Nevada players incensed at cops after game

[EastCoast2]

I don’t care if you feel bad for some well paid referees this call is absolutely horrible...

I hate this play. The defender is never set, and flops. One of Martin's legs makes contact with his chest, and the kid drops like he got speared by Ray Lewis.

 

[dollarbill44]

While I agree that officiating in general is awful, I argue that it is because they let too much go so that when they do make calls, we're left wondering what is a foul. Players foul out. It's always been a part of the game. It's to keep players from turning the game into a rugby match. The players who are prone to fouling out will adjust to a 6 foul rule and just foul more. We saw that in the old Big East. The reason the NBA allows 6 is because the game is 48 minutes (1 foul for every 8 minutes). Accounting for the shorter game, college has the same foul allotment. Call a tighter game and educate the players about not fouling and the game will be much better.
Warning: old man rant ahead. In the 70s and 80s (when I played), you would get whistled many times even if you didn't make contact because you made a play that most often resulted in a foul. For example, if you reached across a dribbler, you got an on the arm foul. If you swatted at the ball from the side when a player went up for a shot, there'd be a foul. We were taught not to do that because it would more than likely get called.
As for players needing to sit, that's a coach's call. There's nothing in the rules that says a player has to sit because he has 3 or 4 fouls. I've often wondered why it's such a knee jerk reaction by coaches to pull a guy out. I wish there was a way to see whether that strategy pays off on average. Is the team better off having that player for the final few minutes at the risk of the game getting out of reach while he sits? It would be an interesting study.

 

[maxxyz]

You could make adjustments, as suggested above, that would be punitive to a team when a player receives his fifth foul. Maybe an extra FT and possession or something like that. Right now it's too prone to corruption and incompetence.

Fixing the officiating is a laudable goal but good luck wid dat.

You're correct on all points. I just feel that going to six fouls isn't the answer.

The extra foul shot for a foul by a player with 5 or more fouls is interesting, but bad officiating will make that a nightmare. Can you imagine how people's heads would explode when a charge is called and the defender gets three shots during a close game?

 

[dollarbill44]

I hate this play. The defender is never set, and flops. One of Martin's legs makes contact with his chest, and the kid drops like he got speared by Ray Lewis.

I think it was a blocking foul, but I don't have a problem with how the guy went down there. I'd like to see someone take that and try to stay up.

 

[81South]

I watched as well. The refs were bad...really bad.

Utah state has a nice looking team and they have a big guy from Portugal that was solid around the basket.

 

[bpo57]

While I agree that officiating in general is awful, I argue that it is because they let too much go so that when they do make calls, we're left wondering what is a foul. Players foul out. It's always been a part of the game. It's to keep players from turning the game into a rugby match. The players who are prone to fouling out will adjust to a 6 foul rule and just foul more. We saw that in the old Big East. The reason the NBA allows 6 is because the game is 48 minutes (1 foul for every 8 minutes). Accounting for the shorter game, college has the same foul allotment. Call a tighter game and educate the players about not fouling and the game will be much better.
Warning: old man rant ahead. In the 70s and 80s (when I played), you would get whistled many times even if you didn't make contact because you made a play that most often resulted in a foul. For example, if you reached across a dribbler, you got an on the arm foul. If you swatted at the ball from the side when a player went up for a shot, there'd be a foul. We were taught not to do that because it would more than likely get called.
As for players needing to sit, that's a coach's call. There's nothing in the rules that says a player has to sit because he has 3 or 4 fouls. I've often wondered why it's such a knee jerk reaction by coaches to pull a guy out. I wish there was a way to see whether that strategy pays off on average. Is the team better off having that player for the final few minutes at the risk of the game getting out of reach while he sits? It would be an interesting study.

I appreciate the noted differentials between the NBA and college but in the college game they call it much tighter than in the pros. And the officiating edge to the home team seems so much more pronounced in college than in the pros.

One other thing they should do in college is if you commit an obvious flop then there should be a penalty for that - either a foul or extra FTs for the other team. That will help to reduce these phantom charge calls.

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

You're correct on all points. I just feel that going to six fouls isn't the answer.

The extra foul shot for a foul by a player with 5 or more fouls is interesting, but bad officiating will make that a nightmare. Can you imagine how people's heads would explode when a charge is called and the defender gets three shots during a close game?

No FTs on Player Control Fouls.

 

[bpo57]

You're correct on all points. I just feel that going to six fouls isn't the answer.

The extra foul shot for a foul by a player with 5 or more fouls is interesting, but bad officiating will make that a nightmare. Can you imagine how people's heads would explode when a charge is called and the defender gets three shots during a close game?

Make it an option for the offender. No extra FT but the fifth foul DQs the player if they so choose. Btw as far as I am aware there are no FTs for a player control foul.

 

[FRANKIEFAN]

Caroline is a nice kid I met him 2 years ago at the UNR bookstore buying a t shirt he was happy to be recognized by someone that knew his name. Asked him how the twins looked in practice and if Oliver was gonna leave. He said good any maybe like it was a yes. Hope this doesn’t hurt his chances of getting drafted he’s got a good handle and stroke for a guy that size. Oshae needs a couple more years here to add those things to his game.

Court stormings are great but you can’t ever touch the opponent hope no one makes contact with a UVA player tomorrow.

They should not have lost to Loyola last year.

 

[bpo57]

Caroline is a nice kid I met him 2 years ago at the UNR bookstore buying a t shirt he was happy to be recognized by someone that knew his name. Asked him how the twins looked in practice and if Oliver was gonna leave. He said good any maybe like it was a yes. Hope this doesn’t hurt his chances of getting drafted he’s got a good handle and stroke for a guy that size. Oshae needs a couple more years here to add those things to his game.

Court stormings are great but you can’t ever touch the opponent hope no one makes contact with a UVA player tomorrow.

They should not have lost to Loyola last year.

Loyola led by four at half and never trailed in the 2H and at one point had a double digit lead. They beat Nevada on the boards and shot much better from the field.

 

[STEVEHOLT]

With all due respect, this is an interesting sentiment. I wonder how many people in their lives have been "truly wronged?" What constitutes your definition of this? Have you ever been "truly wronged in a certain manner" in which you then acted as an "insane" person as you allege? If not, how do you know with certainty the way in which you "will" act, or most humans for that matter. Is "truly wronged" being flipped the bird on the highway after you inadvertently cut someone off and you voluntarily choosing to go, 'road rage' insane chasing them down? Or "insane" as to after catching up with them, commit an assault or felony type crime against them? That insane? If that's the case, maybe you're not "quite the calm fellow" you allege you are then?

Hmm ...love how you throw out hypotheticals, , answer them yourself , and then that proves something about ME. Next level stuff there.

 

[orangecuse]

Hmm ...love how you throw out hypotheticals, , answer them yourself , and then that proves something about ME. Next level stuff there.

You threw out the original hypothetical that if you were "truly wronged" your relatively alleged "calm" fellow demeanor, would turn you into an "insane" person. Therefore, I was just giving a specific hypothetical vs. your general one and whether that constitutes/triggers you being "truly wronged" since I imagine what qualifies this may vary from individual to individual. I didn't say you would actually act that way in that specific example as obviously I have no idea how you (or anyone here) might respond. But whether had you, for example, was it because it met your's/one's "truly wronged" criteria and thus ensuing "insane" behavior afterwards. And, if that was the case (which again it's an example) then maybe you/one wouldn't necessarily be that passive, "gentle" fellow being alleged.

I apologize if you took this personal vs. simply an exercise type discussion, which was the intent.

 

[FRANKIEFAN]

Loyola led by four at half and never trailed in the 2H and at one point had a double digit lead. They beat Nevada on the boards and shot much better from the field.

Nah you get a team like that second weekend after surviving that UC game where they should have lost you have to win. Their run wasn't even impressive.

KSU has their entire team back too and could make a final four but you can't trust a team that lost an easy second weekend game like that.

Its like us losing to MTSU a few years ago.

I think Nevada's role players are pretty good though the big from Old Dominion is good and so is the three point specialist from UNO. The teams a little funky since Caroline and the Martins all want to play like guards despite being so big. USU is a good team but that loss probably cost them seeding. Their 3 losses all came in tough places to play Ogden, Viejas, and the Pit are not easy arenas to win in.

 

[Tom K.]

I hate this play. The defender is never set, and flops. One of Martin's legs makes contact with his chest, and the kid drops like he got speared by Ray Lewis.

Not to mention that lame little dance #12 starts doing after the play. Cringe-worthy.

 

[bpo57]

Nah you get a team like that second weekend after surviving that UC game where they should have lost you have to win. Their run wasn't even impressive.

KSU has their entire team back too and could make a final four but you can't trust a team that lost an easy second weekend game like that.

Its like us losing to MTSU a few years ago.

I think Nevada's role players are pretty good though the big from Old Dominion is good and so is the three point specialist from UNO. The teams a little funky since Caroline and the Martins all want to play like guards despite being so big. USU is a good team but that loss probably cost them seeding. Their 3 losses all came in tough places to play Ogden, Viejas, and the Pit are not easy arenas to win in.

Have to disagree. Nevada wasn't even the best team that Loyola beat in the tourney. That would be Tennessee. Nevada was lucky to get by Texas in OT. As I mentioned, tho it was a tight game loyola never trailed in the 2H despite committing a ton of TOs. I remember that game well cuz i had money on it. Nothing lucky about that win for the ramblers.

 

[FRANKIEFAN]

I’m really struggling with some issues. I think I can’t accept living in the Boston area it sucks it’s mean.


I’m gonna go back to Reno my mental health is bad. I never really had a bad day out there. Just wanted to share this on here.