The Fab Elbow Play - Did we get screwed?

[HoustonCuse]

I watched the replay of the game last night. Here's how that play went down in chronological order:

1. Ball goes to the corner and some guy starting into shooting motion.
2. Fab elbows some other guy.
3. Shot misses.
4. Fab moves to the basket, but doesn't get there in time.
5. Crowder (I think) puts back in the rebound for 2 points.
6. Refs stop action and go to the monitor.

When all was said and done, UM got:
1. The Flagrant 1 on Melo for his fourth foul
2. The two points from Crowder
3. Two free throws

Did we get hosed? Should the 2 points from Crowder's shot have counted? The foul would have stopped play before that rebound or the ensuing follow shot. If the original 3-ball had gone, I could see that counting since it was simultaneous with the foul, but the 2-pointer should have been wiped off when they determined there was a fould (and thus a play stoppage) before the rebound.

Anyone know the rules here? I think we got the shaft.

 

[AZOrange]

I watched the replay of the game last night. Here's how that play went down in chronological order:

1. Ball goes to the corner and some guy starting into shooting motion.
2. Fab elbows some other guy.
3. Shot misses.
4. Fab moves to the basket, but doesn't get there in time.
5. Crowder (I think) puts back in the rebound for 2 points.
6. Refs stop action and go to the monitor.

When all was said and done, UM got:
1. The Flagrant 1 on Melo for his fourth foul
2. The two points from Crowder
3. Two free throws

Did we get hosed? Should the 2 points from Crowder's shot have counted? The foul would have stopped play before that rebound or the ensuing follow shot. If the original 3-ball had gone, I could see that counting since it was simultaneous with the foul, but the 2-pointer should have been wiped off when they determined there was a fould (and thus a play stoppage) before the rebound.

Anyone know the rules here? I think we got the shaft.

I dont think we got shafted. The refs did not stop the play and call a foul until after the shot went in and they had reviewed on monitor. I believe, by rule, they have to check the monitor for above the head contact. It was clearly a flagrant.

 

[PoppyHart]

I don't have a problem with the way things played out.

Take it to the extreme: Suppose a player has a fast break opportunity and a sure two points. What if a player on the other end of the court decided to throw an elbow, trip a player, or otherwise do something intentionally and/or flagrantly to stop the game before guy on the break away scored? I believe the "right" thing to do is to allow the basket, and then assess the foul. Otherwise you incentivize opponents to make potentially dangerous plays, and you penalize the team that has a clear scoring opportunity. Doesn't seem like that's in the best interest of the game.

 

[mayselc]

When all was said and done, UM got:
1. The Flagrant 1 on Melo for his fourth foul
2. The two points from Crowder
3. Two free throws

Anyone know the rules here? I think we got the shaft.

Don't forget they also got possession, so it could have been a 7 point swing.

 

[reedny]

I thought the officiating in this game was pi**-poor. Marquette came in with a brawl strategy and (on many possessions) got away with murder. Meanwhile, the Cuse' was playing defense on egg shells and getting whistled for touch fouls.

But I have to say that on the sequence of this thread, the rule is the problem not the officials. Here's an explanation of the rule:
http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect...ules+committee+recommends+restricted+area+arc
Note "other recommendations" section on retroactivity.

In the Marquette game, the sequence was actually worse than the thread stated:

- Melo gets his 4th foul "retroactively" (i.e., the ref's stop play, go back and watch television to make the call ... not a quality process, to say the least);
- Crowder gets two points;
- Marquette gets two free throws; AND
- Marquette gets the freaking ball (an extra possession/oportunity to go on offense and score).

Here are the problems with the rule:

1- If the ref's don't call a timely foul, allowing them (upon either coach's request) to go back and reconstruct the game and call one from a television monitor, leads to ridiculous situations. The Marquette game was one example. Another was in the Tulane game: the German kid claimed he was flagranted, so the refs had to stand and argue with him and his coach, look at the monitors ... and delay the game for several minutes while the stared at the television screens. Ultimately, they refused to make a call (he flopped), and this was a credit to the officials. But the process takes too long and inserts the coaches pretty far into the officiating process.

2- If the ref's are going to play revisionist historians (go back and call a foul retroactively), how long should the officials have to make the call? If they take more than a few seconds (as they did here), why should any points scored after the foul count, unless the flagrant occured in the act of shooting? Most of these plays occur on the defensive boards. If you go back and call a flagrant foul AND let any post-foul basket count (it could be a three pointer), then you're potentially penalizing the defending team a 3pter, plus 2 foul shots, plus the ball -- this could be anywhere between a 5-8 point swing!! Maybe on a Flagrant 2, this could be justified (especially if they expanded the rule to cover situations like the St Bonnies game 2 years ago when Nicholson punched Andy Rautins in the groin). But on a flagrant 1 (unintentional), I just don't see the justification for the delay or all the penalties.

3- We're all familiar with monitor reviews in sports. But one of the most enjoyable things about college BB is the speed of the game. When you let the officials stop play for 3-5 minutes while they stand around the monitor, with their butts facing the camera and the opposing coach (Buzzie) hounding them, it dimishes the game experience. It also allows the ref's to back-fill their failure to make a call in a timely fashion. If one player punches another in the face ... ok, take the time. But in virtually every other situation.. I don't think it's worth it; and if it's done, any points scored after the foul should NOT count.

 

[HoustonCuse]

I don't think they got possession, but if I recall they rebounded the missed free throw. We got the ball back, but didn't score and they came down and hit a three. So in effect it was a 6 point run and the 4th on Melo. Upon re-watching the game, so many things went wrong for us during that second half it was crazy. It was like the entire duration of the 4 game losing streak from last year.

As to the call - I see the point you guys are making but it still seems strange. Maybe I have been watching too much NFL. It almost seems like a situation where they can either decline the penalty and take the outcome of the play (2 points) or take the foul and the FTs, but to get both seems like having cake + eating it.

 

[Marsh01]

I don't think they got possession, but if I recall they rebounded the missed free throw.


Oh they most certainly did get possession after the flagrant. DJO missed the first FT and then made the second one. Then they took possession.

 

[HoustonCuse]

Oh, worse than I remembered then. I still want to know what the rule book says about all this. What if this was on the offensive end, Melo scored, then they went to the monitor and gave him the foul? Would the shot have counted? What if it was his 5th foul? Then you have a player scoring a basket while disqualified. The whole thing is a can of worms. It really needs to be ironed out. Can you imagine a FF or NC game hinging on a play like this in the last 10 seconds? It would seriously degrade the credibility of the sport.

 

[Chosen0ne]

The refs were terrible, but I did not have an issue with the flagrant call on Fab. I feel like they had to call that as it was hard to really gauge Fab's intentions.

 

[HoustonCuse]

Note: I am not questioning the call or the refs. Merely the rules in cases like this.

 

[OrlandoCuse]

I don't think they got possession, but if I recall they rebounded the missed free throw. We got the ball back, but didn't score and they came down and hit a three. So in effect it was a 6 point run and the 4th on Melo. Upon re-watching the game, so many things went wrong for us during that second half it was crazy. It was like the entire duration of the 4 game losing streak from last year.

As to the call - I see the point you guys are making but it still seems strange. Maybe I have been watching too much NFL. It almost seems like a situation where they can either decline the penalty and take the outcome of the play (2 points) or take the foul and the FTs, but to get both seems like having cake + eating it.

Play by play went like this:

9:53 - Vander Blue missed 3pt shot
9:46 - Jae Crowder offensive rebound
9:45 - Jae Crowder made layup
9:45 - Foul by Fab Melo, flagrant 1
9:45 - Darius Johnson Odom missed Free Throw
9:45 - DJO made Free Throw
9:42 - DJO missed 3pt shot

 

[reedny]

I don't think they got possession, but if I recall they rebounded the missed free throw. We got the ball back, but didn't score and they came down and hit a three. So in effect it was a 6 point run and the 4th on Melo. Upon re-watching the game, so many things went wrong for us during that second half it was crazy. It was like the entire duration of the 4 game losing streak from last year.

As to the call - I see the point you guys are making but it still seems strange. Maybe I have been watching too much NFL. It almost seems like a situation where they can either decline the penalty and take the outcome of the play (2 points) or take the foul and the FTs, but to get both seems like having cake + eating it.

Exactly. And I think Marquette did get the ball (by rule). But either way, you nailed it ... take the outcome of the play or the foul, not both. And the request should be made right after the foul ... not later (and certainly not at any time during the game).

 

[reedny]

Oh, worse than I remembered then. I still want to know what the rule book says about all this. What if this was on the offensive end, Melo scored, then they went to the monitor and gave him the foul? Would the shot have counted? What if it was his 5th foul? Then you have a player scoring a basket while disqualified. The whole thing is a can of worms. It really needs to be ironed out. Can you imagine a FF or NC game hinging on a play like this in the last 10 seconds? It would seriously degrade the credibility of the sport.

Totally agree. I think this is the actual rule. It's a mess, in my humble opinion. See pages 12, 13 (in the text). http://www.wbca.org/includes/media/docs/2010-11WBBPlayRulesHandbook.pdf

 

[BlackSquirrels]

The way I'm reading the rulebook, the refs were correct on this play. I believe the applicable rule can be found on pp. 36-37 of the rulebook:

When it is determined that a flagrant 1 or 2 personal foul, a flagrant 2 contact technical foul or a fight did occur within the prescribed timeframe, the infraction(s) should be penalized and play shall be resumed by awarding the ball to the offended team where the stoppage of play occurred to review the flagrant act. (Men) When a flagrant 2 contact technical foul or a contact dead ball technical foul is assessed, play shall be resumed by awarding the ball to the offended team at the division line on either side of the playing court. Any previous activity before the monitor review shall not be canceled or nullified. When it is determined that a flagrant 1 or 2 personal foul, a flagrant 2 contact technical foul or a fight did not occur or did not occur within the prescribed time frame, play shall be resumed where the stoppage of play occurred to review the act.

As far as I can tell, a monitor review can only be used in specific situations, one of which is a flagrant elbow, and must occur at the next dead ball. Saturday's review fit these criteria.

 

[AZOrange]

The way I'm reading the rulebook, the refs were correct on this play. I believe the applicable rule can be found on pp. 36-37 of the rulebook:



As far as I can tell, a monitor review can only be used in specific situations, one of which is a flagrant elbow, and must occur at the next dead ball. Saturday's review fit these criteria.

Look at bottom of page 15 and top of page 16 also.

 

[reedny]

The way I'm reading the rulebook, the refs were correct on this play. I believe the applicable rule can be found on pp. 36-37 of the rulebook:



As far as I can tell, a monitor review can only be used in specific situations, one of which is a flagrant elbow, and must occur at the next dead ball. Saturday's review fit these criteria.

I agree. As I said, it's not the officials, it's the rule. The way it is now, all Buzzie had to do was wait to see if a post-foul shot goes in (crowders did), then request review of the elbow before the basket (if not called). Since he's not forced into a choice (outcome or foul), he gets to pile on. He gets the (4th) foul (on Melo), the basket, and then the ball...!! Crazy.

Not to mention that the rule allows Buzzie to stand 12 feet into the court and have more 5 minute 'chats' with each Ref.

 

[HoustonCuse]

Another possible negative scenario: The "Patriots Defense." Where NFL linemen are literally falling over like they got shot to fake injuries to get a stoppage in play. In this game, Marquette was out of timeouts with like 3:40 remaining - it was a major factor. What stops Buzz from telling #54 to hit the deck clutching his head. Monitor review - and free timeout - ensues. There are some serious holes in this new rule.

 

[stuckinbig11]

all Buzzie had to do was wait to see if a post-foul shot goes in (crowders did), then request review of the elbow before the basket (if not called)

This is a key point. He gets to see if the shot goes in before making the request.

 

[pfister1]

I don't think they got possession, but if I recall they rebounded the missed free throw. We got the ball back, but didn't score and they came down and hit a three. So in effect it was a 6 point run and the 4th on Melo. Upon re-watching the game, so many things went wrong for us during that second half it was crazy. It was like the entire duration of the 4 game losing streak from last year.

As to the call - I see the point you guys are making but it still seems strange. Maybe I have been watching too much NFL. It almost seems like a situation where they can either decline the penalty and take the outcome of the play (2 points) or take the foul and the FTs, but to get both seems like having cake + eating it.

The free throws were technicals rebound of a missed free throw was not possible.

 

[pfister1]

I don't have a problem with the way things played out.

Take it to the extreme: Suppose a player has a fast break opportunity and a sure two points. What if a player on the other end of the court decided to throw an elbow, trip a player, or otherwise do something intentionally and/or flagrantly to stop the game before guy on the break away scored? I believe the "right" thing to do is to allow the basket, and then assess the foul. Otherwise you incentivize opponents to make potentially dangerous plays, and you penalize the team that has a clear scoring opportunity. Doesn't seem like that's in the best interest of the game.

If that is the case it is a flagrant 2 and the player is ejected. I think the reason that Melo's foul was a flagrant 1 and not 2 is because it was basically deemed inadvertent, had it been intentional as you describe he would have been ejected which should be enough disincentive to prevent someone doing it to stop a fast break.

But to take it to an extreme, what if the Crowder's put back had been missed and there were two or three more offensive boards and a kick out and three pointer before the clock was stopped. How would you implement the rule there?? It is not as though the officials were waiting for an opportune time to stop play and make the call. In this situation they didn't realize there was a call to be made until they went to the replay, which they would not have an opportunity to do until there is a stoppage in play.

What if they had played on and each team had scored multiple buckets before there was a stoppage in play and an opportunity to review the tape. What if it had been Melo's 5th foul and he had scored those points for SU.


I think the rule really assumes in most if not all cases the initial contact will draw a foul of some sort and result in play being stopped. Interpreting the rule otherwise leaves you open to ridiculous results.

 

[Noexcuse]

Play by play went like this:

9:53 - Vander Blue missed 3pt shot
9:46 - Jae Crowder offensive rebound
9:45 - Jae Crowder made layup
9:45 - Foul by Fab Melo, flagrant 1
9:45 - Darius Johnson Odom missed Free Throw
9:45 - DJO made Free Throw
9:42 - DJO missed 3pt shot

Surprised the ref's didnt see the Crowder clear out at 9:47, just before he got the rebound at 9:46. That probably wasn't reviewable though.

 

[cpatrocks]

They DEFINITELY got possession after all that.