You forgot the no call on the flagrant one. The definition of a a flagrant 1. When a player interferes with an opponent in an unnecessary physical manner. That is what happened. No where does it say, it is not physical when you are trying to get the ball over an opponents head and hit him with your elbow on the bridge of the nose. Fricking Little Larry's interpretation last night was total BS.
Please clip plays and post that show the difference between soft fouls on us and none on them? Then explain the consistency issue since the announce crew specifically Robbie Hummel are experts on rules and calls on the floor. I saw exactly one play I thought was incorrect and that was a low post foul on Rebraca in the 2nd half. Other than that they were extremely consistent and the goal of any crew is to not get to the bonus and letting them play...but please advise? Larry Scirotto who apparently sticks it to Iowa and shouldn't be officiating middle school according to the board experts came in correctly and got a blocking/RA foul in the 1st half then had 2 and 1 shooting fouls for us in the 2nd half that kept us close and could have been considered "soft" according to you. I guess "swallowing" their whistles as opposed to the players adjusting is what went on. I missed that too. But by all means please share your expertise so I can learn.
The original foul was for the swing and contact above the shoulders. A crew review is a requirement on this play. This is one instance when upon review a foul can be upgraded or changed. Although Rebraca did nothing wrong, Once the post player moved him down legally he(Rebraca) is now by rule now subject to a cylinder violation which it was. The crew now has a choice 1) we know because it's a cylinder violation that unless the contact was deemed intentional, which it doesn't appear to be it CANNOT be an F1 or worse. 2) or we deem the foul common so it's a team foul against Wisconsin and Iowa gets the ball. They had deference and chose the path of least resistance a win/win for both teams. IF they invoke the cylinder rule at that point it's likely Fran gets whacked and ejected. Fran knows and didn't argue with the explanation he got. This is an NCAA rules committee issue that was handled properly by the officiating crew.
Don't go to the cylinder rule. Crowl elbowed Rebracca in the chest, he held his ground. Crowl moved in closer then swung the elbows high. Always a F1 call. Defend the refs all you want, but that was a bad call. F1 rule is to prevent contact to the face.
I've already explained it to another refereeing expert, but I'll do it one more time for you. Also, best I could tell, Larry Scriotto scored more pts than Sandfort for us...if Larry could have just not gone Ofer from the 3 pt line. So here ya go and PLEASE read this a couple of times so it sinks in: The original foul was for the swing and contact above the shoulders. A crew review is a requirement on this play. This is one instance when upon review a foul can be upgraded or changed. Although Rebraca did nothing wrong, Once the post player moved him down legally he(Rebraca) is now by rule now subject to a cylinder violation which it was. The crew now has a choice 1) we know because it's a cylinder violation that unless the contact was deemed intentional, which it doesn't appear to be it CANNOT be an F1 or worse. 2) or we deem the foul common so it's a personal/ team foul against Wisconsin and Iowa gets the ball. They had deference and chose the path of least resistance a win/win for both teams. IF they invoke the cylinder rule at that point it's likely Fran gets whacked and ejected. Fran knows and didn't argue with the explanation he got. This is an NCAA rules committee issue that was handled properly by the officiating crew. But if you know something about how this works, I'll wait.
I read it. since the BTN crew is your Gold standard....geesh must be true....my bad
So your telling me LL did this extensive mental evaluation in 2 seconds at the time and then in his review rattled through the BS you just posted to NOT call a F1. Your full of crap.
If the goal ‘is not to get to the bonus’ they may want to rethink their goal. Nobody wants a FT marathon but the goal should be to call the game. Not to look at foul counts, avoid the bonus, etc. there are teams that push the ‘won’t call them all’ approach. If it’s a call make the call.
Wahl is 6’9 compared to Connor’s 6’5. How many buckets did Wahl get posting up Connor?
Feel free to watch the film, that number won’t be as high as you think it is. Especially since Patrick was matched up against him just as much depending on the lineups.
Are you serious? Wahl was 9/14 from the field but only made one three. Must have been all the mid range jumpers he took lol. Crowl 6/11 from the field with 0 threes. Two of Wisconsin’s three highest scorers.. the answer by the way is either 3 or 4 times Wahl scored off of post ups on Connor, which would have been more than the difference in final score
So if the refs were saying it wasn’t an f1 because of the cylinder rule, why didn’t they just say that? Instead their explanation was, his intention was to swing above rebracas head. That makes 0 sense, a) how the f do they know what his intention was? b) it doesn’t f’n matter what his intention was, when u swing ur elbow into another players jaw it should be an f1. Oh and let’s not forget, he swung the elbow twice right at Rebracas jaw. So if they thought it was a cylinder violation on rebaraca just use that for the explanation, not the bs that they spewed
That's college referee speak, sir
it's always a goal to have the ball go in and not blow the whistle.. Look at it like this. When you play 20 min at that level(or any level for that matter) and the score is very low ...say 18-17 because the ball won't go in the basket, who does that put all the pressure on? It's now a contact possession every trip down the floor on/off ball trying to execute in 30 secs. When the ball goes in, you don't notice. Do you want a 50 foul game so the play is stopped with no flow? Nobody is looking at foul counts...fallacy... I sure as hell don't. Call the obvious based on rule criteria. LS is a top rated official in the NCAA. I literally reviewed every play in this game. I only really found a dislocation foul on Rebraca in the 2nd half that was probably incorrect...it happens.. You can not like him all you want but he's damn good at what he does. I also mentioned that LS scored more pts for Iowa than Sandfort...think about that?
my answer would be, flip the script and put Rebraca in that position and having swung an inadvertent elbow because it happens. How would you or Iowa fans react? Again, the crew had deference and I've explained it to others in this thread. If you read through it and apply common sense, you'll see that Iowa got a break on what could have been ruled here. Also, in fairness, I agree that I wish the crew could explain the ruling like they do in football and now baseball. They only had a sec out of courtesy to run across and try to clue in Robbie H but he took it what he got and ran with it best he could. You may not agree...but this was a break for Iowa
it certainly is ludicrous if you listen to Robbie H but the NCAA changed their interpretation of the rule. When you start your upward habitual motion even the landing on a jumpstop with 1 foot(like this play) and continue to the basket is considered part of that move now as of this year. Is that continuation? yes. That's on the NCAA rules committee. They did the same with the traveling rule last year? By rule, if you lift your pivot foot and put it back down, it's a travel (think step back). In the NBA/FIBA they are allowed a "zero" step (think James Harden) In HS and the NCAAm you were not. So now in the NCAAm if you land "close" to simultaneous on a jump stop or step back we consider it legal. I actually think Robbie Hummel is an excellent color guy for as young as he is. Robbie just doesn't know the rules of the game and especially the updated ones. Players and announcers never do. As to the cylinder rule. It's ONLY FOR STATIONARY players with the ball in a holding position. Think post, guarding a pt guard who's holding the ball or double team trapping someone who's pulled up their dribble.
I believe I even said no one wants a FT marathon. When you broke down the game were you looking at bad calls, missed calls, calls that disrupt the flow of the game or other metric. You mention that nobody counts fouls but the goal is to stay out of the bonus. Not sure both can be true.
yes sir, thank you respectively... I am...but let's be clear...I bleed black/gold probably more than you. My brother was an All BTN player and I don't take ANY Hawkeye loss well. With that said, yes, I officiate NCAAm below D1. We don't foul count individually but we have to be always aware of team fouls and whether next one puts us in the bonus or not. One of the reasons I replied on this thread is I get tired of the non stop whining and blame put on the officiating crew. I can for example think of 3 xs that LS actually helped. In the first half LS came in late on what we call a secondary PCA and cadence whistle on a RA violation on Wisconsin on a fast break right in front of Gard. LS then had 2 and 1's in the 2nd half which helped keep us close. Like it or not, he's a top 20 official in the NCAA and is very, very good at what he does. If you have any questions regarding any rules applications in the NCAAm let me know...they are very complicated and I can tell you from exp that even most of the college Coaches I deal with don't know them and the players are mostly clueless
Whereas, with Wisconsin players it's just good defense.😏
If I had any less of a life than I do now, I would waste my time patrolling Wisconsin boards to see if they ever complain about refs after a loss.
First time I've visited the board in several months. Came here knowing exactly what would be complained about. You guys never change. Stay golden pony boy.
Bo Ryan was just as bitchy as Fran. So GTFO with that.
No foul was called. No bitching by the UW player. Iowa could learn a few things from their head coach...oh wait.
I really don't understand how backing in creating contact by pushing with the arm and body is not an offense foul
No foul was called. No bitching by the UW player. Iowa could learn a few things from their head coach...oh wait.
Yeah, the Grinch could really bitch when he wanted to
Thank you for the input. Unfortunately the officials will take the heat for games such as last night. When one team is significantly more physical and then foul counts and free throws are thrown out as evidence that the officiating went one way or the other. Did you review the Rutgers/Ohio State debacle? What could have done within the system to get that call correct?yes sir, thank you respectively... I am...but let's be clear...I bleed black/gold probably more than you. My brother was an All BTN player and I don't take ANY Hawkeye loss well. With that said, yes, I officiate NCAAm below D1. We don't foul count individually but we have to be always aware of team fouls and whether next one puts us in the bonus or not. One of the reasons I replied on this thread is I get tired of the non stop whining and blame put on the officiating crew. I can for example think of 3 xs that LS actually helped. In the first half LS came in late on what we call a secondary PCA and cadence whistle on a RA violation on Wisconsin on a fast break right in front of Gard. LS then had 2 and 1's in the 2nd half which helped keep us close. Like it or not, he's a top 20 official in the NCAA and is very, very good at what he does. If you have any questions regarding any rules applications in the NCAAm let me know...they are very complicated and I can tell you from exp that even most of the college Coaches I deal with don't know them and the players are mostly clueless
