But that WALK..

[UKCAT5FAN]

There is zero chance the NCAA is going to give UNC the loss on a walk. Not gonna happen.

The fact that they got an extra half second TWICE is ridiculous. We won, so it doesn't matter, but imagine if we lost cause of that? The outcome of the game shouldn't excuse the gift officiating that UNC got.

1. Hawkins intentional. Ok they are calling it tight, I guess but,
2. No intentional on launching your body into the hot shooter.
3. Removing fouls on Meeks is fishy.
4. The walk.
5. Added clock time once.
6. Added clock time twice.

These aren't ticky tack fouls that I'm sure both sides can point out.. These are blatantly obvious. An attempt to help UNC get the win.

Why is it an attempt to help UNC win the game? Why would the NCAA care who wins this game?


I don't understand how people ALWAYS turn to conspiracy so quickly. Why can't it just be human error? Can they not just miss calls? I just don't get it. I don't think they should've added as much time but adding time was the right thing to do. By the method they use, that was how much time was added. So what? Officials don't care who wins the game, contrary to what most fans believe.

Now, I admit that there is a severely broken system of who officiates the game because the best officials are not always on these games but it's not a conspiracy, it's simply that they aren't the best officials. I know officials personally on the D1 level that can referee circles around some of these guys. That is the problem, not a conspiracy to screw us.

 

[preacherfan]

No but it's a safe assumption that if he were talking to the ref he would be looking at him, right? Plus, the replay doesn't show him saying anything until AFTER he traveled and then turning back to look at the ref to call the timeout.

In the replay from the back of the player, which was an angle shown on CBS, it is crystal clear that UNC player caught the ball with the intention of taking a few dribbles IF he were wide open. He glances around and sees UK has him surrounded. He then moves his pivot foot as he begins to signal the TO.

That replay is at the 1:36:30 mark.....http://ukbasketballlive.com/kentucky-basketball-2016-2017-full-game-replays/

 

[Quick Fiftino]

In 1.9 seconds, they threw it in received it, walked, called timeout. Threw it in again, it was intercepted by U.K., they fell down, called a walk, threw it in again, caught it and shot a three pointer. Lol

Also, everyone on the UNC bench started and completed their AFAM assignments for the week.

 

[kybassfan]

No but it's a safe assumption that if he were talking to the ref he would be looking at him, right? Plus, the replay doesn't show him saying anything until AFTER he traveled and then turning back to look at the ref to call the timeout.

The ref on the floor doesn't get to claim 'the player wasn't looking at me'. Safe assumptions are irrelevant. The ref apparently thought the player was making the attempt.

In the replay, your job is to determine whether the ruling on the floor is clearly incorrect. I doubt they could see his mouth moving or read lips.

I get it, you are seeing what you want to see. The ref is bound by the rules and what he saw in a split second. The replay is bound by clear evidence to the contrary before overturning a call. In this case, I understand the initial call, I understand why it wasn't overturned.

If you want to argue a bad call, pick that intentional on Briscoe. They blew that one.

 

[LineSkiCat14]

Why is it an attempt to help UNC win the game? Why would the NCAA care who wins this game?


I don't understand how people ALWAYS turn to conspiracy so quickly. Why can't it just be human error? Can they not just miss calls? I just don't get it. I don't think they should've added as much time but adding time was the right thing to do. By the method they use, that was how much time was added. So what? Officials don't care who wins the game, contrary to what most fans believe.

Now, I admit that there is a severely broken system of who officiates the game because the best officials are not always on these games but it's not a conspiracy, it's simply that they aren't the best officials. I know officials personally on the D1 level that can referee circles around some of these guys. That is the problem, not a conspiracy to screw us.

Because when it happens over, and over, and over.. it's not just a coincidence.

They botched the walk call, then they put an extra half second on the clock, not once, but TWICE. I've never in my life seen that much time added back to a clock.. not ever.

Officials are employed by the NCAA, an organization run by Emmert, a guy who everyone knows has an axe to grind with Kentucky. I'm also pretty sure the NCAA (and ESPN for that matter) have quite a few alum. Not to mention Duke/UNC were the national teams for quite some time. They were the most popular, just like Dallas or the Bulls.

There's no shortage of reasons why the NCAA wouldn't protect it's golden children and there's certainly enough evidence through the years.

 

[pikespeak1]

I'm a pretty big homer but that's not a walk.

 

[preacherfan]

The ref on the floor doesn't get to claim 'the player wasn't looking at me'. Safe assumptions are irrelevant. The ref apparently thought the player was making the attempt.

In the replay, your job is to determine whether the ruling on the floor is clearly incorrect. I doubt they could see his mouth moving or read lips.

I get it, you are seeing what you want to see. The ref is bound by the rules and what he saw in a split second. The replay is bound by clear evidence to the contrary before overturning a call. In this case, I understand the initial call, I understand why it wasn't overturned.

If you want to argue a bad call, pick that intentional on Briscoe. They blew that one.

Agree that they blew the call on Briscoe. I also believe they blew a few with Bam. The double foul was simply a bad call, IMO.

 

[kybassfan]

In the replay from the back of the player, which was an angle shown on CBS, it is crystal clear that UNC player caught the ball with the intention of taking a few dribbles IF he were wide open. He glances around and sees UK has him surrounded. He then moves his pivot foot as he begins to signal the TO.

That replay is at the 1:36:30 mark.....http://ukbasketballlive.com/kentucky-basketball-2016-2017-full-game-replays/

Preacher, I saw that. I really can't argue that point. However, if you and I had a nickel for every dragged pivot foot that moves but not called in college basketball, we could both enjoy plum seats watching the cats win the NC this year. It's just not called reliably in any game, much less in that situation. The potential walk was the hop. The TO gestures were made by that time.

 

[jarms24]

The ref on the floor doesn't get to claim 'the player wasn't looking at me'. Safe assumptions are irrelevant. The ref apparently thought the player was making the attempt.

In the replay, your job is to determine whether the ruling on the floor is clearly incorrect. I doubt they could see his mouth moving or read lips.

I get it, you are seeing what you want to see. The ref is bound by the rules and what he saw in a split second. The replay is bound by clear evidence to the contrary before overturning a call. In this case, I understand the initial call, I understand why it wasn't overturned.

If you want to argue a bad call, pick that intentional on Briscoe. They blew that one.

Pretty clear to most that it was a travel. Watched it from different angles in slow motion and it was still a travel. I don't care about the actual play in hindsight, but I'm more worried about the ppl who don't understand basic basketball fundamentals.

 

[TortElvisII]

97 title game...No way refs call an intentional late gauranteeing one side victory. That's just not what refs do. Uh nevermind.

 

[kybassfan]

Agree that they blew the call on Briscoe. I also believe they blew a few with Bam. The double foul was simply a bad call, IMO.

No doubt. The double call was just very strange.

 

[jarms24]

Preacher, I saw that. I really can't argue that point. However, if you and I had a nickel for every dragged pivot foot that moves but not called in college basketball, we could both enjoy plum seats watching the cats win the NC this year. It's just not called reliably in any game, much less in that situation. The potential walk was the hop. The TO gestures were made by that time.

No they weren't. GD, are you blind?

 

[TortElvisII]

Worst call all day was on Hawkins.

 

[preacherfan]

Preacher, I saw that. I really can't argue that point. However, if you and I had a nickel for every dragged pivot foot that moves but not called in college basketball, we could both enjoy plum seats watching the cats win the NC this year. It's just not called reliably in any game, much less in that situation. The potential walk was the hop. The TO gestures were made by that time.

True. But, then you have the time factor. The refs puts a lot of time back on the clock as if the player had intended to call the TO from the moment he walked back on the floor. Again, he catches the ball, looks in front and then looks for the ref to call the time out. If I were a replay official, I definitely give him less time.

 

[RACdad]

The last shot should have been waived off anyway. You cant catch, turn and shoot in .7 secs

 

[wildcatwelder_rivals]

I was convinced during the game it was a travel, but I too have now watched it many times in slow motion, and I can see why it wasn't called. It was simply too close to determine, and as others have stated, the ref was watching for the T.O call anyway.

 

[DCFseattle]

True but when did he call the timeout? According to the ref, he had to have called the TO as soon as he touched the ball. That would explain the amount of time put back on the clock and no traveling call. However, as I said, I saw him look down court and then at the ref. Clearly, UNC got the complete benefit of any doubt.

You start asking questions like "what are the rules?" then this whole thing falls apart.

 

[UKCAT5FAN]

LOL. No, I'm just not one to deny what I saw so I fit in with the crowd. I've watch the video 20 - 30 times. Slow mo. Frame by frame. I saw a player making gestures just before and during the hop that a referee might reasonably assume was a call for time out before his feet hit the floor.

We do agree on one thing, the evidence is in the video.

I agree. Not to mention he is verbally calling it also.

 

[Blueaz]

There is zero chance the NCAA is going to give UNC the loss on a walk. Not gonna happen.

The fact that they got an extra half second TWICE is ridiculous. We won, so it doesn't matter, but imagine if we lost cause of that? The outcome of the game shouldn't excuse the gift officiating that UNC got.

1. Hawkins intentional. Ok they are calling it tight, I guess but,
2. No intentional on launching your body into the hot shooter.
3. Removing fouls on Meeks is fishy.
4. The walk.
5. Added clock time once.
6. Added clock time twice.

These aren't ticky tack fouls that I'm sure both sides can point out.. These are blatantly obvious. An attempt to help UNC get the win.

Meeks? At the game. I Thought he got 5 fouls earlier than he did. What was up with that?

 

[UKCAT5FAN]

Because when it happens over, and over, and over.. it's not just a coincidence.

They botched the walk call, then they put an extra half second on the clock, not once, but TWICE. I've never in my life seen that much time added back to a clock.. not ever.

Officials are employed by the NCAA, an organization run by Emmert, a guy who everyone knows has an axe to grind with Kentucky. I'm also pretty sure the NCAA (and ESPN for that matter) have quite a few alum. Not to mention Duke/UNC were the national teams for quite some time. They were the most popular, just like Dallas or the Bulls.

There's no shortage of reasons why the NCAA wouldn't protect it's golden children and there's certainly enough evidence through the years.

Because there are UNC and Duke alumni at ESPN and because UNC and Duke were the most popular teams? Really? None of those reasons you listed are legit reasons. Do you honestly believe that someone who has worked their entire life to get to that level and to that point in their career is going to risk everything because they don't like a team or because their buddy is an alumni of UNC?

Also, the officials are not employed by the NCAA. So, that right just blows your argument up right there.

 

[LineSkiCat14]

So at some point.. I think early in the 2nd,l half, the officials said he was at 4. Which I thought was actually 1 foul too many. Then, with about 11:30 left he picked up a foul which would have been his 5th.. Everyone on the game thread wondered as much..

Turns out not only did they have one too many fouls on him, they had 2 too many. He was really at 3 fouls.

Look, maybe it was legit. But you've seen plenty of games where they think it's a players 5th, but they somehow assign the foul to someone else. Seems weird that it was a two foul discrepency.

 

[LineSkiCat14]

Because there are UNC and Duke alumni at ESPN and because UNC and Duke were the most popular teams? Really? None of those reasons you listed are legit reasons. Do you honestly believe that someone who has worked their entire life to get to that level and to that point in their career is going to risk everything because they don't like a team or because their buddy is an alumni of UNC?

Also, the officials are not employed by the NCAA. So, that right just blows your argument up right there.

You always protect your bread winners. Not even just college. Brady and Manning.. You couldn't touch those guys, but a 3rd year QB takes a licking with no fault.

Believe what you want. It's a fact that there are many UNC Duke alum in the higher ranks of the game. And it shows.

Take them completely out of it. Emmert was a UW alum and took exception to the recruitment of Enes Kanter.

 

[TortElvisII]

Yeah.....great jobs refs.

You left out the word hose.

 

[wildcatwelder_rivals]

So at some point.. I think early in the 2nd,l half, the officials said he was at 4. Which I thought was actually 1 foul too many. Then, with about 11:30 left he picked up a foul which would have been his 5th.. Everyone on the game thread wondered as much..

Turns out not only did they have one too many fouls on him, they had 2 too many. He was really at 3 fouls.

Look, maybe it was legit. But you've seen plenty of games where they think it's a players 5th, but they somehow assign the foul to someone else. Seems weird that it was a two foul discrepency.

FWIW, I was keeping count on the fouls, and when Meeks fouled out he was playing with 4.

What really ticked me off was the double T on Bam, that was a BS call.

 

[UKCatNnc]

He's calling timeout as he's doing it. No official is going to call a walk in that situation. Has no effect on the game.

Except, he caught the ball and raised his right hand to his face, then brought it down to signal timeout. Go Cats!!

 

[englishmajor]

I just assumed he said "time-out"as soon as he caught the ball.

 

[kybassfan]

True. But, then you have the time factor. The refs puts a lot of time back on the clock as if the player had intended to call the TO from the moment he walked back on the floor. Again, he catches the ball, looks in front and then looks for the ref to call the time out. If I were a replay official, I definitely give him less time.

Sorry, had to break for chow.

Yes, I can't account for the time either. I don't know if they have the time to hundredths superimposed on the game feed or what. I'd like to see those monitors in action some time. When you start splitting tenths, there is a lot of room for argument.

 

[preacherfan]

I just assumed he said "time-out"as soon as he caught the ball.

Player A is told by coach to catch the ball and call an immediate TO to preserve as much time as possible. Player A catches the ball and immediately looks at ref yelling and signaling the TO. Player A is not going to be looking around the court. He is not going to move from his spot. He is going to simply catch the ball, freeze in position and call the TO.

I have never seen a player do what UNC did if they were calling the immediate TO. No matter what the call, he was undecided what he was trying to do.

 

[jarms24]

Player A is told by coach to catch the ball and call an immediate TO to preserve as much time as possible. Player A catches the ball and immediately looks at ref yelling and signaling the TO. Player A is not going to be looking around the court. He is not going to move from his spot. He is going to simply catch the ball, freeze in position and call the TO.

I have never seen a player do what UNC did if they were calling the immediate TO. No matter what the call, he was undecided what he was trying to do.

Exactly, and that's why he traveled then called the timeout. He was undecided and panicked ala Chris Webber. Not sure why others don't see this.

 

[kybassfan]

Player A is told by coach to catch the ball and call an immediate TO to preserve as much time as possible. Player A catches the ball and immediately looks at ref yelling and signaling the TO. Player A is not going to be looking around the court. He is not going to move from his spot. He is going to simply catch the ball, freeze in position and call the TO.

I have never seen a player do what UNC did if they were calling the immediate TO. No matter what the call, he was undecided what he was trying to do.

True. Very unusual which may have contributed to an ambiguous call.

 

[preacherfan]

True. Very unusual which may have contributed to an ambiguous call.

My last post on the subject (has been a fun discussion) is that I went back and froze the screen at 1.4, which is the time that was put back on the clock. The UNC player had, by that time, moved both feet. He is also clearly calling a TO.

In the end the call no effect on the game and our discussion is purely academic.. But,it gave us a good discussion and I do see how the ref made the call he did. It was bang-bang.

 

[kybassfan]

My last post on the subject (has been a fun discussion) is that I went back and froze the screen at 1.4, which is the time that was put back on the clock. The UNC player had, by that time, moved both feet. He is also clearly calling a TO.

In the end the call no effect on the game and our discussion is purely academic.. But,it gave us a good discussion and I do see how the ref made the call he did. It was bang-bang.

Agreed. I find it interesting to parse out what those guys go through. I'd still like to get a look at what they are actually seeing on replay.

 

[jarms24]

My last post on the subject (has been a fun discussion) is that I went back and froze the screen at 1.4, which is the time that was put back on the clock. The UNC player had, by that time, moved both feet. He is also clearly calling a TO.

In the end the call no effect on the game and our discussion is purely academic.. But,it gave us a good discussion and I do see how the ref made the call he did. It was bang-bang.

In your opinion, was it a traveling violation?

 

[preacherfan]

In your opinion, was it a traveling violation?

Yeah, it was. They put the clock at 1.4. If they were seeing what I saw, it is a CLEAR walk by that point.

 

[jarms24]

Yeah, it was. They put the clock at 1.4. If they were seeing what I saw, it is a CLEAR walk by that point.

I concur

 

[IUfanBorden]

In 1.9 seconds, they threw it in received it, walked, called timeout. Threw it in again, it was intercepted by U.K., they fell down, called a walk, threw it in again, caught it and shot a three pointer. Lol

Didnt call a walk. Ball went OOB.

 

[IUfanBorden]

Exactly this

@IUfanBorden

Nope. Slow it down. Stop it at around 2-3 seconds. You'll see he has turned his head , asking for a TO. Dont watch anything but his head.

Also, something I noticed. He moves his left foot first; his right foot hits floor first. His right foot never moves until TO is being asked for. His left yes? So possibly the official not only A) verbally herd a request for a timeout prior to a possible travel, but B) felt his right foot was established as his pivot foot.

Look, dude could have been screaming for a TO looking at some fat chick in the 110th row. It doesnt matter if you're looking at the official or not. As long as we hear you, and determine possession, your getting the TO.

That call was close.

 

[IUfanBorden]

He's calling timeout as he's doing it. No official is going to call a walk in that situation. Has no effect on the game.

I've said this a million times. It was basically simultaneous. Not getting a bang-bang call like that.

 

[IUfanBorden]

Also, the officials are not employed by the NCAA. So, that right just blows your argument up right there.

Correct. I officiate. NCAA has zero to do with the hiring of officials.

 

[IUfanBorden]

Well, I had to watch it several times slowing it down and there is no doubt he walked as he establishes his left foot as the pivot foot and then slides it establishing the right. But, it happened pretty quick so a missed call that fortunately didn't cost us the game. But, it was walking absolutely non-debatable UNC fans.

Curious. How do you think one establishes a pivot foot? His right foot hits first. Then his left. He moves his left foot first. Thus by rule, establishing his right foot as his pivot foot. Which isn't a travel. There's no rule saying which foot you have to choose. It just says you have to .

Example:

Catch a pass. No pivot foot established. Jab step with your right foot. Left foot is your pivot.

Same thing here. Catches a pass. First movement is with left foot. Thus making his right foot his pivot foot.

Like you said though...It was bang-bang. Pretty much simultaneous.