EvilMonkeyInTheCloset
Well-Known Member
Except when they do Iowa games.....more often than not, the officials are right...
Also, yes my post had a lot of intentional generalizations.
Except when they do Iowa games.....more often than not, the officials are right...
Because like most of the rules, it allows for "officials judgement". Ever read an NCAA case book? I doubt you have. There are hundreds of scenarios....If this is dfone...if that...If they do this. So on and so on. The rule contracdiscts itself---And if you would taken the time to read---instead of rushing to pounce, you would know why I could have called a block, probably would have called a block, and been within the rules----and, well, not have been.I'm not patronizing you. I was being polite in my question. However, I can me more direct.
Why would you voluntarily and openly admit that you understand a rule, but would call it completely different than the meaning you clearly understand it to be?
Answer that without deflection or doubting my understanding.
You have already stated that you understood the meaning. So make no mistake, I'm not questioning the finer details, I'm question you.Because like most of the rules, it allows for "officials judgement". Ever read an NCAA case book? I doubt you have. There are hundreds of scenarios....If this is dfone...if that...If they do this. So on and so on. The rule contracdiscts itself---And if you would taken the time to read---instead of rushing to pounce, you would know why I could have called a block, probably would have called a block, and been within the rules----and, well, not have been.
In the act of shooting.....Allowing a shooter to return to the floor....legal guarding position...secondary defender...All play a role in calling a charge/block. And they all circle one another. So there is wiggle room, i.e. room to make a decision on what you feel the contact created.
I can go into MORE detail if you like? But me calling that a block isn't disregarding the rules. Its me making a judgement based on the multiple rules at my disposal.
I see....Question: Why are you not cross examining me on not calling tchnical fouls on coaches being out of the box? I mean the rule says...............You have already stated that you understood the meaning. So make no mistake, I'm not questioning the finer details, I'm question you.
Maybe, I wouldn't be as likely to "pounce" if you weren't so condescending every other line.
As in........Not calling a dunk, a charge? Pretty sure they were being sarcastic.So.....because someone does something freakishly athletic, refs should let him slide?
I'm not questioning you on technical fouls due to those being a deflection by you away from the simple question I asked you. Here is what you said, these are your words not mine.I see....Question: Why are you not cross examining me on not calling tchnical fouls on coaches being out of the box? I mean the rule says...............
is it OK for me to use my judgement on that---adhere somewhat from what the rule says?
Condescending? You should go back and read my original post---The part where I say the rule(s) contradict themselves----As in, it gives me the liberty to actually call that a block, and be well within the rule....
Do yourself a favor...
Read better.
Thought the board could use a spot where fans could bring “bad calls” to our beloved resident referee @IUfanBorden, who as many of us know, is an actual college referee and is now on retainer here. He can confirm whether the ref that blew the whistle did indeed have his head up his ass and overturn it - or if it’s YOU who has their head up their ass and confirm the call.
Welp, let’s get it poppin’.
Case #1 . . . What do you think, Borden . . . Confirmed or overturned?
He chopped his arm? You sure you want to stick with that?For chopping the guys arm? Think he did it on purpose to bring attention to all the holding. Seems like a massive exaggeration to think that was that bad a play, lol.
Yeah, but the first question we have to ask is, why the f*ck is unc playing Northeastern in the middle of February?5:58 of the UNC Northeastern game on ESPN replag. Should Garrison Brooks have been ejected? No one even mentions this at any point, no foul was called, no nothing. However, I think I am seeing a questionable play that I am not very happy about from my player.
It was awesome, but it was a charge.Thought the board could use a spot where fans could bring “bad calls” to our beloved resident referee @IUfanBorden, who as many of us know, is an actual college referee and is now on retainer here. He can confirm whether the ref that blew the whistle did indeed have his head up his ass and overturn it - or if it’s YOU who has their head up their ass and confirm the call.
Welp, let’s get it poppin’.
Case #1 . . . What do you think, Borden . . . Confirmed or overturned?
Because all the ACC teams basically out of the tournament are now finding reasons to opt out of all their games and all UNC's home games.Yeah, but the first question we have to ask is, why the f*ck is unc playing Northeastern in the middle of February?
He chopped his arm? You sure you want to stick with that?
5:21.
He is holding the Northeastern player's arm pulls him in and intentionally punches his arm. You can watch the entire less than 4 minutes prior into the game if you think something "warranted" being punched, I suppose.
I actually posted a play from our most recent game that astonished me for not only what he did but also by the fact that there wasn't a foul called, neither announcer mentioned it at all, it was never reviewed, and everyone keeps sweeping it under the rug as either a fair play because he was getting picked on by the guy and had to fight off the bully who was holding him or that it was a normal play. It was neither. That's an ejection if that is caught, imo. I was curious what Borden thought.Maybe Roy should kick him of the team or revoke his scholarship or something. He was definitely being held in the first half a lot, which is why I assumed that is what it was. However, I didn't replay it to really study it either. Just remember watching it in real time. If it was that bad it would seem the player on NE would have had an issue with it. It should have definitely been an F1 though. Glad you are looking to post examples of the worse play our four year senior has made over the course of his career though, lol.
Yes. Absoluteness.So.....because someone does something freakishly athletic, refs should let him slide?
I was waiting for someone to point out the irony that a UK fan started this kind off thread. jumpingsmilethis thread lets me know as a UK fan..., It's ok to bitch about the refs, It's not a stereotype.
I saw the dunk, it was impressive.Did you watch that dunk? Let is slide. It was an awesome basketball play.
Did you see that Isaiah Jackson dunk attempt?I saw the dunk, it was impressive.
I'm saying I didn't pull a play from 2.5 years ago. I just saw this recently, was shocked, and I was curious what Borden thought. I am sure there was a time when Grayson never tripped anyone either. Doesn't make the first time not shocking. This is more blatantly intentional though.It was uncalled for without a doubt and extremely surprising for him. Just seems odd to pick out that play for a guy like Brooks who has never done anything dirty in four years. That's all. I agree 100% it is a dirty play after seeing it though.
Do these guys actually watch tape? Color me skeptical.That call is just plum awful...No idea what Larry saw there. But I guarantee when he saw that on film, he was like---Yikes.
So.....because someone does something freakishly athletic, refs should let him slide?
Because all the ACC teams basically out of the tournament are now finding reasons to opt out of all their games and all UNC's home games.
VT, Miami, BC, Louisville is next I am sure.
Miami didn't have an outbreak. And they are off this week and now we are also and they still won't play the game. ACC also approved playing the game before Miami canceled.Not to sure yalls resume is a helluva lot better than ours. Or VT honestly. That being said I think y’all will manhandle us down low if we ever get to play.
It is so frustrating having these pauses though, last time we came off one we promptly lost to Clemson and Miami smdh.
And the reasons we are finding to have to cancel/postpone games is we found out about this new virus out of China that is extremely contagious and affects everyone differently and can cause lasting damage to the heart and lungs. It’s called the corona virus iirc. And when/if someone close to the program gets infected with the corona virus, everyone has to quarantine so they don’t spread it to each other. I’d guess the other programs found that exact same reason.
Do you honestly think anyone associated with any team doesn’t want to play basketball games or did I miss the sarcasm.
Miami didn't have an outbreak. And they are off this week and now we are also and they still won't play the game. ACC also approved playing the game before Miami canceled.
Kentucky is the only team ever to have a *48 hour pause* before their Texas game.
Yes, I do think teams are taking advantage of the circumstances to duck teams for sure.
I don't know enough about Miami to comment, but UK usually schedules a competitive schedule. So, they put themselves at risk of losing. I'm sure if they back out of a game it is because of the reasons they state and not being afraid.Agree to disagree. You might be right though I Obv don’t know or have any input on these decisions.
I just can’t imagine a team like Miami, who has no shot at the tourney, being scared to play anyone, like they are afraid to lose a game, when they’ve already lost double digit games this year (I assume) And if that is what they are doing, why not pull the plug on the entire season? Guess that would mess with their TV/ACC $$$?
And the UK 48 hr pause was weird AF but again when they’ve already lost to a program like Richmond at home and have double digit losses I just can’t see em canceling the game bc they were scared of losing it.
Yes, we do. Even at halftime, as well.Do these guys actually watch tape? Color me skeptical.
Read better....By ONE definition-it is a charge. BUT, the definition of a shooter/airborne/starting the shot, does/can, contradict the rule. I have pointed this out 100 fukin times to you.I'm not questioning you on technical fouls due to those being a deflection by you away from the simple question I asked you. Here is what you said, these are your words not mine.
IUfanBorden said:
To me, if my call---Its a block.
BUT....By rule, and how its written, it is a charge.
You say, the correct call is it's a charge as written. That pronouncement says it's clear in your mind.
So, why call it differently than as you understand it to be written?
Let's see how your reading is, after all they are your words. It shouldn't be too hard.
Cool as the other side of the pillow----Though that hooker from Tenn is annoying.@IUfanBorden might be too overwhelmed and armchair refs come to play.
Why? Is it gonna change the call? I agree....Still cannot believe they missed the foul on Auburn...Should officials be criticized by coaches after a game where their terrible call swayed the game.
AUBURN vs UVA?
Wow.....Not sure WTF happened there. Right it front of the official. I mean,am I missing something? TO answer your question, thats a punch. And had NE coach wanted that looked at, in all likelihood, he gets ejected. ANY type of punch is automatic ejection..He chopped his arm? You sure you want to stick with that?
5:21.
He is holding the Northeastern player's arm pulls him in and intentionally punches his arm. You can watch the entire less than 4 minutes prior into the game if you think something "warranted" being punched, I suppose.
You said the rules as you understood them call it a charge. That seems pretty straight forward.Read better....By ONE definition-it is a charge. BUT, the definition of a shooter/airborne/starting the shot, does/can, contradict the rule. I have pointed this out 100 fukin times to you.
READ BETTER.
Is your wife typing for you?Read better....By ONE definition-it is a charge. BUT, the definition of a shooter/airborne/starting the shot, does/can, contradict the rule. I have pointed this out 100 fukin times to you.
READ BETTER.