Roberson - why no official review?

[Cheriehoop]

Did anyone hear the reason why there wasn't an official review? I've seen games where even possible contact above the neck an official review was made. The injury and subsequent blood mop ups certainly didn't leave any question regarding contact. Usually the game is stopped, officials hunch over the replay screen etc. They seemed totally uninterested in Robeson's welfare. Is it the official at the scorekeeper's table responsible or the official standing right near the injury? Did JB address it at all? The media?The tv announcers? I would think a refs major duty is to protect the players playing - to try to eliminate, at the least discourage, any possibility of avoidable injury to the players on the court. Maybe a call wasn't warranted, why didn't they care enough to even review it?

Not a huge conspiratorial theorist but Roger Ayres, the official at Duke game last year in Cameron who called and got lots of flack with the CJ charge call (JB's suitcoat game)was at the dome yesterday against Pitt. I actually had few issues with the calls made (I didn't get a good view of Rak's weird illegal screen call) , it was the sins of omission , calls that weren't made, that bothered me more. That said, the way we played, we created the hole we were climbing out of at the end of the game.

 

[SWC75]

JB said he didn't see it because he was 50 feet away. He also said he can't comment on the officiating or he'd get fined. I'm thinking of asking him on his show this week what the protocol in this situation is. It seems like every time an SU elbow makes even incidental contact with an opposing player the refs spend a half hour looking at the monitor trying to decide if our guy needs to get thrown out, (and a couple of times he has. The Pitt guy clocked Tyler just above the eye coming down with a rebound and it was just "play on". I don't get it.

 

[ottodaorange]

I watched on ESPN3 streaming but they replayed it several times and from one angle they show the guy with the ball with his elbows raised as a weapon. I always thought that was a foul if any contact was made, let alone the damage to Roberson's face. But you are right, there should have been a replay.

 

[Cheriehoop]

JB said he didn't see it because he was 50 feet away. He also said he can't comment on the officiating or he'd get fined. I'm thinking of asking him on his show this week what the protocol in this situation is. It seems like every time an SU elbow makes even incidental contact with an opposing player the refs spend a half hour looking at the monitor trying to decide if our guy needs to get thrown out, (and a couple of times he has. The Pit guy clocked Tyler just above the eye coming down with a rebound and it was just "play on". I don't get it.

None of us saw it, I would think that's the exact point of having a review. If the refs didn't see it, why wouldn't they want to see how it occurred? If they did see it, they allowed a fast break basket because of it and didn't use their discretion to stop play (refs do have the discretion of stopping play) and allowed Pitt a distinct advantage.

 

[SUMBA]

Did anyone hear the reason why there wasn't an official review? I've seen games where even possible contact above the neck an official review was made. The injury and subsequent blood mop ups certainly didn't leave any question regarding contact. Usually the game is stopped, officials hunch over the replay screen etc. They seemed totally uninterested in Robeson's welfare. Is it the official at the scorekeeper's table responsible or the official standing right near the injury? Did JB address it at all? The media?The tv announcers? I would think a refs major duty is to protect the players playing - to try to eliminate, at the least discourage, any possibility of avoidable injury to the players on the court. Maybe a call wasn't warranted, why didn't they care enough to even review it?

Not a huge conspiratorial theorist but Roger Ayres, the official at Duke game last year in Cameron who called and got lots of flack with the CJ blocking call (JB's suitcoat game)was at the dome yesterday against Pitt. I actually had few issues with the calls made (I didn't get a good view of Rak's weird illegal screen call) , it was the sins of omission , calls that weren't made, that bothered me more. That said, the way we played, we created the hole we were climbing out of at the end of the game.

The announcers said the contact was "purely incidental."

 

[tbonezone]

i really didn't feel like the pitt guy did any thing intentional or egregious. but given the amount of damage inflicted by what was obviously an elbow they absolutely should have at least reviewed it. we've all seen them go to the monitors for far less contact.

 

[ottodaorange]

The announcers said the contact was "purely incidental."

The announcers said they thought the refs did "a great job of officiating," too. I thought the announcers were almost as bad as the officials. They showed the tap dance at the end and then stepping out of bounce several times also and made no comment on that.

 

[SUMBA]

The announcers said they thought the refs did "a great job of officiating," too. I thought the announcers were almost as bad as the officials. They showed the tap dance at the end and then stepping out of bounce several times also and made no comment on that.

I didn't say that I agreed with that assessment. I simply answered the question that was asked.

 

[Brooky03]

I don't know the official rule, but I always assumed it was only a foul if the offending player intentionally raised his elbows and contact was made (incidental or not). In this case, the Pitt player reached up for the rebound, got the ball and then made contact simply from the fact that he was landing while holding onto the ball. I don't think he intentionally moved his elbow, Roberson just happened to be underneath it.

I was good with them not reviewing it. If they did review it, depending on the rule in the books, they might have been forced to call the foul, and I don't think that would be right. If the roles were reversed, I certainly wouldn't want a Syracuse player being called for a foul in that situation.

 

[Orangezoo]

My biggest issue with it was that the injury led to an advantage 5 on 4 and 2 points for pitt. It was only an advantage due to that injury and the play should have been stopped. I get if it is a fast break but no way should play have continued on so long. It definitely appeared incidental live but it also gave pitt a full possession with an advantage. The refs absolutely should have stopped play. That was the awful part.

 

[007]

My biggest issue with it was that the injury led to an advantage 5 on 4 and 2 points for pitt. It was only an advantage due to that injury and the play should have been stopped. I get if it is a fast break but no way should play have continued on so long. It definitely appeared incidental live but it also gave pitt a full possession with an advantage. The refs absolutely should have stopped play. That was the awful part.

No, per rule, the refs were correct not to stop the play. It does not matter if there was an advantage or not.

"In case of an injury to a player, the official may stop play. If the ball is in play when the injury occurs, the officials shall wait to stop the game until the team with the injury gets possession of the ball. Exception: when necessary to protect an injured player, the officials may stop play immediately."

 

[Brooky03]

My biggest issue with it was that the injury led to an advantage 5 on 4 and 2 points for pitt. It was only an advantage due to that injury and the play should have been stopped. I get if it is a fast break but no way should play have continued on so long. It definitely appeared incidental live but it also gave pitt a full possession with an advantage. The refs absolutely should have stopped play. That was the awful part.

We should have recognized the injury and had a player commit a foul. I don't think Pitt was in the bonus at the time, so a non-shooting foul would certainly be better than playing 4 on 5.

 

[007]

We should have recognized the injury and had a player commit a foul. I don't think Pitt was in the bonus at the time, so a non-shooting foul would certainly be better than playing 4 on 5.

As long as it wasn't Rak or G who committed the foul, that would have been a great, heads up play. There aren't many players in college who react that way. Ennis??

 

[NineOneSeven]

It was incidental

 

[urban96]

JB said he didn't see it because he was 50 feet away. He also said he can't comment on the officiating or he'd get fined. I'm thinking of asking him on his show this week what the protocol in this situation is. It seems like every time an SU elbow makes even incidental contact with an opposing player the refs spend a half hour looking at the monitor trying to decide if our guy needs to get thrown out, (and a couple of times he has. The Pitt guy clocked Tyler just above the eye coming down with a rebound and it was just "play on". I don't get it.

I remember a call against Cooney where he was leaning back doing the limbo and the defender was still chest to chest with him. Cooney brought brought the ball from his right to left side above his body, the defender flopped and Cooney got called for a foul. Might have been a tournament game.

 

[Consigliere]

Said the same thing at the game, Cherie. Watching the replay I don't think there was an F1 on the play - rule of thumb is that the elbow needs to be turning quicker than the body and that was not the case here - but with an injury like that I expect to see the refs at least check the monitor at the next dead ball to verify.

I did notice that as soon as Syracuse got the ball in the defensive end, Dixon was up and screaming at the refs pointing at Roberson. I'm sure it was a gesture of concern and had nothing to do with an unguarded Syracuse player standing by himself under the Pittsburgh hoop,

 

[PartTimeFan]

I thought any contact above the shoulder with the elbow was needed to be reviewed. I think we can all remember the one call where Baye had the ball above his head and the defender ran into the elbow and he received the flagrant..

Needless to say they should have at least stopped play and done a review.

 

[xc84]

I watched on ESPN3 streaming but they replayed it several times and from one angle they show the guy with the ball with his elbows raised as a weapon. I always thought that was a foul if any contact was made, let alone the damage to Roberson's face. But you are right, there should have been a replay.

Yes, the contact should be called a foul but if it was not, I don't think they do a review to see if it was a common, flagrant 1 or 2.

 

[xc84]

I can't believe this was missed.

https://mtc.cdn.vine.co/r/videos/78...p4?versionId=ITX5VGDfKY26Yiej5nlAb3XQWG0A88IX

 

[SWC75]

It was incidental

In past debates on this subject, I've been told that that doesn't matter.

 

[SWC75]

Yes, the contact should be called a foul but if it was not, I don't think they do a review to see if it was a common, flagrant 1 or 2.

I've seen them review it against us when no foul had been called. I recall a big thread about such an incident last year.

 

[xc84]

I've seen them review it against us when no foul had been called. I recall a big thread about such an incident last year.

I won't question that but I don't know that the rules are supposed to allow it. With that said, sometimes it does not matter I guess.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

After McCullough went on that caterpillar ride and they went to the monitor to see if he "kicked" anyone, they can review anything that any opponent does to any of our guys in my book.

 

[pearl31]

The announcers said they thought the refs did "a great job of officiating," too.

I am so tired of hearing the preprogrammed robotic "this is a great officiating crew" or "these referees have done a terrific job today, as usual" game in and game out. As if it's some horrific taboo to say a ref or crew is having a bad game.
Oh Lord
This is actually why Bilas is usually so great to listen to - his willingness to simply tell it like it is in regards to the refs' performances - and he's pretty much the only one with the guts to do it.
When/why did refs become beyond reproach in college hoops?

 

[samspann1]

^^^I couldn't agree more