been established, one should not be able to lift it off of the floor unless one is jumping with both feet simultaneously or the ball has left one's hand (for a shot, pass, dribble or, of course, turnover). While this would make the game more plodding, it would also return meaning to proper defensive positioning, which can often be negated by the use of the current rules (see: jump-stop), and bring consistency to the idea of having a pivot foot in the first place.
|
|
|
Post by jumbo7676 on Mar 24, 2007 10:47:10 GMT -5
As far as I am concerned, it doesn't matter whether or not Green traveled on that play. I was at the game and even with that potentially missed call, the UNC fans sitting around me who wanted Vandy to win were saying that the game was called in favor of Vanderbilt. My buddy's boss, a Vanderbilt Alum, came over to our seats after the game. We asked him if he felt the officials were calling the game Vandy's way and he said the the officiating was pathetic. Maybe it seemed worse because I was there and obviously biased towards the Hoyas, but it seemed there were different rules on each side of the court. Because Vandy was smaller, they were allowed to make more contact to make up for the lack of size. So I really don't care about this call because the only reason Vandy was even in the game at the end was because of terrible officiating. If I'm wrong here, which I may be considering I was in the upper level and didn't have as good a view as your would have on tv or the benefit of replays, let me know and maybe I'll stop being so damn Editeded about the whole thing.
|
|
HarbinHoya
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 543
|
Post by HarbinHoya on Mar 24, 2007 11:12:53 GMT -5
does someone have video of the game that they can post or video of gottlieb and packers rants, I have yet to hear them and want to know what was said. Also, I would like to post video of the dajuan rebound that was called a push off cause I didnt see anyone near him
|
|
Filo
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,920
|
Post by Filo on Mar 24, 2007 11:38:57 GMT -5
I think worse than the "travel controversy" is Nantz's last call which I didn't see until I got back. The "and NO FOUL called on the shot by Gordon." So you were looking for a foul on a 37-foot running heave? That would have been a reasonable call? Really? Sorry it just seems like they tried to create a drama at every turn. That was Packer, wasn't it?
|
|
Cambridge
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Canes Pugnaces
Posts: 5,304
|
Post by Cambridge on Mar 24, 2007 12:25:47 GMT -5
You want to know what is really going on? For the last two weeks sports radio guys, columnists and celebrated casual observers (Sportsguy for example) have been giving the officials a hard time. They have asked repeatedly why the play-by-play, color guys and talking heads haven't taken the NCAA officials to task for their shoddy officiating. This was their chance to respond to all those complaints and the TV crew took it. We have become everything that is wrong with the officiating. Yawn.
It's really sad that everyone wants to make one "blown" call an issue and ignore 40 minutes of shoddy officiating. Has anyone pointed out that we shot 4 free throws in the second half? Four. How is that possible when we deliberately brought the ball inside all of the second half? It would be one thing if we just shot threes...but we deliberately and systematically banged it inside throughout the second half and drew zero fouls. Granted Vandy played great D...but no fouls? Unlikely.
Also, has any talking head pointed out that we picked up 4 charging fouls in the first half? Four. Two of them were so embarassingly bad that CBS refused to show them again. The third would never be a charge in the NBA (the defender may have barely established position under the basket...but he was right under it). The fourth was a charge.
Whatever. Its' going to be mildly frustrating that this is THE story. Let's beat UNC and shut up the "experts."
|
|
HoyaFanNY
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Never throw to the venus on a spider 3 Y banana!
Posts: 4,995
|
Post by HoyaFanNY on Mar 24, 2007 12:49:43 GMT -5
filo, you're a joke. anyone that says anything negative 'quits' on the team. give me a break. sapp played horrible and you're trashing me for pointing that out? give me a break. IMO sapp shouldn't have been in there and we won in spite of his horrible play. i'm unbiased and realistic, you're blind, just like some syracuse fans i know. jeff traveled and got away with it. stop acting like a first grader and just be happy we won.
|
|
SirSaxa
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 747
|
Post by SirSaxa on Mar 24, 2007 13:02:18 GMT -5
I think worse than the "travel controversy" is Nantz's last call which I didn't see until I got back. The "and NO FOUL called on the shot by Gordon." So you were looking for a foul on a 37-foot running heave? That would have been a reasonable call? Really? Sorry it just seems like they tried to create a drama at every turn. Gigafan -- Hey man, looking forward to seeing you tomorrow! As for Nantz's "no foul", I listened to it in replay... I guess i heard it differently. Sort of confirming "there was no foul so the game is over", not "there was no foul called but there should have been." That was just my take. Something like when a guy runs the kickoff all the way back for a TD and the announcers might say.. "and there were no flags on the play" -- they are just confirming the TD will count, not suggesting there should have been a flag someplace. See you at the Tailgate -- as a 20 year JETS season ticket holder, I am very familiar with the Meadowlands parking lot, but never looked forward to a tailgate more than this one! HOYA SAXA
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,477
|
Post by TC on Mar 24, 2007 13:05:54 GMT -5
I think worse than the "travel controversy" is Nantz's last call which I didn't see until I got back. The "and NO FOUL called on the shot by Gordon." Packer was the one who made the "no foul called on the shot by Gordon" call. I'm not even sure who could have fouled him - Jesse had his back to Gordon. I do agree with GIGA - that is a terrible way of calling the end of a game. Comment on the shot, not the lack of a phantom foul.
|
|
GIGAFAN99
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,487
|
Post by GIGAFAN99 on Mar 24, 2007 13:10:16 GMT -5
I think worse than the "travel controversy" is Nantz's last call which I didn't see until I got back. The "and NO FOUL called on the shot by Gordon." So you were looking for a foul on a 37-foot running heave? That would have been a reasonable call? Really? Sorry it just seems like they tried to create a drama at every turn. Gigafan -- Hey man, looking forward to seeing you tomorrow! As for Nantz's "no foul", I listened to it in replay... I guess i heard it differently. Sort of confirming "there was no foul so the game is over", not "there was no foul called but there should have been." That was just my take. Something like when a guy runs the kickoff all the way back for a TD and the announcers might say.. "and there were no flags on the play" -- they are just confirming the TD will count, not suggesting there should have been a flag someplace. See you at the Tailgate -- as a 20 year JETS season ticket holder, I am very familiar with the Meadowlands parking lot, but never looked forward to a tailgate more than this one! HOYA SAXA Fair enough. I just think Nantz and Packer are the "glass slipper and ACC" crew so I heard it with that bias. But none of this matters. There's a game tomorrow!
|
|
SaxaCD
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,402
|
Post by SaxaCD on Mar 24, 2007 13:10:19 GMT -5
please. he pivoted on one foot, then spun to pivot on the other before he jumped to shoot. are you guys that blinded by loyalty that you can't even see the obvious? i saw it right when it happened. it was an nba move. just accept the fact that, for once, we got a break...and we deserved it. Wow, i guess all those officials on the officials forum, who don't have anything to do with Georgetown, are also blinded by loyalty. Or maybe they just know the rules better.
|
|