Breeding Explains Why Powell Was Allowed To Return

[TallTitan34]

https://setonhall.forums.rivals.com/threads/ap-pool-reporter-with-the-ref-crew-chief.39400/

So clapping at an opponent is a more serious foul than deliberately elbowing an opponent. Makes perfect sense.

[JakeBarnes]

https://setonhall.forums.rivals.com/threads/ap-pool-reporter-with-the-ref-crew-chief.39400/

So clapping at an opponent is a more serious foul than deliberately elbowing an opponent. Makes perfect sense.

The Clap is bad, but the ejections are mainly involuntary

[TJ]

https://setonhall.forums.rivals.com/threads/ap-pool-reporter-with-the-ref-crew-chief.39400/

So clapping at an opponent is a more serious foul than deliberately elbowing an opponent. Makes perfect sense.

bad, bad rule. Hopefully it gets addressed. Very very bad rule. Flagrant 1 should count as a first T (or 2nd).

Plus it was close enough to flagrant 2 refs should have found a way to toss him after he STARTED the second altercation.

[NickelDimer]

To hell with that assshole and his explanation

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Read over the rules for flagrants and technicals. Have to say the refs followed the letter of the law perfectly. Only squabble I could see is whether or not Powell's elbow was severe enough to warrant a flagrant 2. or not. I could see an argument for both.

I said it elsewhere but I'll say it again, while they followed the letter of the law, the spirit of the law got missed here. Sacar gets ejected for clapping and shoving a guy who shoved him first (that was the other thing, why no foul for Nelson? He shoved Anim first). Powell gets to stay after intentionally elbowing a guy and angrily getting in someone's face and instigating a fight. That doesn't seem right to me. I agree with others who say they should look at that rule. I think any combo of two flagrants, two techincals or a flagrant and a technical should be an ejection.

Flagrant 1 personal foul. A flagrant 1 personal foul is a personal foul that
is deemed excessive in nature and/or unnecessary, but is not based solely on
the severity of the act. Examples include, but are not limited to:
1. Causing excessive contact with an opponent;
2. Contact that is not a legitimate attempt to play the ball or player,
specifically designed to stop or keep the clock from starting;
3. Pushing or holding a player from behind to prevent a score;
4. Fouling a player clearly away from the ball who is not directly involved
with the play, specifically designed to stop or keep the clock from
starting;
5. Contact with a player making a throw-in, and
6. Illegal contact caused by swinging of an elbow that is deemed excessive
or unnecessary but does not rise to the level of a flagrant 2 personal
foul (See Rule 4-18.7).
7. Illegal contact caused by a player hooking an opponent over or under
the arm in an attempt to deceive the official into believing the contact
was caused by the opponent. Depending on the nature of the contact,
or the result of the contact, this foul could be considered a flagrant 2
foul.
d. Flagrant 2 personal foul. A flagrant 2 personal foul is a personal foul
that involves contact with an opponent that is not only excessive, but also
severe or extreme while the ball is live. In determining whether a foul has
risen to the level of a flagrant 2, officials should consider the following:
1. The severity of the contact;
2. Whether a player is making a legitimate effort to block a shot. Note
that a player may still be assessed a flagrant 2 foul on an attempted
blocked shot when there are other factors such as hard contact to the
head or the defender winding up or emphatically following through
with the contact);
3. The potential for injury resulting from the contact (e.g., a blow to
the head or a foul committed while the player was in a vulnerable
position), and
4 Any contact by the offending player to the groin area of an opponent
which is not clearly accidental.
RULE 4 / Definitions 47
5. Any foul similar to the foul described in Rule 4-15.2.c.7 in which
the contact, or the result of the contact, is not only excessive but also
severe or extreme.

[Warrior2008]

Outcome aside, if tonight wasn't a great reason why James Breeding shouldn't ref Big East games, I'm not sure what will. The outcome sucked for Mubb, but the Big East is killing themselves with the product they are putting out thanks to these refs. Tonight was an absolute debacle.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

There's this too:

Section 14. Ejection
Art. 1. Ejection is the act of immediate dismissal of an individual from
participation in a game because of a specific infraction of the rules.
a. In addition to being disqualified, an individual who is ejected shall leave
the playing court and floor area and report to his team's locker room until
the game is over.
Art. 2. The following shall result in automatic ejection:
a. Committing a flagrant 2 personal or flagrant 2 technical foul;
b. Incurring the maximum number or combination of technical fouls;
c. Participating in a fight;
d. Leaving the bench area during a fight situation as bench personnel but
not participating in the fight; or
e. Participating after having been disqualified for a reason other than
ejection.

The refs decided this wasn't a fight. I'm curious what would be defined as a fight. Given the suckershoves from Mamu and Nelson, I think it could have been called a fight. That would have meant Powell, Nelson, and Mamu all ejected.

[JakeBarnes]

Read over the rules for flagrants and technicals. Have to say the refs followed the letter of the law perfectly. Only squabble I could see is whether or not Powell's elbow was severe enough to warrant a flagrant 2. or not. I could see an argument for both.

I said it elsewhere but I'll say it again, while they followed the letter of the law, the spirit of the law got missed here. Sacar gets ejected for clapping and shoving a guy who shoved him first (that was the other thing, why no foul for Nelson? He shoved Anim first). Powell gets to stay after intentionally elbowing a guy and angrily getting in someone's face and instigating a fight. That doesn't seem right to me. I agree with others who say they should look at that rule. I think any combo of two flagrants, two techincals or a flagrant and a technical should be an ejection.

The part you highlighted is pretty key. However it was excessive. Intent is not part of the rule, but certainly is a factor that elevates a normal elbow to an excessive elbow. Biggest miss by officials in a night where they peed down their leg constantly

[TJ]

Read over the rules for flagrants and technicals. Have to say the refs followed the letter of the law perfectly. Only squabble I could see is whether or not Powell's elbow was severe enough to warrant a flagrant 2. or not. I could see an argument for both.

I said it elsewhere but I'll say it again, while they followed the letter of the law, the spirit of the law got missed here. Sacar gets ejected for clapping and shoving a guy who shoved him first (that was the other thing, why no foul for Nelson? He shoved Anim first). Powell gets to stay after intentionally elbowing a guy and angrily getting in someone's face and instigating a fight. That doesn't seem right to me. I agree with others who say they should look at that rule. I think any combo of two flagrants, two techincals or a flagrant and a technical should be an ejection.

agree 100%. Refs weren't wrong technically, but they had discretion to do the right thing and they did not.

[Dr. Blackheart]

Read over the rules for flagrants and technicals. Have to say the refs followed the letter of the law perfectly. Only squabble I could see is whether or not Powell's elbow was severe enough to warrant a flagrant 2. or not. I could see an argument for both.

I said it elsewhere but I'll say it again, while they followed the letter of the law, the spirit of the law got missed here. Sacar gets ejected for clapping and shoving a guy who shoved him first (that was the other thing, why no foul for Nelson? He shoved Anim first). Powell gets to stay after intentionally elbowing a guy and angrily getting in someone's face and instigating a fight. That doesn't seem right to me. I agree with others who say they should look at that rule. I think any combo of two flagrants, two techincals or a flagrant and a technical should be an ejection.

I am not there on the Theo F2.  I thought it was incidental but worthy of a F1 under these rules.  Powell should have clearly been gone with a F2 as it was intentional. And then there is the rest of the shyt show beyond this scrum. 

[TallTitan34]

They didn't have the balls to ejected Seton Hall's best player.

[JakeBarnes]

I assume the explanation was

[TJ]

I am not there on the Theo F2.  I thought it was incidental but worthy of a F1 under these rules.  Powell should have clearly been gone with a F2 as it was intentional. And then there is the rest of the shyt show beyond this scrum.

I know I just said I agree, but you're right about Theo. There was no reason to eject him from the game. I meant I agree that the Powell situation was technically right but still was done wrong.

[ChitownSpaceForRent]

Looking back, I wish Theo would have at least gotten his moneys worth before being ejected. Let him have a go at Powell and Mamu again.

[JakeBarnes]

Looking back, I wish Theo would have at least gotten his moneys worth before being ejected. Let him have a go at Powell and Mamu again.

At minimum a Sub-Zero finisher uppercut

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

I am not there on the Theo F2.  I thought it was incidental but worthy of a F1 under these rules.  Powell should have clearly been gone with a F2 as it was intentional. And then there is the rest of the shyt show beyond this scrum.

I was struggling with that as well. On one hand I see point #3 of the flagrant 2 rule and see the example of a "player in a vulnerable position" on the other hand, I really think that was incidental contact and something that happens to Markus three times a game.

[wadesworld]

Theo was ejected for something that happens to Markus a minimum of 2 times a game, oftentimes not even getting a whistle at all let alone an ejection.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Looking back, I wish Theo would have at least gotten his moneys worth before being ejected. Let him have a go at Powell and Mamu again.

Ironically, it would have likely worked out better for Marquette. If Theo gets a good hard shove in on Powell, I guarantee you Powell would have returned in kind, along with others from Seton Hall. The refs would have been forced to call it a fight and then Powell would have been ejected for sure, others from Seton Hall as well.

[MUDPT]

I also found it kind of strange that the refs had to tell SH that Powell wasn't ejected. SH coaching staff should know the rules, shouldn't have to tell them their player can come back...

[rocket surgeon]

 the FS 1 guys post game -steve lavin-and 2 others were highly highly critical of the refs-said they took that game away from fans and players

   the chirping started hard and fast and refs were very aware of-did nothing

   let the players play to the point of chirping + physical contact=what was a foul and what was not?

   87 fouls called, 8 technicals 57 ft's, 3 (should have been 4) ejections

   2 1/2 hour game took closer to 3 1/2

  watching the escalating play in super slo-mo made it look worse than it was-it was a regular basketball play.  if the refs have control of that game from the beginning, nothing happens there,  the elbow shot to sacar's chest was a one punch fight-he should have been gowne

powell assuming and taking himself out of game-what does that tell you?  he felt his actions were going to warrant ejection...hmmmmm

[WhiteTrash]

If any ref from this game comes back to a Big East game, that will tell us all if the Big East is serious about being the best conference in college basketball. The ACC wouldn't allow this low level of refereeing.

[MUEng92]

Saw a view of the Theo Powell play from a camera on the opposite end of the court. Powell was unquestionably already awkwardly falling to the ground before Theo arrived to no more than brush his forearm on Powell. I thought 5 hours of sleep would help me calm down. But seeing that view 1st thing in the morning actually shows the call was even worse than I thought last night and shot a new dose of adrenaline through my body.

[NickelDimer]

Saw a view of the Theo Powell play from a camera on the opposite end of the court. Powell was unquestionably already awkwardly falling to the ground before Theo arrived to no more than brush his forearm on Powell. I thought 5 hours of sleep would help me calm down. But seeing that view 1st thing in the morning actually shows the call was even worse than I thought last night and shot a new dose of adrenaline through my body.

I woke up maybe more fired up then I went to bed. We were so cheated.

[MUEng92]

Hope this link works.  It compares what Powell did to Sacar and why Theo didn't do to Powell.  Credit Nathan Marzion on Twitter if the link works. Blame me if it doesn't

https://video.twimg.com/ext_tw_video/1106790110727684096/pu/pl/ud0H8nnW4ZlGJbmi.m3u8?tag=8

[mu03eng]

The biggest problem I have is the inequity of the letter of the law application of the rules against Theo and Powell. If what Powell did is judged to be a F1, which even in the slowest of mos was as damaging as what Theo did to Powell then Theo has to get an F1 at worst.

Further for Seton Hall to be the aggressor/escalators in every one of the confrontations, but MU to suffer the worst officiating outcome is just maddening.

Honestly, it may come off as whining but I want MU to public rebuke the Big East and its officials in some capacity, this $hit has got to stop.