I never fault referees for a game's outcome, but did Darius Johnson-Odom really fall completely on his own at the end of the game?
None of the Vanderbilt players had any role in that?
Johnson-Odom just fell on his own?
Really?
They are not going to bail DJO out going 1 on 3...with a wide open Buycks on the top of the key. DJO can really be a dumb basketball player sometimes. I would have rather given it to Buycks in that situation.
No intentional foul on the fast break?
Yes, absolutely. Bad call, we beat these guys out in Milwaukee. Where was the intentional foul call too on the breakaway stopped by a vandy foul?
Vanderbilt gets 2 breaks
Quote from: MU Avenue on December 29, 2010, 10:14:51 PM
I never fault referees for a game's outcome, but did Vander Blue really fall completely on his own at the end of the game?
None of the Vanderbilt players had any role in that?
Blue just fell on his own?
Really?
Yeah, really. On the road, not going to get it. Besides, the analyst was wrong, he didn't trip over his foot. Watched the replay about 10 times. Did he get him with the body, hard to tell but he certainly didn't trip him.
They called the intentional on Crowder when it wasn't a fast break but when we had the wide open fast break no intentional.
Jim Burr needs to retire
Didn't look like a trip to me either after lots of DVR slow mo. DJO just out of control. We just never get a decent look at an end of game shot.
Yes, 3rd bad call - intentional on Crowder
2) no intentional on breakaway
1) no call at end
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 29, 2010, 10:16:59 PM
Yeah, really. On the road, not going to get it. Besides, the analyst was wrong, he didn't trip over his foot. Watched the replay about 10 times. Did he get him with the body, hard to tell but he certainly didn't trip him.
As I slo moe'd and paused..there was clear contact between the Vandy player's leg/foot and DJO..pretty sure DJO can run and not fall to the ground..so long as he doesn't get tripped or nudged.
The bigger issue was the B.S. intentional foul they awarded Vanderbilt 94 feet from the basket..and then didn't award MU the same when DJO has a SURE dunk and the player grabs DJO to prevent him from going to in for a clear, uncontested slam.
Quote from: TallTitan34 on December 29, 2010, 10:18:23 PM
They called the intentional on Crowder when it wasn't a fast break but when we had the wide open fast break no intentional.
Calling an intentional in either case is stupid.
Quote from: Ners on December 29, 2010, 10:19:50 PM
As I slo moe'd and paused..there was clear contact between the Vandy player's leg/foot and DJO..pretty sure DJO can run and not fall to the ground..so long as he doesn't get tripped or nudged.
He was completely out of control. That would have been a BS call.
Quote from: mviale on December 29, 2010, 10:16:57 PM
Yes, absolutely. Bad call, we beat these guys out in Milwaukee. Where was the intentional foul call too on the breakaway stopped by a vandy foul?
Vanderbilt gets 2 breaks
But that's the deal, it wasn't in Milwaukee. Road games are tougher because you don't get the calls.
I thought the breakaway call was poor on the refs part. Did not think the last play was.
MU got a break as well....one of their starters didn't play.
Good to see St. John's beat West Virginia tonight at WVU. Feel very good about us beating WVU in Milwaukee.
Quote from: Ners on December 29, 2010, 10:19:50 PM
As I slo moe'd and paused..there was clear contact between the Vandy player's leg/foot and DJO..pretty sure DJO can run and not fall to the ground..so long as he doesn't get tripped or nudged.
The bigger issue was the B.S. intentional foul they awarded Vanderbilt 94 feet from the basket..and then didn't award MU the same when DJO has a SURE dunk and the player grabs DJO to prevent him from going to in for a clear, uncontested slam.
Look at it again, and watch his feet from the top angle camera (the original angle) when DJO already has him beat and their legs haven't touched...I would argue if anything happened he got him with the hip but hard to say. No way you're going to get that call on the hip.
Agree that the intentional non foul was a blown call, that was terrible.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on December 29, 2010, 10:21:29 PM
He was completely out of control. That would have been a BS call.
Are you saying he was out of control before or after he made contact with the Vandy guy's leg and flew to the ground? When a guy sets a screen you can't stick your leg out and knock someone over. If you do, that tends to make them lose contol of their body.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 29, 2010, 10:22:39 PM
But that's the deal, it wasn't in Milwaukee. Road games are tougher because you don't get the calls.
I thought the breakaway call was poor on the refs part. Did not think the last play was.
MU got a break as well....one of their starters didn't play.
Good to see St. John's beat West Virginia tonight at WVU. Feel very good about us beating WVU in Milwaukee.
we don't get many calls in MKE either though.
Is the clear-path foul an NBA-only thing or is it in college as well? Either way there is no way that should have been an intentional foul on Crowder, people do that on almost every possession when the ball is rebounded. Sure it probably should have been a foul because it was in plain view, but no way intentional.
Quote from: marquette09 on December 29, 2010, 10:19:18 PM
Jim Burr needs to retire
Burr has always been a dipstick in our games. He must be pissed at MU for some reason.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on December 29, 2010, 10:16:07 PM
They are not going to bail DJO out going 1 on 3...with a wide open Buycks on the top of the key. DJO can really be a dumb basketball player sometimes. I would have rather given it to Buycks in that situation.
Sorry Sultan...but not too many kids have the wherewithal to be able to rush full speed up the court with 4.1 seconds left..survey the defense, asses their own shot option, other teammates on the court, calculate will there be enough time for the pass to get their and the shot to get launched. Lots at play there. I like the aggressive move of taking it all the way to the basket as the defense cannot foul, is generally stationary, and the offensive player has the momentum..
Can you imagine if DJO did pass off and it was too late and we don't get a shot off in that scenario?
Quote from: karavotsos on December 29, 2010, 10:24:52 PM
Are you saying he was out of control before or after he made contact with the Vandy guy's leg and flew to the ground? When a guy sets a screen you can't stick your leg out and knock someone over. If you do, that tends to make them lose contol of their body.
Dosen't matter. He was out of control, looked out of control, and when that is the case you are not going to get the call.
Quote from: karavotsos on December 29, 2010, 10:24:52 PM
Are you saying he was out of control before or after he made contact with the Vandy guy's leg and flew to the ground? When a guy sets a screen you can't stick your leg out and knock someone over. If you do, that tends to make them lose contol of their body.
I am saying he was out of control on the drive and a foul would have been a BS bailout call. I mean, where was he going?
The Vandy defender could have stuck his arm out and clothes-lined DJO and they weren't going to call a foul in that situation. Having a defensive breakdown on the biggest possession of the game is why MU lost.
Ners, Buycks makes better decisions than DJO does. He sees the floor better too.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on December 29, 2010, 10:28:25 PM
I am saying he was out of control on the drive and a foul would have been a BS bailout call. I mean, where was he going?
Around the screen toward the basket for a pull up at about 17 feet.
I'm not as disturbed by the lack of a foul on the last play. On the road, certainly don't expect to get that call. True that you do want the first minute to be reffed the same way as the last minute, but that's rarely the case.
My question for the board is this - did anyone notice that DJO was sent up the right side of the court, even though he is left-handed? I'm wondering if that contributed to his lack of control/awareness. I know he has tremendous finishing abilities with both hands, but I think he loses his handle more easily when he dribbles right.
((And even as I'm typing the question, I realize it is probably easier for him to get a shot up going against the grain, but he has to get through the defense first))
Otule was forced to guard two men on that last play. It was a breakdown by the other defenders
they owed us that call at the end, on the road or not. chicos stick to the UW message boards you just annoy the **** out of everyone on here. also everyone stop complaining about DB, he was big tonight
Quote from: elephantraker on December 29, 2010, 10:31:21 PM
Otule was forced to guard two men on that last play. It was a breakdown by the other defenders
I think crowder left his man
Quote from: karavotsos on December 29, 2010, 10:29:59 PM
Around the screen toward the basket for a pull up at about 17 feet.
Lol...there wasn't a chance in hell he was pulling up.
Quote from: mklenn on December 29, 2010, 10:32:30 PM
they owed us that call at the end, on the road or not. chicos stick to the UW message boards you just annoy the **** out of everyone on here. also everyone stop complaining about DB, he was big tonight
Choices has actually been very complimentary towards MUs tonight.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on December 29, 2010, 10:29:19 PM
Ners, Buycks makes better decisions than DJO does. He sees the floor better too.
I tend to agree, but that is even debatable..Buycks is prone to the no brainer turnover at times..and DJO is prone to getting a little out of control at times. Probably no perfect solution..however, tonight I would have chosen Buycks to be the receipient of the inbounds pass...given he shot the ball very well tonight..and probably give him the edge for the qualities you mention above..
WTF!?
I am so angry I can punt a baby right now.
On the road? Yes. In the waning seconds? Yes. If it is a foul at any other point in the game, it is a foul then.
Being a road team in the waning seconds didn't prevent Georgetown from getting a phantom foul call in 08 (no I have not and will never let that go). DJO didn't fall to the floor at the same time as the defender (who because I am so incredibly angry I do not care to look up who it was) by coincidence.
We were worked on that play.
Quote from: TallTitan34 on December 29, 2010, 10:38:34 PM
Choices has actually been very complimentary towards MUs tonight.
saw his other post after i posted. my bad chicos
Quote from: Ners on December 29, 2010, 10:41:40 PM
I tend to agree, but that is even debatable..Buycks is prone to the no brainer turnover at times..and DJO is prone to getting a little out of control at times. Probably no perfect solution..however, tonight I would have chosen Buycks to be the receipient of the inbounds pass...given he shot the ball very well tonight..and probably give him the edge for the qualities you mention above..
And to be fair, they may have cycled Buycks through and they just didn't get him the ball.
But DJO also made that bonehead play versus UW when he knocked it out of Buycks hands.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on December 29, 2010, 10:46:25 PM
And to be fair, they may have cycled Buycks through and they just didn't get him the ball.
But DJO also made that bonehead play versus UW when he knocked it out of Buycks hands.
yeah..that was brutal..just brutal..nothing worse than stealing the ball from your teammate! Think DJO thought it was gonna be a handoff play..and Buycks decided to keep that..but whatever the case..just more end of game hi-jinx.
If there was no contact why did the defender fall right as DJO passed him?
Quote from: TallTitan34 on December 29, 2010, 10:51:58 PM
If there was no contact why did the defender fall right as DJO passed him?
But it's on the road. Near the end of the game. So it's different.
You all need to invest in a TiVo. There was no contact. As much as I hate to say it, it was a good no call.
Quote from: GuyIncognito on December 29, 2010, 11:07:45 PM
You all need to invest in a TiVo. There was no contact. As much as I hate to say it, it was a good no call.
Why did the defender fall? Was djo really running that fast?
I have a DVR. Are you sayin DJO and the Vandy defender both tripped at the same time without contact?
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on December 29, 2010, 10:33:48 PM
Lol...there wasn't a chance in hell he was pulling up.
I don't understand why its funny to believe he would have pulled up. Maybe he would have shot a runner. I don't understand your point. It looked pretty clear to me what they were trying to do.
Quote from: TallTitan34 on December 29, 2010, 11:09:24 PM
I have a DVR. Are you sayin DJO and the Vandy defender both tripped at the same time without contact?
All I'm saying is that if you go frame by frame on the replay from BOTH angles, there is no evidence of contact being made.
Quote from: TallTitan34 on December 29, 2010, 11:09:24 PM
I have a DVR. Are you sayin DJO and the Vandy defender both tripped at the same time without contact?
Same reason DJO fell. Slipped and lost footing. Well drawn up play that gave us a chance to win, but very unfortunate ending.
Quote from: GuyIncognito on December 29, 2010, 11:12:50 PM
All I'm saying is that if you go frame by frame on the replay from BOTH angles, there is no evidence of contact being made.
Except for the defender falling to the floor as well. Unless DJO was really running that fast?
Quote from: GuyIncognito on December 29, 2010, 11:12:50 PM
All I'm saying is that if you go frame by frame on the replay from BOTH angles, there is no evidence of contact being made.
Two guys tripping at the exact same time as they pass each other isn't evidence?
Quote from: TallTitan34 on December 29, 2010, 11:14:27 PM
Two guys tripping at the exact same time as they pass each other isn't evidence?
No, evidence would be physical contact actually being made between the two of them. They simply dont touch each other.
I have a question that i'm unsure of the answer and i'd appreciate if someone can clear it up?
If a defensive player unintentionally trips a guy who is penetrating, is that by the rule book technically a foul because i thought DJO did get tripped by the defender, but the defender didn't stick his leg out with the intention to trip DJO, their feet just got tangled up?
Quote from: mklenn on December 29, 2010, 10:32:30 PM
they owed us that call at the end, on the road or not. chicos stick to the UW message boards you just annoy the **** out of everyone on here. also everyone stop complaining about DB, he was big tonight
I hate UW, why in hell would I want to stick to their message boards?
You don't get calls "owed" to you....I'm sure Vanderbilt fans could claim Vander fouled their guys bringing up the ball 4 or 5 times during the game, you could here the fans displeasure with those non-calls.
Let's put it another way....if the reverse happened and MU was winning and that call was made people here would be going absolutely APESHYTE that it was a ridiculous call and you know it. You can't have it both ways.
Quote from: timinatorx3 on December 29, 2010, 11:09:11 PM
Why did the defender fall? Was djo really running that fast?
Why did we throw the ball out of bounds without a deflection against Wisconsin? Sometimes kids make odd plays in crunch time.
I watched the play many times on the DVR, no trip from what I can see. I do think he got him on the hip a bit, but believe it was not going to be called. If the shoe was on the other foot and a call made with MU up, people here would go ballistic. Can you imagine MU at home, up 1 against Vandy and a call made in that situation...there would be riot here.
As for why the defender fell down....wouldn't that be because he was fighting through the screen?
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 29, 2010, 11:33:34 PM
Let's put it another way....if the reverse happened and MU was winning and that call was made people here would be going absolutely APESHYTE that it was a ridiculous call and you know it. You can't have it both ways.
And you'd be on here reminding everyone that a foul is a foul, take off your blue and gold glasses, stop being a fanboy, etc. You can't have it both ways either.
I watched it several times, and I'm pretty sure there was no contact. Looked to me like they both slipped. Didn't go back to see if someone had gone down in that area leading up to it, but it sure looked like they both slipped. Helluva game, but we needed a W.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 29, 2010, 11:38:42 PM
Why did we throw the ball out of bounds without a deflection against Wisconsin? Sometimes kids make odd plays in crunch time.
I watched the play many times on the DVR, no trip from what I can see. I do think he got him on the hip a bit, but believe it was not going to be called. If the shoe was on the other foot and a call made with MU up, people here would go ballistic. Can you imagine MU at home, up 1 against Vandy and a call made in that situation...there would be riot here.
As for why the defender fell down....wouldn't that be because he was fighting through the screen?
I watched it multiple times and thought there was a trip, but an unintentional trip, more so that the defender was just standing there and DJO tripped over the defenders foot. Not sure if that's technically a foul though?
It's interesting to see how many people here said no trip vs unintentional trip vs hip contact vs blatant trip....opinions all over the place.
What does that lead me to believe..... NO CALL would be correct. If we can't figure it out here with multiple replays, angles, etc and come to different opinions, why would we expect there to be a call at the end of the game happening in real time?
I see no contact between thier feet. Looks like DJO was out of control leaning too far and slipped or just feel cause he was trying to go to fast. He had plenty of time to get to the basket if he stayed up.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 29, 2010, 11:38:42 PM
Why did we throw the ball out of bounds without a deflection against Wisconsin? Sometimes kids make odd plays in crunch time.
I watched the play many times on the DVR, no trip from what I can see. I do think he got him on the hip a bit, but believe it was not going to be called. If the shoe was on the other foot and a call made with MU up, people here would go ballistic. Can you imagine MU at home, up 1 against Vandy and a call made in that situation...there would be riot here.
As for why the defender fell down....wouldn't that be because he was fighting through the screen?
Would that be similar to Georgetown getting three shots in OT in 2008 vs. MU? Yes I can imagine.
I watched it a couple times, frame by frame. There was definitely contact with the Vandy player. He certainly didn't trip over Vander, or his own feet.
Would have been a very, very tough call in that situation. But no tougher than the call on James against GTown a couple years back. About time we get one of those.
Quote from: MUfan12 on December 29, 2010, 11:56:36 PM
I watched it a couple times, frame by frame. There was definitely contact with the Vandy player. He certainly didn't trip over Vander, or his own feet.
Would have been a very, very tough call in that situation. But no tougher than the call on James against GTown a couple years back. About time we get one of those.
timinatorx3 likes this.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 29, 2010, 11:51:42 PM
It's interesting to see how many people here said no trip vs unintentional trip vs hip contact vs blatant trip....opinions all over the place.
What does that lead me to believe..... NO CALL would be correct. If we can't figure it out here with multiple replays, angles, etc and come to different opinions, why would we expect there to be a call at the end of the game happening in real time?
I don't think there was anything blatant enough either for fans to blame the ref for not calling a foul there as if they swallowed their whistle on a clear obvious foul.
That said, does anyone know what the rule book states if a defender is just standing in a spot and not sticking his leg out to purposely trip a guy penetrating, but their feet do tangle causing the offensive player to trip and fall?
I'm curious because my buddy called right after the game all pissed off by the no call and i said that well the trip was unintentional, so that's probably why there was no call. My buddy though said even an unintentional trip is a foul because it impedes the offensive player. I have no clue either way?
Quote from: El Duderino on December 30, 2010, 12:01:44 AM
I don't think there was anything blatant enough either for fans to blame the ref for not calling a foul there as if they swallowed their whistle on a clear obvious foul.
That said, does anyone know what the rule book states if a defender is just standing in a spot and not sticking his leg out to purposely trip a guy penetrating, but their feet do tangle causing the offensive player to trip and fall?
I'm curious because my buddy called right after the game all pissed off by the no call and i said that well the trip was unintentional, so that's probably why there was no call. My buddy though said even an unintentional trip is a foul because it impedes the offensive player. I have no clue either way?
This is a good question. It seems to me that intent doesn't ever factor into whether or not it is a foul though (well tonight it did...) But i would like to see a definitive answer as well... I do not think the trip in this game was intentional but a trip there was.
Quote from: MUfan12 on December 29, 2010, 11:56:36 PM
I watched it a couple times, frame by frame. There was definitely contact with the Vandy player. He certainly didn't trip over Vander, or his own feet.
Would have been a very, very tough call in that situation. But no tougher than the call on James against GTown a couple years back. About time we get one of those.
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/photos?gameId=303630238&photoId=1034865
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 30, 2010, 12:12:25 AM
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/photos?gameId=303630238&photoId=1034865
Umm... okay? That was after the contact. The guy he made contact with would have been behind, and out of that shot.
Not sure what that was supposed to prove.
Quote from: MUfan12 on December 29, 2010, 11:56:36 PM
I watched it a couple times, frame by frame. There was definitely contact with the Vandy player. He certainly didn't trip over Vander, or his own feet.
Would have been a very, very tough call in that situation. But no tougher than the call on James against GTown a couple years back. About time we get one of those.
The difference, in my opinion, is the call on DJ (which was a bad call) was done on a shot attempt which is going to have the refs all over it. This was a guy trying to get around his own player laying down a high screen. The refs, right or wrong, are going to be analyzing a shot attempt a lot more than a play at the top of the key involving a screen. IMO.
Quote from: MUfan12 on December 30, 2010, 12:15:10 AM
Umm... okay? That was after the contact. The guy he made contact with would have been behind, and out of that shot.
Not sure what that was supposed to prove.
Doesn't prove anything. I just thought people would want to see the photo. I thought the caption was interesting as well.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 30, 2010, 12:20:01 AM
The difference, in my opinion, is the call on DJ (which was a bad call) was done on a shot attempt which is going to have the refs all over it. This was a guy trying to get around his own player laying down a high screen. The refs, right or wrong, are going to be analyzing a shot attempt a lot more than a play at the top of the key involving a screen. IMO.
Good points. We're on the same page regarding the call tonight. No call was probably right in that situation.
Regarding the photo, I thought that was in response to my post. My bad.
Quote from: timinatorx3 on December 30, 2010, 12:06:59 AM
This is a good question. It seems to me that intent doesn't ever factor into whether or not it is a foul though (well tonight it did...) But i would like to see a definitive answer as well... I do not think the trip in this game was intentional but a trip there was.
That how i felt and in watching lots of basketball over the years, i've seen offensive players trip quite a bit on the feet of defenders in both college/the NBA, yet sometimes the refs call a foul and other times let it go.
Only because it happened on the last play of a 1 point game did it finally make me question what the actual rule on that is? Players feet tangle quite a bit in basketball games and in most cases, it's not the defender intentionally sticking his foot out to trip the guy penetrating.
Given i've never noticed a very clear trend by most refs in how to call plays where an offensive/defensive player get their feet tangled, i wonder if it's one of those ambiguous deals where a ref simply gets to decide on his own whether on offensive player tripping on a defenders foot is a foul?
Nashville, Tenn. — The Marquette Golden Eagles' search for a quality win continues.
And the latest missed opportunity was also the team's most painful, as Andre Walker's layup with 4.1 seconds left propelled the No. 24 Vanderbilt Commodores to a 77-76 win Wednesday night at Memorial Gym.
MU (9-4) got the ball back with a chance to win, but Darius Johnson-Odom's sprint with the ball coming out of a timeout ended with the junior guard seemingly tripping over teammate Vander Blue about 25 feet away from the basket as the freshman tried to set a screen. The ball bounced away as time expired.
"It was supposed to be a brush screen for me," Johnson-Odom said. "I was trying to get to the rim. At first I got hit on the arm, and then I tripped. I don't know if it was a tough call for them to make or whatnot, but that was the play."
http://www.jsonline.com/sports/goldeneagles/112636614.html
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 30, 2010, 12:20:01 AM
The difference, in my opinion, is the call on DJ (which was a bad call) was done on a shot attempt which is going to have the refs all over it. This was a guy trying to get around his own player laying down a high screen. The refs, right or wrong, are going to be analyzing a shot attempt a lot more than a play at the top of the key involving a screen. IMO.
At the same time, wouldn't a play with the refs "all over it" be more prone to having a correct call made? The only pattern I can see is that "officiating" is inconsistent and the reasonable expectation of objectivity is unreasonable.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 30, 2010, 12:52:33 AM
Nashville, Tenn. — The Marquette Golden Eagles' search for a quality win continues.
And the latest missed opportunity was also the team's most painful, as Andre Walker's layup with 4.1 seconds left propelled the No. 24 Vanderbilt Commodores to a 77-76 win Wednesday night at Memorial Gym.
MU (9-4) got the ball back with a chance to win, but Darius Johnson-Odom's sprint with the ball coming out of a timeout ended with the junior guard seemingly tripping over teammate Vander Blue about 25 feet away from the basket as the freshman tried to set a screen. The ball bounced away as time expired.
"It was supposed to be a brush screen for me," Johnson-Odom said. "I was trying to get to the rim. At first I got hit on the arm, and then I tripped. I don't know if it was a tough call for them to make or whatnot, but that was the play."
http://www.jsonline.com/sports/goldeneagles/112636614.html
So the player involved also thought he was fouled?
I Watched the replay in slow motion on the HD DVR... Do not look at the feet...look at DJO's waist....completely hooked by the Vandy player as he was falling. Definate foul!
Quote from: timinatorx3 on December 30, 2010, 01:04:38 AM
So the player involved also thought he was fouled?
He said he was hit on the arm (which is what I saw with the hip brush) and then he said "I tripped" not "he tripped me". That was interesting.
Rosiak seems to say he tripped over Vander, which is also possible.
Seems, again, pretty clear to me that no one really knows what happens despite different angles, replays, theories, etc so it shouldn't surprise anyone that it was a non-call. It certainly wasn't open and shut or we wouldn't have so many opinions on this.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 30, 2010, 01:12:16 AM
He said he was hit on the arm (which is what I saw with the hip brush) and then he said "I tripped" not "he tripped me". That was interesting.
Rosiak seems to say he tripped over Vander, which is also possible.
Seems, again, pretty clear to me that no one really knows what happens despite different angles, replays, theories, etc so it shouldn't surprise anyone that it was a non-call. It certainly wasn't open and shut or we wouldn't have so many opinions on this.
Well it doesn't surprise me DJO doesn't name names... he was driving and although I 've never played D1 basketball I assume things happen fairly quickly when you're driving to the basket... Also I would find it odd if DJO and Vander Blue tripped over each other and a Vanderbilt player arbitrarily fell to the floor at the same time as DJO, and Vander stayed upright, although I guess it's possible. Also, wouldn't getting hit on the arm be a foul? Was Blue trying to strip the ball from DJO?
Also sorry to harp on this so much... what's done is done and whether or not a foul should have been called, none was and that is the unfortunate reality we live in.
Quote from: MUfan12 on December 29, 2010, 11:56:36 PM
I watched it a couple times, frame by frame. There was definitely contact with the Vandy player. He certainly didn't trip over Vander, or his own feet.
I will also point out that referees don't have the ability to view it a couple of times, frame by frame.
Quote from: elephantraker on December 29, 2010, 10:31:21 PM
Otule was forced to guard two men on that last play. It was a breakdown by the other defenders
Crowder was on the guard at the top of the key and Buycks came to help with a fly-by double team. Re-wind the tape a few seconds and see if they switched, with Crowder taking the guard and Buycks the big. Then, when Buycks left to double team, you see that Otule had his guy sealed effectively. He hadn't opened up to guard both. When the dumpdown came, Otule left his guy and got there a 1/2 second late. IMO, Buycks and Crowder should not have switched, leaving DB one on one on top and Crowder down low. Didn't happen. If the the Vandy guard rushes his pass, DB swats it with his flyby and we are all singing and dancing. Ah, well.
I did not bother to watch the replay. What upsets me is that I believed with 4.1 seconds we would not get the ball upcourt to even get a shot off. Two times already this year and no chance at a game winning shot. That happen several times last year. The first time was DJO throwing it over Buycks head against Florida St. There were a couple of other games to. I think Notre Dame was one of them. I guessing 5 games between the two years that we had last shot that we did not get off.
Quote from: tower912 on December 30, 2010, 08:06:52 AM
Crowder was on the guard at the top of the key and Buycks came to help with a fly-by double team. Re-wind the tape a few seconds and see if they switched, with Crowder taking the guard and Buycks the big. Then, when Buycks left to double team, you see that Otule had his guy sealed effectively. He hadn't opened up to guard both. When the dumpdown came, Otule left his guy and got there a 1/2 second late. IMO, Buycks and Crowder should not have switched, leaving DB one on one on top and Crowder down low. Didn't happen. If the the Vandy guard rushes his pass, DB swats it with his flyby and we are all singing and dancing. Ah, well.
With all the justifiable focus on the last two possessions, it's easy to forget just how close we were to having a two pt lead going into that last defensive possession. Buycks' toes just on the line. Seems that's the way it goes for us down the stretch in close game after close game, JFB's heroics last year aside.
The reason we can't see anything on TV is because Blue is blocking our view. Burr was on the other side, however, with a clear view right in front of him.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on December 30, 2010, 07:16:17 AM
I will also point out that referees don't have the ability to view it a couple of times, frame by frame.
Well, duh.
You also left out the part where I said it would have been. really tough call to make.
I have said this a million times and I will say it again....a foul is a foul is a foul is a foul is a foul(unless you are UW). I don't care if there is 8:00 to go or .8 seconds to go. You can't NOT give a team a foul call because of the time/situation. DJO should have been at the FT line there. PERIOD.
Quote from: willie warrior on December 29, 2010, 10:27:17 PM
Burr has always been a dipstick in our games. He must be pissed at MU for some reason.
Does that remind you of anyone?
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 30, 2010, 12:20:43 AM
Doesn't prove anything. I just thought people would want to see the photo. I thought the caption was interesting as well.
Why is the caption interesting? Because it doesn't say "Marquette guard Darius Johnson-Odom (1) was tripped on a no-call by referee Jim Burr"? Unless there is a league-wide uproar, such as that play that cost the Jets a playoff berth a few years back, the media almost never calls out referees on missed or bad calls. And if they do, it will be in a subtle on-air comment, not in the caption of a game photo.
DJO went down. Vandy's defender went down. That's either an amazing coincidence, or he was the reason DJO tripped. And I don't care if he had a clear view, I sure as hell don't trust Jim Burr to make the right call. He's got fewer working eyes than Otule.
Breakdown of the first half plays that were questionable / terrible calls. If you have TVO or can go to espn3.com and watch the replay go to the times noted below.
-18:49 absolute phantom offensive call on Otule.
-16:15 is that a carry? No call.
-15:40 Buycks gets called for charge on baseline. Questionable call.
-14:35 JB draws foul on pass to the block. Phantom call.
-13:10 Crowder rebound off missed 3. Runs the break and gets MUGGED, no call.
-10:10 Jae makes a great steal and then gets fouled at half court. Phantom call again. He would have had a breakaway layup.
-9:20 Vander rushes down tries to draw contact but no call. He did not have numbers and should have pulled it out.
-3:50 Buycks nice pressure in backcourt. Fulce gets called for a PHANTOM call. Who the F is this guy? Is this the same guy who called the offensive foul call on Otule early?
-2:35 Halarious. Another phantom call by our guy. Except this one goes our way. Ezeli is called for holding Otule behind his back. Terrible. Otule has no idea what the call is after the whistle blows.
Quote from: TallTitan34 on December 30, 2010, 08:34:55 AM
The reason we can't see anything on TV is because Blue is blocking our view. Burr was on the other side, however, with a clear view right in front of him.
Agreed. The camera views don't capture in totality what is happening. In NFL parlance, this would be a classic "inconclusive video evidence".
For the other posters here, all this conspiracy talk about how he (Jim Burr) hates MU...really??....
I'll bet he reads these boards and wants to stick it to some posters. For the record, Burr has worked in 16 Final Fours and 7 National Championship games. No current ref has worked as many and that doesn't happen by accident.
Quote from: brewcity77 on December 30, 2010, 10:16:13 AM
Why is the caption interesting? Because it doesn't say "Marquette guard Darius Johnson-Odom (1) was tripped on a no-call by referee Jim Burr"? Unless there is a league-wide uproar, such as that play that cost the Jets a playoff berth a few years back, the media almost never calls out referees on missed or bad calls. And if they do, it will be in a subtle on-air comment, not in the caption of a game photo.
DJO went down. Vandy's defender went down. That's either an amazing coincidence, or he was the reason DJO tripped. And I don't care if he had a clear view, I sure as hell don't trust Jim Burr to make the right call. He's got fewer working eyes than Otule.
Actually the media calls out the refs quite a bit on calls...look at the UCLA Kansas game from 2 weeks ago as a recent example. http://espn.go.com/ncb/recap?gameId=303362305
There are examples all the time for this stuff.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 30, 2010, 11:49:32 AM
For the other posters here, all this conspiracy talk about how he (Jim Burr) hates MU...really??....I'll bet he reads these boards and wants to stick it to some posters.
For the record, Burr has worked in 16 Final Fours and 7 National Championship games. No current ref has worked as many and that doesn't happen by accident.
Chicos,
Just because Burr has been around for quite some time and has worked the big games, does not mean he is a good referee. I'm sure there are worse but I don't like him or Hightower because in my opinion, they always seem to be making questionable calls during pivotal parts of the game (for or against MU). Personally, I prefer it when I do not recognize the referees on the floor at the beginning of the game. While I don't think Burr has any vendetta against MU and in no way am I saying that Burr cost MU the game last night, I did find it humorus to see that a quick search for Burr seems to show quite a bit of hatred for his calls across the boards:
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/mensbasketball/2009-03-11-referees-tournament_N.htm
http://vuhoops.com/2010/11/27/nova-loses-first-of-the-season/
http://mswisher.blogspot.com/2006/02/referee-jim-burr.html
http://www.illinoisloyalty.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=11741
http://www.cardchronicle.com/2010/11/27/1839206/louisville-tops-marshall-80-66
http://blog.syracuse.com/orangebasketball/2010/02/orange_basketball_links_life_o/964/comments-newest.html
http://blog.syracuse.com/orangebasketball/2010/03/mike_kitts_is_one_of_two_refer.html
http://buckyville.yuku.com/reply/432121/t/Re-Big-10-Dumps-Several-Refs.html
http://ncaabbs.com/showthread.php?tid=471860&pid=6069900#pid6069900
http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/2008/dec/13/tigers-fall-georgetown-76-70-overtime/
Quote from: Danny Noonan on December 30, 2010, 01:22:38 PM
Chicos,
I'm sure there are worse but I don't like him or Hightower because in my opinion, they always seem to be making questionable calls during pivotal parts of the game (for or against MU).
Hightower is a terrible ref.
Quote from: chren21 on December 30, 2010, 01:26:43 PM
Hightower is a terrible ref.
but at least he is entertaining to watch
Quote from: TallTitan34 on December 29, 2010, 10:16:21 PM
No intentional foul on the fast break?
There were 2 MU fast breaks fouls and neither were called intentional.
Quote from: Danny Noonan on December 30, 2010, 01:22:38 PM
Chicos,
Just because Burr has been around for quite some time and has worked the big games, does not mean he is a good referee. I'm sure there are worse but I don't like him or Hightower because in my opinion, they always seem to be making questionable calls during pivotal parts of the game (for or against MU). Personally, I prefer it when I do not recognize the referees on the floor at the beginning of the game. While I don't think Burr has any vendetta against MU and in no way am I saying that Burr cost MU the game last night, I did find it humorus to see that a quick search for Burr seems to show quite a bit of hatred for his calls across the boards:
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/mensbasketball/2009-03-11-referees-tournament_N.htm
http://vuhoops.com/2010/11/27/nova-loses-first-of-the-season/
http://mswisher.blogspot.com/2006/02/referee-jim-burr.html
http://www.illinoisloyalty.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=11741
http://www.cardchronicle.com/2010/11/27/1839206/louisville-tops-marshall-80-66
http://blog.syracuse.com/orangebasketball/2010/02/orange_basketball_links_life_o/964/comments-newest.html
http://blog.syracuse.com/orangebasketball/2010/03/mike_kitts_is_one_of_two_refer.html
http://buckyville.yuku.com/reply/432121/t/Re-Big-10-Dumps-Several-Refs.html
http://ncaabbs.com/showthread.php?tid=471860&pid=6069900#pid6069900
http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/2008/dec/13/tigers-fall-georgetown-76-70-overtime/
A high profile ref where fans don't like him....color me shocked. Do the same searches over the years for Ted Hillary, Valentine, Hightower, etc. NBA fans are the same way toward the officials that work the high profile games or are considered high profile in nature.
What I find equally humorous is the NCAA and their officiating gurus continue put these guys as officials of the biggest games in the country on the biggest stage (NCAA Final Four, Championship games, etc) despite how poor they are.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 30, 2010, 03:56:16 PM
A high profile ref where fans don't like him....color me shocked. Do the same searches over the years for Ted Hillary, Valentine, Hightower, etc. NBA fans are the same way toward the officials that work the high profile games or are considered high profile in nature.
What I find equally humorous is the NCAA and their officiating gurus continue put these guys as officials of the biggest games in the country on the biggest stage (NCAA Final Four, Championship games, etc) despite how poor they are.
That right there is the problem. The job title doesn't include "high profile." It includes getting the calls right and remaining unknown. For that reason (and others) Burr is not a good referee. I don't care if he ends up officiating every FF and NC game until he dies. Chicos, you know that just because the ruling body says/implies something doesn't make it true. Not to turn this into a political debate, but the Republican party thought Sarah Palin was a good idea, too.
EDIT: I should amend this by saying I'm not convinced there was a foul on that last play either. I'm more interested in the non-intentional foul that prevented a breakaway.
Quote from: IAmMarquette on December 30, 2010, 04:27:03 PM
That right there is the problem. The job title doesn't include "high profile." It includes getting the calls right and remaining unknown. For that reason (and others) Burr is not a good referee. I don't care if he ends up officiating every FF and NC game until he dies. Chicos, you know that just because the ruling body says/implies something doesn't make it true. Not to turn this into a political debate, but the Republican party thought Sarah Palin was a good idea, too.
EDIT: I should amend this by saying I'm not convinced there was a foul on that last play either. I'm more interested in the non-intentional foul that prevented a breakaway.
And the DNC thought Obama was. LOL.
The reason a lot of refs become high profile is because they work a lot of high profile games. Chicken and egg.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 30, 2010, 04:31:24 PM
And the DNC thought Obama was. LOL.
The reason a lot of refs become high profile is because they work a lot of high profile games. Chicken and egg.
The "chicken and egg" part conflicts with the first part of this statement. The claim is first that high profile refs become high-profile because they work high profile games. This is followed with "chicken and egg," which implies that: either your first statement is true, OR that high profile referees are assigned to high profile games because they are high profile referees (in which case their high-profile status should be called into question. see Tim Hightower's ridiculous antics), BUT there is no way to tell which is actually true.
What remains uncontested however is that referees should ideally never achieve high-profile status, neither through seemingly appropriate channels (e.g. officiating several high-profile games) nor through inappropriate ones (e.g. Tim Donaghy). The fact that I know and many others know the names of Burr and Hightower is not a credit to their competence.
Quote from: IAmMarquette on December 30, 2010, 05:09:26 PM
The "chicken and egg" part conflicts with the first part of this statement. The claim is first that high profile refs become high-profile because they work high profile games. This is followed with "chicken and egg," which implies that: either your first statement is true, OR that high profile referees are assigned to high profile games because they are high profile referees (in which case their high-profile status should be called into question. see Tim Hightower's ridiculous antics), BUT there is no way to tell which is actually true.
What remains uncontested however is that referees should ideally never achieve high-profile status, neither through seemingly appropriate channels (e.g. officiating several high-profile games) nor through inappropriate ones (e.g. Tim Donaghy). The fact that I know and many others know the names of Burr and Hightower is not a credit to their competence.
We'll have to agree to disagree because it's actually a bit of both. If you look at some of the Final Four refs over the years they often will have 2 "vets" and a newcomer (by newcomer I don't mean rookie ref, but rather a ref that hasn't worked that high profile of a game). As the newcomeres are added to that rotation they become more and more high profile. At the same times, time they certainly do pick those high profile vets as well. So I guess I don't see why you label it as an either / or, when it can be both. We are talking about 3 refs for each of these games and they don't all have to be high profile at the time of their slection for that game.
Maybe MU should have tried this...
http://www.youtube.com/user/NBA#p/u/12/01_yKYAGJew