MUScoop
MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: wadesworld on November 18, 2021, 06:26:21 PM
-
It’s terrible basketball and college refs are terrible at calling it. I said it in a previous game thread but it deserves its own thread.
-
It’s terrible basketball and college refs are terrible at calling it. I said it in a previous game thread but it deserves its own thread.
Halle-freaking-luhah
-
Yes.
-
Drives me nuts. Agreed.
-
Could not possibly disagree more. Offensive players already have the benefit of the doubt. What is to stop them from lowering their head and barreling to the basket?
-
Could not possibly disagree more. Offensive players already have the benefit of the doubt. What is to stop them from lowering their head and barreling to the basket?
yep might as well just bull rush ur defender every time if its a block always
-
Could not possibly disagree more. Offensive players already have the benefit of the doubt. What is to stop them from lowering their head and barreling to the basket?
Because you can still call offensive fouls. Being a roadblock isn’t playing defense
-
Because you can still call offensive fouls. Being a roadblock isn’t playing defense
so youve changed nothing. refs still have to discern between off foul and block. why is it any less confusing
-
Because you can still call offensive fouls. Being a roadblock isn’t playing defense
Yes, that is what I should have said. If you’re defending the ball and making a play on the ball, it can be a charge. But just sliding under an offensive player making no defensive move at all should not be a charge. At best make it a play on.
-
so youve changed nothing. refs still have to discern between off foul and block. why is it any less confusing
The play tonight that was called a charge should have been a foul on the defender. He wasn’t playing defense.
-
Totally disagree. Playing good defense is getting to the spot before the offensive player. If the offensive player is able to bull through the defensive player good defense becomes a thing of the past.
If it is a play on then why would the defense need to move their feet and just let the player run into them and lose the ball.
If has to be a foul both ways or it has to be a play on both ways which will just lead to horrible play.
-
Getting rid of the charge would only lead to even more stoppage in play than we already have as ball handlers lose fear of the call and we end up with collision after collision that necessitate a whistle.
-
Holding your nuts and standing in a completely unnatural defensive position is not basketball.
-
Totally disagree. If they got rid of the charge, I'd have to start carrying cash again.
-
For all you Pat Driscolls Bo Boroskis out there who can't get enough charge calls...
https://youtu.be/poO7iPq1Y3w
This play... It's kinda bullcrap, right? That's exactly the crap secondary defenders are getting rewarded for. They're throwing themselves in front of guys and falling down. It's dangerous, and is sure as hell ain't "good defense."
I'm all for calling it when a guy lowers his shoulder on a drive or pushes off. No one is advocating getting rid of that.
-
For all you Pat Driscolls Bo Boroskis out there who can't get enough charge calls...
https://youtu.be/poO7iPq1Y3w
This play... It's kinda bullcrap, right? That's exactly the crap secondary defenders are getting rewarded for. They're throwing themselves in front of guys and falling down. It's dangerous, and is sure as hell ain't "good defense."
I'm all for calling it when a guy lowers his shoulder on a drive or pushes off. No one is advocating getting rid of that.
There’s multi-generations of basketball fans that have been beaten over the head with what a great play it is by announcers and it’s been ingrained into the consciousness.
-
Holding your nuts and standing in a completely unnatural defensive position is not basketball.
It is if Brad Davison is coming at you.
-
Bummmmmp. Traaaaaash.
-
Bummmmmp. Traaaaaash.
That Oso charge was ridiculous
-
Bump. Awful. Refs have no idea what they’re calling.
-
The charge call on Kolek was unconscionable, and it totally altered the course of the game.
-
So let the offense get away with pushing? Be it with body or hands?
-
Porky concurs. Too arbitrary. The game has way way too many fouls as it is and 2/3 of them are a joke. Short of players tackling one another, Porky says let the kids play. If that means CBB games routinely end with both teams scoring less than 40pts, so be it.
-
Separate from that, can someone explain the rule where Oso was fouled with the clock stopped at the end of the game? I thought that was supposed to be two shots and the ball?
-
Separate from that, can someone explain the rule where Oso was fouled with the clock stopped at the end of the game? I thought that was supposed to be two shots and the ball?
Your thought is correct. That and the Kolek charge were absurd calls.
-
Separate from that, can someone explain the rule where Oso was fouled with the clock stopped at the end of the game? I thought that was supposed to be two shots and the ball?
Your thought is correct. That and the Kolek charge were absurd calls.
Not quite. What you are describing is a type of Flagrant 1 foul which is 1 shot and the ball. Flagrant 1s are personal fouls that are deemed "excessive in nature" and/or "avoidable". Fouling before the clock starts is allowed but you need to make sure that the ref doesn't view it as "excessive in nature" or "avoidable". I would translate this as intentional. If the ref thinks you intentionally fouled to stop the clock, it's a Flagrant 1. If he thinks it's incidental, common foul.
The chrage on Kolek was bogus
-
This is an area where the European/International rules (or enforcement thereof) is much better than NCAA / NBA. There still exists a charge rule, but the defender has to be there long enough to get a parking ticket in order to get the call.
This whole thing with defenders rushing into/under the driving/leaping player will unfortunately end with a severe injury unless there is a rule change first. The safety issue is far more important than the difficulty for the average college ref to get it right.
-
Separate from that, can someone explain the rule where Oso was fouled with the clock stopped at the end of the game? I thought that was supposed to be two shots and the ball?
I might be wrong about this, but only if it’s judged excessive. It’s not automatic.
-
White people love the charge
-
Racist, George
-
I can remember when just about any contact with a player was called a foul.
-
I can remember when just about any contact with a player was called a foul.
I can too. This season's Providence game. But only one team.
-
I can remember when just about any contact with a player was called a foul.
I can remember when women didn’t wear pants
-
I might be wrong about this, but only if it’s judged excessive. It’s not automatic.
Feels like everyone should just be overly aggressive on the inbounds then, so as to never allow time to fall off.
I'd think it'd fall under 'unsportsmanlike behavior' or 'delay of game'
-
I might be wrong about this, but only if it’s judged excessive. It’s not automatic.
Is it intentional, excessive or either one?
-
Is it intentional, excessive or either one?
Not quite. What you are describing is a type of Flagrant 1 foul which is 1 shot and the ball. Flagrant 1s are personal fouls that are deemed "excessive in nature" and/or "avoidable". Fouling before the clock starts is allowed but you need to make sure that the ref doesn't view it as "excessive in nature" or "avoidable". I would translate this as intentional. If the ref thinks you intentionally fouled to stop the clock, it's a Flagrant 1. If he thinks it's incidental, common foul.
-
Thanks TAMU. But the reality is, there is little chance you are calling a Flagrant 1 in that scenario. It would have to be pretty blatant for that to happen.
-
I thought it was borderline. I'm neither surprised nor outraged that the ref didn't call it, but it wouldn't have been a bad call had he deemed it a flagrant.
I'm just grateful that the ref wasn't conned into calling an offensive foul on O-Max!
-
Yeah I had no problem with the Oso one just being a foul. Tough to call intent there. And it just looks worse since it happened to be Oso.
The TK charge was criminal though.
-
Thanks TAMU. But the reality is, there is little chance you are calling a Flagrant 1 in that scenario. It would have to be pretty blatant for that to happen.
I think it would have to be a hack-a-Shaq type of foul, right? My view was blocked, but it seemed like the Oso foul was just a regular off the ball foul as Oso was trying to get open. Although, I’m sure intentional in some way.
-
I'm sure that fouling the right guy just hard enough to avoid a flagrant without time coming off the clock is something that teams work on as part of their end of game scenarios. Credit to UConn for executing, credit to Oso/Stevie for making them pay.
-
I can remember when just about any contact with a player was called a foul.
Not to the degree you are saying but do you think it is called a lot tighter during the NCAA tournament and pre conference games like Hurley said in his presser? Hurley made mention that he won’t be nearly as concerned in March about getting calls or the physical play. Basically said many of his younger guys weren’t strong enough and didn’t have freedom of movement from being held and grabbed in conference games.
Do you think this is a correct theory? Or does it just seem that way when another teams guards are simply more aggressive and stronger.
-
This is an area where the European/International rules (or enforcement thereof) is much better than NCAA / NBA. There still exists a charge rule, but the defender has to be there long enough to get a parking ticket in order to get the call.
This whole thing with defenders rushing into/under the driving/leaping player will unfortunately end with a severe injury unless there is a rule change first. The safety issue is far more important than the difficulty for the average college ref to get it right.
This is exactly it. There should be an "offensive foul" for something like what the refs thought Kolek did (charge into a guy in good defensive position with shoulder lowered, push off with off hand, neither of which Kolek did). They need to get rid of the charge where a guy is going airborn and the only "defense" being played is someone who didn't play good enough defense to prevent the offensive player from getting to the rim and can't contest the shot just jumps under him and falls over hoping for the whistle to go his way. It's garbage basketball and refs don't know how to call it. Defenders should need to be making a play on the ball.
The Kolek call was just the wrong call.
-
Gold clearly charged. I thought Kolek's was a coin flip. The one I want to see called more is the hook.
-
Gold clearly charged. I thought Kolek's was a coin flip. The one I want to see called more is the hook.
How about a good, old-fashioned 3 seconds call?
-
Yes.
-
Gold clearly charged. I thought Kolek's was a coin flip. The one I want to see called more is the hook.
Gold's was obvious. I thought Kolek's was a nice flop. I also thought MU benefitted from the call on Joplin when he had already lost control of the ball and was heading out of bounds.
It happens.
-
Exactly. Expect the refs to miss some.
-
My only complaint about the refs was Hurley didn’t get T’d up. When I saw Driscoll, I thought it was going to be a sure thing.
No instance that he should have gotten one, but for me Danny Hurley didn’t live up to the hype.
-
My only complaint about the refs was Hurley didn’t get T’d up. When I saw Driscoll, I thought it was going to be a sure thing.
No instance that he should have gotten one, but for me Danny Hurley didn’t live up to the hype.
I too was disappointed. I bet the over on a Widowmaker.
-
Not to the degree you are saying but do you think it is called a lot tighter during the NCAA tournament and pre conference games like Hurley said in his presser? Hurley made mention that he won’t be nearly as concerned in March about getting calls or the physical play. Basically said many of his younger guys weren’t strong enough and didn’t have freedom of movement from being held and grabbed in conference games.
Do you think this is a correct theory? Or does it just seem that way when another teams guards are simply more aggressive and stronger.
Seeing that the providence game was the only game (going off memory) where there was a big foul discrepancy, this seems to be more whining by hurley than anything.
-
I don't feel like this year it's any different or worse regarding charges. There's always going to be subjectivity/bias in calls with a wide variety of refs. It's part of the game, unfortunately.
-
My only complaint about the refs was Hurley didn’t get T’d up. When I saw Driscoll, I thought it was going to be a sure thing.
No instance that he should have gotten one, but for me Danny Hurley didn’t live up to the hype.
Did you watch on TV, or live? There was a call Hurley disputed with Driscoll, then it went to commercial. Hurley spent half the break going at Driscoll while his assistants ran the huddle until one came to get him away. I really thought he was trying to get the T there.
-
Did you watch on TV, or live? There was a call Hurley disputed with Driscoll, then it went to commercial. Hurley spent half the break going at Driscoll while his assistants ran the huddle until one came to get him away. I really thought he was trying to get the T there.
Yea, actually had a pretty good view of that one. I thought when he went back out there, he was going to get a T. It was relatively calm, but he lingered awhile.
-
Yea, actually had a pretty good view of that one. I thought when he went back out there, he was going to get a T. It was relatively calm, but he lingered awhile.
His initial reaction, the length, and it being Driscoll, I really thought it was coming. Still a bit surprised he got out without one with that crew.
-
His initial reaction, the length, and it being Driscoll, I really thought it was coming. Still a bit surprised he got out without one with that crew.
He was yelling across the court at O’Connell, during OMax’s first free throws of the game, which I thought was obnoxious. Could hear it in the opposite corner where our seats are.
-
I would like charges to be just turnovers with no personal foul given.
-
He was yelling across the court at O’Connell, during OMax’s first free throws of the game, which I thought was obnoxious. Could hear it in the opposite corner where our seats are.
Can confirm, he was loud and obnoxious during those FTs. I've never actually heard a coach yelling during an opponents FTs before
-
He was yelling across the court at O’Connell, during OMax’s first free throws of the game, which I thought was obnoxious. Could hear it in the opposite corner where our seats are.
Brian looked like he wasn't having it. He seemed overall annoyed with Hurley most of the game.
-
I would like charges to be just turnovers with no personal foul given.
Yeah, I have thought that for a long time. Also think there should be either an enlarged protected area-maybe even all of the paint- for the driving ball handler or tougher requirements for a charging call so that the guy trying to draw the charge is making a risky bet by trying to get the call.
-
How about a good, old-fashioned 3 seconds call?
Absolutely yes to the 3 second call. Seems to have gone the way traveling did in the NBA, although they have picked up on that a bit recently. The 3 sec call could greatly benefit us as well. But not for that, it’s a rule that’s been kinda forgotten.
-
Just not defense.
-
Call it more but call it correctly. Chicken wings, hooks, clear outs, absolutely. It was a 50-50 call on Ross.
-
Draw more fouls drive drive
-
Moore’s head down drive running through OMax is much more of what a “charge” should be than a defender running under a player jumping for a layup or dunk.
-
The calls on Chase and OMax were both bad. Worst calls of the half.
-
And what Moore just did was way more of what a “charge” should be than a defender running under a guy driving in for a shot attempt.
-
Call it more but call it correctly. Chicken wings, hooks, clear outs, absolutely. It was a 50-50 call on Ross.
Watch it again, tower. The defender started falling backward before Ross even touched him, and the defender leaned just a little bit with Ross on the side of him. Worst call of the game. Thankfully, it didn't matter in the big picture.
-
Call it more but call it correctly. Chicken wings, hooks, clear outs, absolutely. It was a 50-50 call on Ross.
It was such a 50/50 call two different refs called two different things.
-
It was such a 50/50 call two different refs called two different things.
Feels like the charge call always wins out in those scenarios.
-
The calls on Chase and OMax were both bad. Worst calls of the half.
ya gotta think the refs had the foul discrepancy in the back(or front) of their minds here otherwise it was starting to look like us at providence. nova was playing pretty aggressive.
-
Bump
-
Yes. Trash basketball.
-
Quit extending your arm. Charge every time.
-
Quit extending your arm. Charge every time.
Yeah, Oso gave them an easy call
-
The refs aren’t our issue tonight. But LOL at just deciding “the next contact I take I’m just falling as hard as I can” and getting a turnover out of it. Marcus Smart getting DPOY by simply doing that is embarrassing, and we’ll just see more and more of it.
-
The refs aren’t our issue tonight. But LOL at just deciding “the next contact I take I’m just falling as hard as I can” and getting a turnover out of it. Marcus Smart getting DPOY by simply doing that is embarrassing, and we’ll just see more and more of it.
I don’t understand how that isn’t a point of emphasis for the Big East. If there isn’t an elbow or a hook, there should never be a charge on a back down in the post. They’re all flops by the defender.
-
I don’t understand how that isn’t a point of emphasis for the Big East. If there isn’t an elbow or a hook, there should never be a charge on a back down in the post. They’re all flops by the defender.
Yeah…that’s not accurate.
-
Yeah…that’s not accurate.
Last night it was. Alleyne's flops were Davison-esqe, yet he got at least two calls on them.
-
I don’t understand how that isn’t a point of emphasis for the Big East. If there isn’t an elbow or a hook, there should never be a charge on a back down in the post. They’re all flops by the defender.
Sorry, but what? You don't think there can be any offensive fouls for a back down in the post?
-
I don't think you can rid of the charge. I am a fan of expanding the restricted area and making it a violation instead of a foul.
-
I don't think you can rid of the charge. I am a fan of expanding the restricted area and making it a violation instead of a foul.
Yep yep. One more change though- no charge call when the defender slides right in front of the ball handler. That should be a block.
-
https://www.ncaa.org/news/2023/6/8/media-center-change-to-legal-guarding-position-approved-for-mens-basketball.aspx
White people are devastated
-
https://www.ncaa.org/news/2023/6/8/media-center-change-to-legal-guarding-position-approved-for-mens-basketball.aspx
White people are devastated
Some other interesting rule changes in there, including:
++ Under two minutes, when a coach requests an out-of-bounds play be reviewed, that team will be charged a timeout if the original call is not overturned.
(This should help speed up the end of games, which often become interminable bores.)
++ A timeout will be able to be granted when a player has possession of the ball even though the player is airborne. An example would be a player grabbing a loose ball and calling timeout before landing out of bounds.
(This used to be allowed but they stopped allowing it several years ago.)
++ Players will be allowed to wear numbers 0-99.
(Nice. There's no good reason players shouldn't be restricted to the numbers they have been.)
-
Yep yep. One more change though- no charge call when the defender slides right in front of the ball handler. That should be a block.
Bump.
-
Get rid of the Eurostep next.
-
Get rid of the dunk next
-
Get rid of the dunk next
And the 3-pointer and shot clock.
-
++ A timeout will be able to be granted when a player has possession of the ball even though the player is airborne. An example would be a player grabbing a loose ball and calling timeout before landing out of bounds.
(This used to be allowed but they stopped allowing it several years ago.)
I have no idea why they decided to bring this back.
-
I have no idea why they decided to bring this back.
My only guess is that it encourages the use of timeouts outside of end of game situations. Theoretically could improve "pace of play"
-
I have no idea why they decided to bring this back.
Because it’s logical.
For each rule change, the rationale behind it is discussed.
On this one, it’s very basic: they decided that if a player had possession of the ball, they should be entitled to request a timeout.
-
Because it’s logical.
For each rule change, the rationale behind it is discussed.
On this one, it’s very basic: they decided that if a player had possession of the ball, they should be entitled to request a timeout.
I understand that rationale. It just seemed like there wasn't a particular reason why they decided to revisit that rule at this point.
-
Some other interesting rule changes in there, including:
++ Under two minutes, when a coach requests an out-of-bounds play be reviewed, that team will be charged a timeout if the original call is not overturned.
(This should help speed up the end of games, which often become interminable bores.)
++ A timeout will be able to be granted when a player has possession of the ball even though the player is airborne. An example would be a player grabbing a loose ball and calling timeout before landing out of bounds.
(This used to be allowed but they stopped allowing it several years ago.)
++ Players will be allowed to wear numbers 0-99.
(Nice. There's no good reason players shouldn't be restricted to the numbers they have been.)
How about PI, you know 3.14159 etc? The rule does not stipulate whole numbers.
-
Nooooooooooo
This thread is back lol
-
How about PI, you know 3.14159 etc? The rule does not stipulate whole numbers.
#FakeNews #Lies
The actual rule (rule 1 section 22 article 7) spells out the specific numbers allowed. Strange way perhaps.. vs. “whole numbers between….” But that’s the rule.
You also can use 0 or 00…. But not both
-
#FakeNews #Lies
The actual rule (rule 1 section 22 article 7) spells out the specific numbers allowed. Strange way perhaps.. vs. “whole numbers between….” But that’s the rule.
You also can use 0 or 00…. But not both
Awe, that sucks, but I stand corrected.
-
I can remember when women didn’t wear pants
How old are you?
https://www.pinterest.com/pin/286682332514250790/
-
I just finished watching a documentary about Mary Tyler Moore.
Fun fact: Her character on the Dick Van Dyke Show, Laura Petrie, was the first woman on a TV series who wore pants on a regular basis. Even then, there were strict rules from the censors about how tight they could be in the, er, hip area.
-
I just finished watching a documentary about Mary Tyler Moore.
Fun fact: Her character on the Dick Van Dyke Show, Laura Petrie, was the first woman on a TV series who wore pants on a regular basis. Even then, there were strict rules from the censors about how tight they could be in the, er, hip area.
In one of his All Creatures Great and Small books, British vet James Herriot wrote about his young wife assisting him on farm calls just before the outbreak of WWII. She was wearing pants, much to the surprise, or perhaps I should say shock, of the very conservative Yorkshire farmers.
-
In one of his All Creatures Great and Small books, British vet James Herriot wrote about his young wife assisting him on farm calls just before the outbreak of WWII. She was wearing pants, much to the surprise, or perhaps I should say shock, of the very conservative Yorkshire farmers.
Great show on PBS by the way. My mom was factory worker and required to wear pants for her job in the 1950s. I'm sure all the Rosy the riveters during the War years wore only skirts.
-
Awe, that sucks, but I stand corrected.
That does suck.
Imagine if Theo had been able to wear jersey number 3:16 instead of 4.
-
Some other interesting rule changes in there, including:
++ Under two minutes, when a coach requests an out-of-bounds play be reviewed, that team will be charged a timeout if the original call is not overturned.
(This should help speed up the end of games, which often become interminable bores.)
++ A timeout will be able to be granted when a player has possession of the ball even though the player is airborne. An example would be a player grabbing a loose ball and calling timeout before landing out of bounds.
(This used to be allowed but they stopped allowing it several years ago.)
++ Players will be allowed to wear numbers 0-99.
(Nice. There's no good reason players shouldn't be restricted to the numbers they have been.)
In the dark ages, it was so the referees could signal the scorers table with one digit represented on each hand when calling a foul. Thus 55 was the highest number available.
-
In the dark ages, it was so the referees could signal the scorers table with one digit represented on each hand when calling a foul. Thus 55 was the highest number available.
Yes, because either the refs, or the scorers were too dumb to be able to figure out the higher numbers like 77. I would go with the refs being too dumb.
-
In the dark ages, it was so the referees could signal the scorers table with one digit represented on each hand when calling a foul. Thus 55 was the highest number available.
They should've just hired Count Rugen.
-
Yes, because either the refs, or the scorers were too dumb to be able to figure out the higher numbers like 77. I would go with the refs being too dumb.
Well, it did take 15 years after the game was invented to cut the bottom out of the peach basket. Evolution.
-
Well, it did take 15 years after the game was invented to cut the bottom out of the peach basket. Evolution.
TGFBR.
-
Bump.
-
Bump.
Yes give the offense the ability to run over the D, get rid of all fouls, period.
-
Lol. Bump. Even if you like the rule, refs have absolutely no idea how to call the rule correctly. Kid is backpedaling and moving to the side. First of all, dangerous for the airborn player. Second of all, just garbage bail outs for not actually being able to defend. You get penalized for being more athletic. Which is wild to do in sports.
-
Ref just flat out missed that call. The near-elimination of the charge this season has been wonderful. What an improvement to the game.
-
Ref just flat out missed that call. The near-elimination of the charge this season has been wonderful. What an improvement to the game.
Awful call for sure.
-
Lol. Bump. Even if you like the rule, refs have absolutely no idea how to call the rule correctly. Kid is backpedaling and moving to the side. First of all, dangerous for the airborn player. Second of all, just garbage bail outs for not actually being able to defend. You get penalized for being more athletic. Which is wild to do in sports.
Brutal call for sure.
But at least the refs weren’t as bad as the as the announcers.
-
I guess we can’t get Jason Benetti and Bill Raftery for every game.
-
Lollllllllllllllllll
-
But then Newton just blatantly lowering his shoulder and pushing Stevie off of him over and over and over and they won’t call that lollllllllll.
I mean come on. If you’re going to call it, freaking call it.
-
Haha that call on Bacott in the UNC/Duke game was nuts.
-
Now one on Carmack Ryan lol.
-
😅
Will call the flop a charge. But will allow 5 steps to get set for a (banked in) 3 point shot.