jncuse
I brought the Cocaine to the White House
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2012
- Messages
- 19,587
- Like
- 33,330
This is like saying there are only two possible options for UConn's future - to stay at the same level or reach another level.
Refs made right call
- Thread starter Orangeyes
- Start date
This is like saying there are only two possible options for UConn's future - to stay at the same level or reach another level.
Melancer46
Living Legend
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2011
- Messages
- 10,458
- Like
- 13,671
I find it funny that they went back and revised the rule this year to make it more clear, but they left it as something along the lines of "The defender must be in legal guarding position with feet set before the shooter begins their upward motion" and nobody actually knows where the upward motion begins. Does it begin once CJ picks up his dribble and is gathering himself to jump? Is it the last step he takes before jumping? It used to be that they just had to be planted before the shooter leaves his feet, so clearly it's supposed to be one of those two. Either way, it seemed pretty clear to me on the zoomed in-baseline replay that Hood was still moving as CJ took that last step. So personally, I think it was a blocking foul. But I just think it's really funny that they revised a rule and still failed to make it any clearer than it was before.
rstone7727
All Conference
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 2,335
- Like
- 2,006
We never had these problems years ago. The offensive player was always granted the call unless it was totally obvious that the defender had established defensive position. The offensive player got the call maybe 90% of the time. As a defender you didn't even attempt to stand your ground unless you were positive you would get the call. Now the calls go about 50/50 and therein lies the problem. Back in the day, that call was a block 100% of the time. (likewise for the Gbinije play).
Bayside44
Moderator
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 15,527
- Like
- 31,954
The source is dumber than a bag of hammers. It ALWAYS looks like an offensive foul in slow motion.
Fair beat his guy, Hood pushed off on Grant to slide in and was moving as CJ was in the air.
The fact that people get paid for this and don't know these simple, simple, simple things is really mind-blowing.
Bornorange
2nd String
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 847
- Like
- 886
It is not really about whether the call was right or wrong.
It is about being inconsistent in how you call it.
When you call Silent G for blocking on an inarguable charge then you can not call charging on CJ
for a close one. Any source comments on that referee screw job.
It is about being inconsistent in how you call it.
When you call Silent G for blocking on an inarguable charge then you can not call charging on CJ
for a close one. Any source comments on that referee screw job.
KaiserUEO
2022 and 2x ESPN Tourney Challenge Winner
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 18,889
- Like
- 22,942
I have slo motion too. His right foot and shoulder was elevating, he was moving.
B.L.O.C.K.
Unless there's a different shot than all the ESPNs have, it was a block.
Now back to arguing JBs actions.
Cowtown
Sesquipedalia verba
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2012
- Messages
- 71,443
- Like
- 147,412
Fair enough, although refs still kicked the call back then, too.
About 20-25 years ago, the idea began to creep in to basketball that the defense should be allowed to play, too. People argued logically that you "can't play defense standing still." This principal was developed and entered into the game, then, in the application of the principal that once you establish position, you can move to maintain it. It sounds simple enough, I know, but in truth is it often difficult. Sometimes it all sets up so fast that you don't get all the information you need to make the call correctly. It's a problem, and it's always going to be as long as being allowed to move while still maintaining position is in application. But I don't see that changing any time soon.
Orangeyes
R.I.P Dan
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2011
- Messages
- 16,265
- Like
- 21,713
FWIW, I found these comments under a video posted in the articles section today. I'm sure they have appeared in some of the articles posted but I think they are germane to this discussion.
"The controversial call in the waning seconds of Saturday's showdown between Syracuse and Duke was so close, at least in real time, that one veteran person in officiating management said he could see it being called either a block or a charge.
"Honest to God, I'm not sure," the official told ESPN.com. "I think if you talked to five people, you'd get three or four different interpretations."
ESPN.com's Jeff Goodman spoke to three game officials and there was no consensus opinion on the play, backing up the officiating manager's assertion.
The official said that Syracuse's C.J. Fair was not in an upward motion and that Duke's Rodney Hood had established position.
"By the strict interpretation of the rule, it was a player control foul in my opinion," the official said. "The defender was in position with his feet facing his opponent before Fair raised his hand. I think if you watch it, at least frame-by-frame, it was a player-control foul."
He added that the defender does have the right, after establishing legal guarding position, to slide to a side to cover an opponent, which Hood did.
Officiating has been a hot-button issue since the start of the season. The NCAA instituted a new rules package that has been dissected and questioned all year and includes an adjustment to how the block/charge call is interpreted.
Saturday night's call came right out of the amended interpretations, which reads: "A defensive player is not permitted to move into the path of an offensive player once he has started his upward motion with the ball to attempt a field goal or pass. If the defensive player is not in legal guarding position by this time, it is a blocking foul."
The timing of this particular call, with the NCAA tournament right around the corner, will only add to the heightened scrutiny officials are facing.
"It's really your garden variety block-charge call, and fortunately there haven't been too many controversies on those this year," the official said. "Except, naturally, in the final seconds of the most-watched game of the year. Murphy's law."
"The controversial call in the waning seconds of Saturday's showdown between Syracuse and Duke was so close, at least in real time, that one veteran person in officiating management said he could see it being called either a block or a charge.
"Honest to God, I'm not sure," the official told ESPN.com. "I think if you talked to five people, you'd get three or four different interpretations."
ESPN.com's Jeff Goodman spoke to three game officials and there was no consensus opinion on the play, backing up the officiating manager's assertion.
The official said that Syracuse's C.J. Fair was not in an upward motion and that Duke's Rodney Hood had established position.
"By the strict interpretation of the rule, it was a player control foul in my opinion," the official said. "The defender was in position with his feet facing his opponent before Fair raised his hand. I think if you watch it, at least frame-by-frame, it was a player-control foul."
He added that the defender does have the right, after establishing legal guarding position, to slide to a side to cover an opponent, which Hood did.
Officiating has been a hot-button issue since the start of the season. The NCAA instituted a new rules package that has been dissected and questioned all year and includes an adjustment to how the block/charge call is interpreted.
Saturday night's call came right out of the amended interpretations, which reads: "A defensive player is not permitted to move into the path of an offensive player once he has started his upward motion with the ball to attempt a field goal or pass. If the defensive player is not in legal guarding position by this time, it is a blocking foul."
The timing of this particular call, with the NCAA tournament right around the corner, will only add to the heightened scrutiny officials are facing.
"It's really your garden variety block-charge call, and fortunately there haven't been too many controversies on those this year," the official said. "Except, naturally, in the final seconds of the most-watched game of the year. Murphy's law."
I understand you didnt write the articles or do the interviews, but what else did you expect them to say. What I'm getting at is the officials arent going to say tg made a bad call. In my opinion there wasn't really that much contact and should have been a play on but I'm certainly not a referee
Orangeyes
R.I.P Dan
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2011
- Messages
- 16,265
- Like
- 21,713
Here is a great analysis in the Business Insider, the point they make is that the new rule leaves a gray area subject to interpretation
When you're watching the play you can see CJ trying to avoid the contact going between the defender and baseline. There isn't much contact at all.
http://www.businessinsider.in/Contr...ous-Flaw-In-New-Rule/articleshow/30954768.cms
good article, wondering if anyone has asked tg what he thinks after further review
AZOrange
Living Legend
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 19,761
- Like
- 41,596
Two things I don't get...why this "source" requires anonymity... It was a play that the world saw...this is an interpretation. This isn't internal source reporting news unknown.
Second, how are there 3-4 interpretations to the rule possible? It's a block or a charge. And the rule is very clear.
Second, how are there 3-4 interpretations to the rule possible? It's a block or a charge. And the rule is very clear.
RF2044
Living Legend
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2011
- Messages
- 30,838
- Like
- 99,756
Agreed on the anticipatory aspect of it. Also, Duke gets away with a lot of flopping historically--and guess what Hood did?
Most of all, i don't understand why every play involving contact has to necessitate a whistle. Fair slid right by the guy with minimal contact. Flop or no, that more of a block or a no-call than a charge.
