How do you call that Technical?

[NutmegDog]

I just read that the ref who T'd AD up was Roger Ayers. Google that name...cyberspace is full of posts on this guy and everyone agrees that he's terrible -- bad calls aggravated by a hair-trigger on Ts.
The fact that Roger Ayers is even doing a BE game speaks to the "who you know - not what you know" aspect of big time college officiating.

 

[dogpause]

I have no problem at all with AD helping the other player up off the floor.

 

[upstater]

You're all jumping to conclusions. You weren't on the court. Maybe AD said something. Not sure. But if he threw the ball toward the ref and the ref wasn't looking, that's on AD. This doesn't merit a thread. It's like you caught your wife cheating on you and you're focused on the fact that she had blue panties on when you caught her. Who cares?

I'll ignore the ridiculous analogy, but in this post, you have Drummond saying something to the ref? Maybe he's a ventriloquist? Because his mouth was closed and his lips weren't moving. Oh, and he didn't throw the ball at the ref. He tried to hand it to him but the ref ran right past him.

 

[willie99]

You're all jumping to conclusions. You weren't on the court. Maybe AD said something. Not sure. But if he threw the ball toward the ref and the ref wasn't looking, that's on AD. This doesn't merit a thread. It's like you caught your wife cheating on you and you're focused on the fact that she had blue panties on when you caught her. Who cares?

you're creating a situation that wasn't there. We all saw the replay, everyone else including the announcers saw AD didn't do or say anything.

 

[Excalibur]

you're creating a situation that wasn't there. We all saw the replay, everyone else including the announcers saw AD didn't do or say anything.

Just call it what it is -- he's making up, like he always does.

 

[minidarren]

This was where my seats were. The "T" was called right in front of us. Andre flipped the ball to the ref. No words were exchanged. It actually took the ref a few seconds to determine what he was going to do. Poor officiating, but shouldn't have been the difference in that game. Poor performance by the huskies led to the outcome.

 

[Prezidint]

Take off the homer goggles.


He gets the foul for throwing an elbow because he's upset.
Drummond retrieves the dead ball.
The ref who calls the foul is then walking toward the table to report the foul.
Drummond throws the ball and hits him.
Tell me, do players typically retrieve the ball and then throw it "to" the ref who made the call against them as that ref is walking toward the scorer's table?

Of course not. It was a dumb thing to do. Perhaps it was innocent, perhaps it was passive-aggressive, perhaps it was just aggressive. In any event, it sure must have seemed antagonistic to the ref, who is walking to report the foul and he gets hit by the ball by the guy he just called the foul on.

Blame Drummond, not the ref. The foul was stupid, and throwing the ball toward the ref was stupid as well. Stop being stupid and then you don't have to worry about the ref having a "quick" trigger. The reffing in the game, regardless of the homerism belly-aching in this thread, was fine. Much better than our play, in any event.

 

[Excalibur]

Take off the homer goggles.


He gets the foul for throwing an elbow because he's upset.
Drummond retrieves the dead ball.
The ref who calls the foul is then walking toward the table to report the foul.
Drummond throws the ball and hits him.
Tell me, do players typically retrieve the ball and then throw it "to" the ref who made the call against them as that ref is walking toward the scorer's table?

Of course not. It was a dumb thing to do. Perhaps it was innocent, perhaps it was passive-aggressive, perhaps it was just aggressive. In any event, it sure must have seemed antagonistic to the ref, who is walking to report the foul and he gets hit by the ball by the guy he just called the foul on.

Blame Drummond, not the ref. The foul was stupid, and throwing the ball toward the ref was stupid as well. Stop being stupid and then you don't have to worry about the ref having a "quick" trigger. The reffing in the game, regardless of the homerism belly-aching in this thread, was fine. Much better than our play, in any event.

Players normally hand/flip the ball to the closest official. It was no different than any player tossing the ball to any ref after any play. He practically dropped it in front of the guy. Maybe if you watch it fifty more times you'll stop making up.

Wait, I know what happened. You were watching footage of Rajon Rondo last week, and got confused. It's really the only explanation for your opinion.

 

[Prezidint]

Players normally hand/flip the ball to the closest official.

Not the guy going over to the scorer's table to report the foul. You're reaching.

 

[BlueMAB]

Not the guy going over to the scorer's table to report the foul. You're reaching.

They do it to me all the time and I've never given a tech for it.

 

[Excalibur]

Not the guy going over to the scorer's table to report the foul. You're reaching.

You're lying.

 

[upstater]

Take off the homer goggles.


He gets the foul for throwing an elbow because he's upset.
Drummond retrieves the dead ball.
The ref who calls the foul is then walking toward the table to report the foul.
Drummond throws the ball and hits him.
Tell me, do players typically retrieve the ball and then throw it "to" the ref who made the call against them as that ref is walking toward the scorer's table?

Of course not. It was a dumb thing to do. Perhaps it was innocent, perhaps it was passive-aggressive, perhaps it was just aggressive. In any event, it sure must have seemed antagonistic to the ref, who is walking to report the foul and he gets hit by the ball by the guy he just called the foul on.

Blame Drummond, not the ref. The foul was stupid, and throwing the ball toward the ref was stupid as well. Stop being stupid and then you don't have to worry about the ref having a "quick" trigger. The reffing in the game, regardless of the homerism belly-aching in this thread, was fine. Much better than our play, in any event.

1. He didn't throw an elbow
2. He didn't throw the ball
3. You've backtracked on Drummond saying something to him.

Pathetic

 

[tzznandrew]

Prez, you're clearly reaching here.

First, Drummond had the rebound, and the PC player was reaching in--the "elbow" was him swinging his arms to get the ball back and draw attention to the foul being committed. Then they called a foul on him. He handed the ball to the ref who wasn't looking, gets a tech. Terrible call. Drummond could have, perhaps, been less demonstrative in wrangling the rebound. Otherwise, that was a bad call as well.

 

[Excalibur]

Prez, you're clearly reaching here.

First, Drummond had the rebound, and the PC player was reaching in--the "elbow" was him swinging his arms to get the ball back and draw attention to the foul being committed. Then they called a foul on him. He handed the ball to the ref who wasn't looking, gets a tech. Terrible call. Drummond could have, perhaps, been less demonstrative in wrangling the rebound. Otherwise, that was a bad call as well.

He's not reaching, he's trying to stir up. I'm dropping out of this one. I have no more time to waste on someone who clearly like to talk without saying anything and argue for the sake of arguing.

 

[wpq4elamin]

You're all jumping to conclusions. You weren't on the court. Maybe AD said something. Not sure. But if he threw the ball toward the ref and the ref wasn't looking, that's on AD. This doesn't merit a thread. It's like you caught your wife cheating on you and you're focused on the fact that she had blue panties on when you caught her. Who cares?

so, if she still had blue panties on, what was she doing at the time? hahaha

this analogy is extremely funny to me for some reason, but i don't understand it.... (is it worrying about something small when we had other problems that lost the game? bc, if she still had her panties on.... idk... )

 

[BlueMAB]

1. He didn't throw an elbow

I'm not defending prez.

He did swing his arms violently. Like it or not, that's throwing an elbow. I can't honestly say I'm 100% on the rule in college, but I am 99% sure. Whether you make contact or not, and whether the intent is to harm or not, excessive swinging of the elbow(s) is a foul, and like all fouls it's a judgment call and that's how the ref called it. According to the rule, I think he made the right call.

The technical was mind-boggling.

 

[Prezidint]

this analogy is extremely funny to me for some reason, but i don't understand it.... (is it worrying about something small when we had other problems that lost the game? bc, if she still had her panties on.... idk... )

Glad you liked it. You understood it correctly. We got blown out. We had a loss that was one of the worst ever. And guys are contorted trying to find solace in a ref call. The T is the blue underwear. Why bother discussing it?

 

[Prezidint]

He's not reaching, he's trying to stir **** up. I'm dropping out of this one. I have no more time to waste on someone who clearly like to talk without saying anything and argue for the sake of arguing.

But, fortunately, you have plenty of time to waste on other unimportant things.

 

[BlueMAB]

We got blown out. We had a loss that was one of the worst ever. And guys are contorted trying to find solace in a ref call.

Other than the fact we didn't get blown out, it wasn't the worst loss of the season (Tennessee), and the technical came in the middle of a PC run, and resulted in a 3 point deficit ballooning to 7 points in a game we lost by 2, yeah the T had no impact on the game whatsoever.

 

[Prezidint]

1. He didn't throw an elbow
2. He didn't throw the ball
3. You've backtracked on Drummond saying something to him.

Pathetic

1. He threw an elbow/forearm/whatever. It was a clear foul. He lost control of his emotions. You certainly can understand that.
2. If he didn't throw the ball, who did? He clearly threw the ball. The fact that he didn't gun it or didn't throw it overhand is not material to the question. Unless, of course, you think there was some magic involved.
3. No backtracking needed, as I qualified it with he "may have" said something. He may have. May have not. You just don't know. Sure, when the camera was on his face, right when the ball magically shot out of his hands and hit the ref, he wasn't talking. But maybe he was saying some stuff when he elbowed the other guy.

I understand your focus on the blue panties. It's hard when you find out your SO has been cheating on you.

We got beat in a horrible loss. Your emotional response is to pick out an immaterial detail and focus on it. You've done that. You should move on. Drummond committed a foul, then he threw the ball at/to the ref to whom the ball is never thrown in that situation - the guy who made the call who was going over to the scorer's table. Dumb and Dumb. AD will get better control of his emotions eventually. Maybe the two of you can form a support group.

 

[Prezidint]

and resulted in a 3 point deficit ballooning to 7 points

Technicals are 4 free throws now, are they?

We were well on our way to choking this one into the loss column, and if it wasn't the T it would have been some other bonehead mistake.

 

[businesslawyer]

I had no problem with the personal foul being called on Drummond. Yes, you can argue he was fouled first, but when he swung the elbow it was a foul. And, as I and others have said, there were lots of reasons for the loss having nothing to do with the T.

So now can you please go away. Because neither of those statements change the fact that defending the technical foul call itself is just dumb.

 

[BlueMAB]

Technicals are 4 free throws now, are they?

We were well on our way to choking this one into the loss column, and if it wasn't the T it would have been some other bonehead mistake.

Two free throws and an additional possession that never would have happened were it not for the technical.

I'm not blaming the loss on the technical. I agree it's not the reason we lost. But pretending the call didn't impact the game and isn't worth discussion is (at a minimum) as dumb as blaming the loss on the technical.

Lastly, you can't have it both ways. You can't say the tech isn't why they scored 4 points on that possession, and also make an argument that there would have been some other mistake had the tech not been given. You want to ignore what actually happened, and substitute what you believe would have happened anyway in your alternate universe. You understand that's crazy, right?

 

[FeedTheDove]

After watching the replay i came to the conclusion that after the jump ball with TO, the ref was LOOKING to T andre up. After TO and whoever it was had that long jump ball scramble, AD went to go back TO up and nudged the other guy off of him. Im set on believing that after that, the ref was just drooling over an opportunity to T him up and when the foul was called on andre, he was ready for it. He knew exactly what he was doing and if he heard, saw, or felt anything he was going to call a T. Meanwhile the jackass forgets About collecting the ball after andre LITERALLY lobs the ball to him. It hit him, thats it for him, T. Awful call

I draw this conclusion because the replay shows that after the foul was called, andre did not throw an elbow, he put his head down, disappointed in himself, and lobbed the ball to the ref. THATS IT.

 

[tzznandrew]

Technicals are 4 free throws now, are they?

We were well on our way to choking this one into the loss column, and if it wasn't the T it would have been some other bonehead mistake.

We had the ball. PC player reaches in and fouls Drummond. Then this happens: