Louisville survives, with a little help
- Thread starter schuele
- Start date
It looked like there was some shoulder-to-shoulder contact caused by the Ville defender. Should have been called a foul, IMO. But a flat out tackle? Not really. The UCI player appeared to embellish the contact a bit too. So it's hard to tell how much contact actually occurred.
A
anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi
Guest
Lol. He initiated contact with the opposite arm while running the opposite direction from a step behind. Foul all day. Another example of officiating getting worse and worse. Good old boy network in full effect.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Reading comprehension is not your strength.I understand. You've done this plenty of times before.
Apparently the last time I schooled you with the proof of the location of the official making that foul call in front of TV wasn't enough. The thread got deleted, but you know what happened.
I explicitly state the contact should have been called a foul. No ifs, ands, or buts. I said from the camera angle we all had, it looked like a foul, although it was hard to see how much contact there actually was because the UCI player acted a bit. Generally, you don't throw your head back like that when you get bumped. He must certainly wasn't tackled, which was my only point.
Apparently the last time I schooled you with the proof of the location of the official making that foul call in front of TV wasn't enough. The thread got deleted, but you know what happened.
I explicitly state the contact should have been called a foul. No ifs, ands, or buts. I said from the camera angle we all had, it looked like a foul, although it was hard to see how much contact there actually was because the UCI player acted a bit. Generally, you don't throw your head back like that when you get bumped. He must certainly wasn't tackled, which was my only point.
I don't recall any schooling but what was questioned was whether it was a bailout call or not, not that a foul happened. Your explanation of the rule made sense however, that's not a consistent call in college hoops. I couldn't tell you how many "and 1's" I've watched over the last day and a half And yes, each time I thought of you, ha!
It'd be nice if the rule, or how it's called, is looked at this off-season. Not looking for the phony and 1 like the NBA but something a little better than it currently is in college.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
It'd be nice if the rule, or how it's called, is looked at this off-season. Not looking for the phony and 1 like the NBA but something a little better than it currently is in college.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Tim are you talking about the play where TV had a jump ball and the official opposite the table, free throw line extended, came in with a foul call? That's what I was referring to. The dude that loves to troll me was arguing that the official made the call from half court, then I posted pics of the official being exactly where I said he was - free throw line extended with a great angle on the foul.
I think you might be referring to the continuation play we discussed? I agree, it would be nice if there could be some consistency between the way its called in the college and pro game. I officiate in a semipro basketball league as well, and its a much easier call to make with pro rules. I don't like the college rule or the way we are being asked to enforce it. The way officials are being asked to enforce it, to cut the continuation off, is difficult to get right. Allowing for continuation of the play makes it much, much easier.
Haha, I hope you're not swearing at me under your breath when you see the and-1s!
My bad, thought you were talking about the Webster play. I sware anyways on the and 1's as it's too inconsistent so you're in a long line, ha!
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Posted from Rivals Mobile
haha! Well at least I've got company!!
I wouldn't be surprised if it changed in the next year or two. I know the review rules are going to be changing over the next couple of years. So I can see the continuation plays, considering the challenge to judge the difference between the start of the upward motion of the hand and the beginning of the motion immediately preceding the upward motion of the hand, being up for review.
In general, college rules follow NBA rules, and high school rules follow college rules. Actually, the women's game is more progressive, when talking about rule changes and adoption, than the men's side.
In fairness to the Louisville player, he was the only guy on the court who did his job well. He was supposed to give a foul and he did so - decisively. UCI took a stupid approach throwing the ball into the backcourt, which was going to make it easy for Louisville to give fouls with no fear they would be in the act of shooting. And as for the officials, I have no idea what they were doing.
I don't think UCI was likely to score anyway, given the time and fouls-to-give situation. But good God, do your damn job.
I don't think UCI was likely to score anyway, given the time and fouls-to-give situation. But good God, do your damn job.
A
anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi
Guest
My response wasn't directly to you. Just hit respond. Watched it in the bar before we headed to the Husker baseball game. The reaction in there was disbelief. But if you need it, you are important and very wise. I call bs when I see it, not excuse it so reffing can continue to get worse.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Good, I'd really like to see a :30 shot clock as well. Games in the NIT seem to have a better flow to it.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Posted from Rivals Mobile
A
