Alright Blum....

[ILikeCy]

Anyone else notice that Issiah Austin set 2 moving screens on Morris when Heslip hit 2 of his 3s?

Yes, they were obvious moving screens, and at critical times of the game. If Heslip doesn't hit those two 3's, I think we maintain momentum and win the game. Those shots knocked the wind out of our sails, and got Heslip going to hit a couple more. Never should have happened.

 

[CoKane]

I don't consider myself an officiating expert, but those two were competently obvious on TV IN REAL TIME.

I think I even saw one play where he did 2 on Morris on one play. He slid in front of Morris, and then when Morris tried to go around again he slid over to block him a second time. How does one do get away with that? Austin's new nickname should be something to the effect of the screen door, because the screen is always moving when you try to get through (sorry for the lame joke, I can normally come up with better ones than that)

 

[The_Architect]

As the resident Cyclone Fanatic supervisor of officials, I need to get your opinion. There was a 2-3 minute stretch in last nights game where one official was involved in three plays that ultimately led to Baylor's Brady Heslip scoring 9 points during the last minute of the 1st half and the first couple of minutes of the second half. I personally felt this stretch was critical in the outcome of last nights game.


1) This play involved Edozie closing out late on Heslip on a missed three. 1st) The official didn't blow his whistle until the ball was off the rim. If you agreed that there was a foul should he have been awarded a shooting foul, or should it have been a foul on the floor?

Edozie lands left of the shooter and is clearly planted before Heslip decides to Marcus Smart himself to the ground. Was he indeed fouled on the shot? Was there enough grey area there to warrant a call?



2) At the beginning of the second half, the same official is positioned on the baseline and Baylor is running Heslip off a couple of screens to get him open for a three point shot. First, Baylor's Royce O' Neale runs across the lane to chip Monte Morris which creates initial seperation between Heslip and Morris. Then as Morris trails on the baseline. Austin slides a couple of feet sides ways and hips Morris which gives Heslip enough separation to make a three point shot. The same official as the first play is positioned three feet from where Austin slides down and hips Morris. The replay showed him positioned to clearly see this happen. Was that a moving screen? Was it acceptable for the official to miss that call? Keep in mind that we are talking about a lanky 7 footer that is a few feet in front of the official.

3) Only a few moments later in the same area on the court Baylor again runs Heslip off a screen and Austin again slides sideways to impede Morris and Heslip gets enough separation to hit another three. Should that have been called a moving screen, and if so is it excusable for a big twelve official to miss back to back moving screens or am I being to critical?

All 3 of these were just brutal. The worst of the 3 being the foul on Edozie - total joke.

 

[cyclonespiker33]

I also thought it was great when Melvin got called for hooking on offense and the very next possession Austin did it with no call.

 

[oldman]

I also thought it was great when Melvin got called for hooking on offense and the very next possession Austin did it with no call.

I watched that over in slo-mo. There was no hook that I saw.

 

[cyclonespiker33]

I watched that over in slo-mo. There was no hook that I saw.

By whom?

 

[Cyclonin]

I had the worst lady in the world behind me. Thought the refs were out to get Baylor last night.

"OH DAG NABBIT, CMON BEARS, YOU GOTTA PLAY TOUGH" about every two minutes.

Also according to her, Isiah Austin could do no wrong, and we traveled every time we had possession.

Other than her, fans were good and cordial to me. I was one red in a sea of green. I stuck around for their senior tribute after, pretty cool to see. Drew grabbed the mike first (after a Timeout of course), and then they let the seniors say something. They also chanted "One More Dunk" to Jefferson, who attempted a between the legs dunk and just couldn't get it all the way through his legs, still a cool tribute for the seniors though.

 

[Jaws73]

The rule is once it is on a downward arc or it hits the backboard it is goal tending.

 

[Jaws73]

No your are wrong. Once the ball hit the backboard or is on it's downward arc. Defensive player cannot touch it or it's goal tending..

 

[Jaws73]

On the 3 point shot. You are right it should have been after the shot. Once the shooter lands back on the floor in other words he has finished his shot process. It would be a common foul and not a shooting foul. Ball out of bound unless it's the 7 team foul.

 

[brentblum]

No your are wrong. Once the ball hit the backboard or is on it's downward arc. Defensive player cannot touch it or it's goal tending..

The ball still has to be above the ring and on a downward arc. It is not goal-tending just because it hits the back-board and then pinned. Check out section 34. Article 3.

http://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/BR11.pdf

 

[tzjung]

The ball still has to be above the ring and on a downward arc. It is not goal-tending just because it hits the back-board and then pinned. Check out section 34. Article 3.

http://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/BR11.pdf

Art. 3. When the entire ball is above the level of the ring during a field-goal
try and contacts the backboard, it is considered to be on its downward flight.
In such a case, it is goaltending when the ball is touched by a player

As soon as it hits the backboard...it is 100% considered downward in its flight and as such is goaltending. Jaws is right.

 

[brentblum]

Art. 3. When the entire ball is above the level of the ring during a field-goal
try and contacts the backboard, it is considered to be on its downward flight.
In such a case, it is goaltending when the ball is touched by a player

As soon as it hits the backboard...it is 100% considered downward in its flight and as such is goaltending. Jaws is right.

Still has to be above the ring like I said. You can pin a ball below the rim.

 

[cyclonespiker33]

Still has to be above the ring like I said. You can pin a ball below the rim.

That's usually the case when the ball is on the backboard however.

 

[brentblum]

That's usually the case when the ball is on the backboard however.

Certainly, but its not automatic.

 

[tzjung]

Still has to be above the ring like I said. You can pin a ball below the rim.

Not a lot of room to get a ball to hit the backboard and NOT be above the rim!

File:2008 NCAA Basketball backboard dimensions.svg - Wikimedia Commons

In addition, the play against us at Baylor was VERY close....I for sure thought it was goal tending live...even after they showed the replay it looked like Jefferson may have 'tied' it and pinned it, but even then it is too late.

 

[Clonefan94]

Still has to be above the ring like I said. You can pin a ball below the rim.

When I saw that full speed, I though, "Wow, we just got screwed there. Should have been goal tending." So I watched it in slo-mo a couple of times. I really don't see how it was anything other than a clean block.

 

[Rhoadhoused]

Not a lot of room to get a ball to hit the backboard and NOT be above the rim!

File:2008 NCAA Basketball backboard dimensions.svg - Wikimedia Commons

In addition, the play against us at Baylor was VERY close....I for sure thought it was goal tending live...even after they showed the replay it looked like Jefferson may have 'tied' it and pinned it, but even then it is too late.

Sure there is if it has to be 100% above the rim.

 

[mjhavlo76]

I thought the game last night was well officiated. The West Virginia game at Hilton, might very well go down as the most horrendous officiating I have EVER seen! There were a litany of calls missed. Frankly, I'm surprised more fans were not complaining. It was clearly obvious.

As the resident Cyclone Fanatic supervisor of officials, I need to get your opinion. There was a 2-3 minute stretch in last nights game where one official was involved in three plays that ultimately led to Baylor's Brady Heslip scoring 9 points during the last minute of the 1st half and the first couple of minutes of the second half. I personally felt this stretch was critical in the outcome of last nights game.


1) This play involved Edozie closing out late on Heslip on a missed three. 1st) The official didn't blow his whistle until the ball was off the rim. If you agreed that there was a foul should he have been awarded a shooting foul, or should it have been a foul on the floor?

Edozie lands left of the shooter and is clearly planted before Heslip decides to Marcus Smart himself to the ground. Was he indeed fouled on the shot? Was there enough grey area there to warrant a call?



2) At the beginning of the second half, the same official is positioned on the baseline and Baylor is running Heslip off a couple of screens to get him open for a three point shot. First, Baylor's Royce O' Neale runs across the lane to chip Monte Morris which creates initial seperation between Heslip and Morris. Then as Morris trails on the baseline. Austin slides a couple of feet sides ways and hips Morris which gives Heslip enough separation to make a three point shot. The same official as the first play is positioned three feet from where Austin slides down and hips Morris. The replay showed him positioned to clearly see this happen. Was that a moving screen? Was it acceptable for the official to miss that call? Keep in mind that we are talking about a lanky 7 footer that is a few feet in front of the official.

3) Only a few moments later in the same area on the court Baylor again runs Heslip off a screen and Austin again slides sideways to impede Morris and Heslip gets enough separation to hit another three. Should that have been called a moving screen, and if so is it excusable for a big twelve official to miss back to back moving screens or am I being to critical?

 

[Iastfan112]

[video=youtube;YVVTZgwYwVo]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVVTZgwYwVo[/video]

While since its posted this video is an example of something that slightly bugged me when watching Frozen, Idina Menzel, especially when singing, just sounds way older than the teenager that Elsa is supposed to be. Sounds fantastic but just doesn't fit the character great imo.