*** Official #8 IOWA STATE vs #5 Houston Game(Day) Thread ***
- Thread starter CycloneRulzzz
- Start date
AllinforISU
Can you explain how you think the two clips provided a few minutes ago was Cryer having "Cylinder?" I'd like to see a top down on that. But, what that looked like to me on the swipe was Heise off Cryers right shoulder. Maybe crowding, but also maybe occupying the space outside of his shoulder as well AFTER Cryer had quickly moved into Heises' space. (Maybe Defenders do not have the right to any space on the floor? Is that the deal?) Hard to tell.
The definition of the cylinder that I could find is this:
Boundaries of the cylinder
AND you can not tell me that Cryer did not purposefully put himself in position and purposefully move to hit Heise. Watching that back seveal times, it is pretty obvious. Heise was bothering him and he didn't like it and got lucky taking advantage of a rule. I'd say anytime you are pissed off at a guy, you should be able to crouch down into the defenders space and come up through his body and face with both hands and elbows as hard as you can throwing them to the ground. It would be, in the cylinder after all.
We need to teach this technique to at least Jefferson and Chat and have them execute it in the first 2 minutes of every game. That should keep a few people off of them. Maybe just knock some people out of the game. That seems to be in the rules.
Can you explain how you think the two clips provided a few minutes ago was Cryer having "Cylinder?" I'd like to see a top down on that. But, what that looked like to me on the swipe was Heise off Cryers right shoulder. Maybe crowding, but also maybe occupying the space outside of his shoulder as well AFTER Cryer had quickly moved into Heises' space. (Maybe Defenders do not have the right to any space on the floor? Is that the deal?) Hard to tell.
The definition of the cylinder that I could find is this:
Boundaries of the cylinder
- Front: The player's feet, bent knees, and arms
- Rear: The player's buttocks
- Sides: The outer edge of the player's elbows and legs
- Height: Extends from the floor to as far above the player as they can jump or extend their arms and body
I felt like Heise had established his positon, Cryer moved into it and then made a move from there. Heise had legal positon, Cryer moved into his space and does not carry his cylinder into that position. This is my non-professional interpretation of the rule that you pointed out. Does the Cylinder move from that initial position and does the Defender have a right to the spot they have established? Woudl I be correct to say the only way that heise could actually legally defend Cryer is to back off after he pivots into him? Becuase that does not sound like the rule I just read. AND sounds just stupid.
AND you can not tell me that Cryer did not purposefully put himself in position and purposefully move to hit Heise. Watching that back seveal times, it is pretty obvious. Heise was bothering him and he didn't like it and got lucky taking advantage of a rule. I'd say anytime you are pissed off at a guy, you should be able to crouch down into the defenders space and come up through his body and face with both hands and elbows as hard as you can throwing them to the ground. It would be, in the cylinder after all.
We need to teach this technique to at least Jefferson and Chat and have them execute it in the first 2 minutes of every game. That should keep a few people off of them. Maybe just knock some people out of the game. That seems to be in the rules.
That to me was a very difficult choice, but I'd have probably left it as a regular foul. The choice they actually made was absurd.
What they are saying is you can create all the contact you want if someone enters your cylinder. The PROBLEM that I see is that Heise has legal guarding positon, Cryer pivots into him and I want to know can you reestablish a cylinder in the defenses space that they have established? Taht is the question. Maybe it is the case. If so, I need to come in for a "special training session" with our bigs.
AllInforContrarianism thinks the fact that Heise moved his feet slightly and backed up is why it's a foul, he thinks defensive players are not allowed to move their feet at all, even to get out of the way of an incoming haymaker to the jaw.
If the cylinder can move with the player basketball basically becomes full contact tag and you just run into people and win.
We're all overthinking this because it's a 100% blown incorrect call. It's not that complex.
Heise gave him legal space and didn't move further into him, Cryer totally initiated the contact, the defensive player has a right to his space too. The sport would be 100% permanently broken if this were the right call today. It wasn't.
There was really only one time I thought he passed on a shot I wanted him to take. 3 at the top of the arc.
Yeah, when he pivots, he takes a giant step with his non pivot foot into Heise then swings his entire body into him. We didn't say he traveled(this time) he stepped into then aggressively leaned into Heise's cylinder and swung his elbow. The cylinder only applies to when you establish position and allows you to pivot, it does not establish a new moving cylinder when you pivot take a step and shift into a defender. Heise was established in legal guarding position outside his legal cylinder. Totally hard to understand how they could overturn when the call on the floor was offensive foul. They could have just called it a basketball play, although under today's rules I think it should have been a flagrant 1.
Last edited:
He’s wrong and just won’t admit it. He said Cryder didn’t move which shows you he’s just being difficult to be difficult.
It was just absolutely absurd for the refs to act like the cylinder mattered in that moment, when it hadn’t for the previous 30 minutes.
I can’t wait for AI refs, which are not very far away.
Flagrant or common foul I could have lived with either way because it's subjective by nature. Like others that is what I assumed was being reviewed.
The more I watch the replay there's just absolutely nothing to support changing the call other than these officials were owned by Sampson all game.
Isn’t swinging your elbow and contacting someone face an automatic F1?
I watch more NBA than college so I get fuzzy with rules, but I know in NBA it's a judgement they review intent.
I think intent is only used in college to assess a F2.
Flagrant 1 foul
- Unnecessary or avoidable contact
- Not required by the circumstances of the play
- The fouled player receives two free throws
- The opposing team gains possession of the ball
- Unnecessary and excessive contact
- More severe contact than a flagrant 1
- The player who committed the foul is ejected from the game
- Excessive contact to play the ball or an opponent
- Unnecessary contact to stop the offensive team in transition
- Violent swing and hard contact to the opponent's head
- Hit to opponent's groin
I don't think that should have been a flagarent foul as didn't seem like a non basketball play but it's still a foul on off player. The reversal was crazy.
ISU played a great second half, no shame in falling short without full squad. Great to see Mom come alive second half, Jeffersons passing, Heise aggressiveness.
First half Watson drove and turned it over like 2 or 3 times and just not enough play makers against a swarming defense.
If Houston didn't make so many tough shots they were in danger
ISU played a great second half, no shame in falling short without full squad. Great to see Mom come alive second half, Jeffersons passing, Heise aggressiveness.
First half Watson drove and turned it over like 2 or 3 times and just not enough play makers against a swarming defense.
If Houston didn't make so many tough shots they were in danger
From this I guess F1 was correct call.
What a massive swing, in a one point game could have been a 3-8 point swing if called correctly.
2 shots and the ball back seems excessive to me too, but that might be the actual correct call.
Certainly what they did was not correct.
He played pretty good D on the perimeter honestly. Would have been fun to see him get a three of course.
