They just explained this at halftime of the Duke UL game and explained it Was offensive goaltending and not interference on EJ. Just like I tried to explain to some of you thick skulled morons.
Last edited:
Ball was in cylinder
- Thread starter HalHR2500
- Start date
I’m not sure if the people arguing otherwise understand the rule, or if they just like arguing.
Sure man. Whatever you say. I bet if you call up the right people they will get it changed right away.
I think you left the L out of your name: TheBigBluebLowski
a). Trolling
b) Blind
c). don't know the rules
d). all of the above
I hate to rag on ya. but what part of the 2/3 of that orange sphere was actually outside the iron circular thing
Has nothing to do with having shades on. I am a high school and small college official myself, so Im very good at looking at things through an unbiased view. You can ask anyone atound here that Im usually saying the same thing when a call can go either way. But this is not one of those instances. This is black and white, there is no grey with this call. If you cant see that the ball was "in the cylinder " BY THE LETTER OF THE RULE, then you need to take off you blinders. It has nothing to do with seeing something through shades bro. These are facts.
Please tell me how this is not in the cylinder.....
http://kentuckysportsradio.com/bask...-offensive-goaltending-that-wasnt-reviewable/
Please, please, please explain!!
Several other people have explained the rule, Cal thought it should have been called. The ESPN crew explained it and even used video. You continue to defend a position that is incorrect, to repeat all of the things you continue to ignore would be futile. So, I thought I could at least change the narrative and make it personal.
I agree with the rule, which is why I know it wasn't goaltending. Ball was outside the cylinder and off the rim.
Seems like the smart thing to do. [winking]
It's off and outside the rim. I just can't in good faith say otherwise. It was a fair putback. We blew it.
It is not even debatable. It was offensive goaltending to the tee.
They can’t explain their stance. Just continue to spout nonsense. Seem like the typical never admit to being wrong kinda people.
But everyone who seems like level headed rational UK fans that I have seen on this board, Twitter or Facebook are saying the same thing.
No one is saying that if the right call had been made UK would’ve won. We are saying that the game shouldn’t have been taken away on a bad and clearly incorrect call. Big difference.
I still love the argument that well UK didn’t play good anyway so they deserve to lose. WTF does deserve got to do with it. Jeez.
Dead wrong and you are hopelessly delusional.
The ball was clearly in the cylinder, not even close
Any part of the ball over any part of the cylinder. So yes, it was.
If you ever want a list of trolls, this thread would be a good place to start.
When people say that UK has some of the most knowledgeable fans in basketball, they didn’t read this thread.
I think the people who don’t understand why that was clearly offensive goaltending don’t understand what a cylinder is.
If you have a camera directly above the goal, and in that camera shot the ball is blocking part of your view of the rim, it’s in the cylinder. That’s why you can’t see the whole rim.
Also, as another poster linked the actual rule above, it doesn’t matter if EJ’s hand was in the net. If he doesn’t touch the ball (in the cylinder or out) it isn’t defensive goaltending.
LSU outplayed UK tonight. That’s a separate issue than the missed call.
I think the people who don’t understand why that was clearly offensive goaltending don’t understand what a cylinder is.
If you have a camera directly above the goal, and in that camera shot the ball is blocking part of your view of the rim, it’s in the cylinder. That’s why you can’t see the whole rim.
Also, as another poster linked the actual rule above, it doesn’t matter if EJ’s hand was in the net. If he doesn’t touch the ball (in the cylinder or out) it isn’t defensive goaltending.
LSU outplayed UK tonight. That’s a separate issue than the missed call.
Outside the rim???? What?? Come on dude, youre not real Lebowski and you dont have to act like an idiot to prove it. Im in no way blaming that call for our loss, we lost for several other reasons. We played like **** but if you cant admit that it was a blown call, something is really wrong. It was not outside the rim, as you can CLEARLY see. Come on man!
The vast majority of people saying it was a good call are not what you would conventionally describe as UK fans.
They may be fans but they’re dumb as *#%*#
Of course you're correct...they missed it and I guess it's one of those non reviewable plays in college.
Imagine EJ put his hand thru the cylinder while the offensive player was at half court, still 3 seconds from shooting. Basket interference? Of course not, it didn’t impact the shot. Same here - EJ clearly put his hand thru the rim, but it was before the shot. So it didn’t impact the shot. So it’s not interference.
As for the offensive goaltending no call, some of you must think the ball has to be sitting on the rim before it can be goal tending. Not so. Nor does it have to be certain that the ball would have gone through the hoop if not touched. If any part of the ball is still in the cylinder, still in the imaginary cone extending from the circumference of the rim to the ceiling, it’s goaltending. It clearly was.
Also don’t u derstand the “it doesn’t matter, we didn’t deserve to win, we did 20 other things to lose” thinking. In any close game you can always go back and find 20 - or 50 - screwups by each team over the course of the game. Does that mean we just disregard the rules at the end of the game?
As for the offensive goaltending no call, some of you must think the ball has to be sitting on the rim before it can be goal tending. Not so. Nor does it have to be certain that the ball would have gone through the hoop if not touched. If any part of the ball is still in the cylinder, still in the imaginary cone extending from the circumference of the rim to the ceiling, it’s goaltending. It clearly was.
Also don’t u derstand the “it doesn’t matter, we didn’t deserve to win, we did 20 other things to lose” thinking. In any close game you can always go back and find 20 - or 50 - screwups by each team over the course of the game. Does that mean we just disregard the rules at the end of the game?
That’s textbook goal tending. They blew it. It happens.
Although....it’s an article of faith among SEC fans, and college basketball fans generally, that Kentucky gets a favorable whistle in Rupp. Is there any chance that Duke, Carolina or Kansas don’t get that call at home?
Although....it’s an article of faith among SEC fans, and college basketball fans generally, that Kentucky gets a favorable whistle in Rupp. Is there any chance that Duke, Carolina or Kansas don’t get that call at home?
And he pulls his hand out well before the balls in the basket. Meaning it wasn't goaltending. Montgomery can take the basket net down, use them to floss his teeth, play cats cradle and then put them back for all anyone else cares as long as he's done making contact before the ball touches the basket.
Thread. Tons of ****** calls, misses on both sides, and either team can complain. But at the end of the day, THAT play affected the outcome. Not a missed call from 17 minutes into the first half. That missed call to give LSU a score that they didnt deserve did us in.
So, you're right and everybody else is wrong. Most intelligent folk would pause to reassess, nope not you. You're right dammit.
That's it man, stick to your guns. Who gives a damn how simple minded you look.
Thanks for the very thorough rational post that explains this play to a T. If someone wants to disagree with what you laid out they’re simply trolling and or just lacking intelligence.
This isn't hard at all.
If it were reviewable, it would've been called off.
It isn't. So it wasn't.
It's BS, but it's how the NCAA (currently) has it.
If it were reviewable, it would've been called off.
It isn't. So it wasn't.
It's BS, but it's how the NCAA (currently) has it.
Now youre obviously just being stubborn. Have you seen a replay of the play?? If so, can you please provide some evidence of your stance here? If not, then youre just being stubborn and argumentative.
If the ball was touching the rim and any part of the the ball was over the cylinder its goaltending. Can you post a clip of the two put backs EJ had that you say were similar?
Says the man having an online meltdown over it. :joy:
The ball wasn't over the cylinder. That's just the crybaby narrative a bunch of grown men are giving to avoid admitting we blew it as a team.
There's already proof posted. All the pictures and replay show it was good. Again, whining about it endlessly won't change it. We blew it defensivly. It happens.
Looked like a good putback to me. We blew it as a team. It's okay, I can live with that.
Still trolling? The mods should do their damn job and permaban an epic dumbf*** like you.
Latest
-
01
KSR Football
Will Stein wanted to run the damn ball against South Alabama
-
02
KSR Football
CJ Baxter was happier for his fellow running backs than himself
-
03
KSR Football
Will Stein on Bo Barnes' targeting penalty: "Don't go in for the killshot"
-
04
KSR Football
Kentucky gets a Wake-Up Call. Stein: "That Was Not Our Standard"
-
05
KSR Football
Kentucky Offensive Line Lets the Running Backs Shine