This is in the second half if it is the play you are talking about.
WOW, great shot! That's definately the play!
Grabbing the Rim
- Thread starter cycloneworld
- Start date
WOW, great shot! That's definately the play!
I had thought about that too so I sent them to Coach and he can do that if he wants to.
This is in the second half if it is the play you are talking about.
While hitting the rim or the net on the shot is goal tending. Isnt pulling yourself up on the rim to gain leverage a T?
Dear Commish and Your Chief Head of all 12 Refs:
During a very important game on national TV which is watched by all, the blue defender (see skycam pic) from KU climbed higher by lifting his body by forcibly pulling himself up towards the rim in order to block and antagonize the said ball from Mr. Hubulek who was then rudely interrupted from making an easy basket. Obviously distressed at the ignorance of the three refs, Mr H proceeded to miss both free throws. Scratching hid head, Coah McD quizzed the KU Stripes on what they saw. They replied SayWhat?
The SkyCam Reporter
During a very important game on national TV which is watched by all, the blue defender (see skycam pic) from KU climbed higher by lifting his body by forcibly pulling himself up towards the rim in order to block and antagonize the said ball from Mr. Hubulek who was then rudely interrupted from making an easy basket. Obviously distressed at the ignorance of the three refs, Mr H proceeded to miss both free throws. Scratching hid head, Coah McD quizzed the KU Stripes on what they saw. They replied SayWhat?
The SkyCam Reporter
It's not goaltending. It's not basket interference. What it IS, is a technical foul.
So in that case, you should have had:
(1) Personal foul (00-Arthur) on the shot attempt
(2) Technical foul (00-Arthur) for moving the rim/backboard while a shot was in the air
(3) Four total free throw attempts for ISU (withOUT KU being allowed to shoot threes in between)
So in that case, you should have had:
(1) Personal foul (00-Arthur) on the shot attempt
(2) Technical foul (00-Arthur) for moving the rim/backboard while a shot was in the air
(3) Four total free throw attempts for ISU (withOUT KU being allowed to shoot threes in between)
What a joke!!! Thanks for the pictures!!! Although we pry still would have lost it is just another time when the refs are pulling for the nation power-house...
It definitely should have been a technical foul. I'm not sure whether the shot should have been counted or not... but...
Could have ended up being a 6-7 point swing towards us in one trip down the court.
2 points for personal foul FT's (even though Jiri missed the two foul shots he had, you can't say that he would have automatically missed these)
2 points for technical foul FT's
2-3 points if we score on the following possession.
That definitely is a game-changing call that didn't even get so much as a second look from the officials. Terrible.
I think this scenerio is the elusive "false multiple foul"
and I think the ball would actually be put in play at the point of interuption following the 4 FTs ... meaning we'd get it on the baseline.
check out rules 4 & 10 in the NCAA rule book for some literature to put you to sleep tonight, I'm sleepy just skimming a couple sections :daydreaming:
Dear ISU,
We see why you are so upset by this. Yes the KU player grabed the rim, pulled it down, and caused your player to miss the shot. But you player touched the backboard and at that point of the game that is a not allowed thus the fouls would offset and it would have been KUs ball. How do you even know if the ball was going into the rim? This is a dead issue, if you question the officals when playing KU again, KU will be allowed to shoot a wide open 3 pointer between shot one and shot two each time you shot freethrows.
Thanks for rolling over for the Big Budget teams
The office of the Big 12
We see why you are so upset by this. Yes the KU player grabed the rim, pulled it down, and caused your player to miss the shot. But you player touched the backboard and at that point of the game that is a not allowed thus the fouls would offset and it would have been KUs ball. How do you even know if the ball was going into the rim? This is a dead issue, if you question the officals when playing KU again, KU will be allowed to shoot a wide open 3 pointer between shot one and shot two each time you shot freethrows.
Thanks for rolling over for the Big Budget teams
The office of the Big 12
That was last year against Bradley at Wells Fargo....yea McD followed the refs by the locker rooms at half and kept at um but they said they never saw it. BS
yeah, i remember that too. somebody put a lay up, and as the ball hit the back board, a defender pulled the rim down just like arthur did wednesday. still no call. mcd was livid then as well
wesley_w...GREAT PIC!
Any "interference" with the rim, net, or backboard during a shot is supposed to be goaltending. This was clearly a blatant case (probably the worse I've seen). Hands getting in the net or slapping the backboard happens way more often...and is rarely called goaltending for some reason. A technical foul is only assessed when the rim is hung on for an unduly long time. Maybe it is time to raise the hoop to 12 feet?!
Oh, by the way, this play (or the officiating in general) had nothing to do with us losing this game.
Any "interference" with the rim, net, or backboard during a shot is supposed to be goaltending. This was clearly a blatant case (probably the worse I've seen). Hands getting in the net or slapping the backboard happens way more often...and is rarely called goaltending for some reason. A technical foul is only assessed when the rim is hung on for an unduly long time. Maybe it is time to raise the hoop to 12 feet?!
Oh, by the way, this play (or the officiating in general) had nothing to do with us losing this game.
