Worst refs ever?

[Rico444]

I'm planning on re-watching soon, I'll keep my eyes peeled for all of these plays. Sometimes it's easier to see on TV.

 

[caw]

The refs were horrible both ways, just horrible.

The only play I hold against them is the Giffey flagrant. They reviewed it on tape, it shouldn't have been a flagrant. It was incidental contact, IMO. It would have been one thing if it was his hand or elbow that hit the GTown player but it wasn't.

Sadly it was the difference in the game. Though the bigger issue was Napier getting injured. He must have been a plus 20 or so on the night.

 

[caw]

Like all rules, there is area for interpretation.

The NCAA defines a flagrant 1 as "non-excessive contact with an opponent above the shoulders" according to the NCAA press release from May 2011.

B1G officials ruled no flagrant in the Indiana/Minnesota game. Similar amount.

 

[BoatShow]

Can someone with rewatching capabilities please check Rivera-Smith's feet on his three at 51 seconds?

Also, R-S and Starks were hooking and pushing off on offense the entire game. That's nothing new though, happens all the time to our.

I just read that Markel Starks is John Starks's son? Someone in the student section cheer organizing committee was asleep at the wheel. Where was a "Reggie Miller" chant?????

 

[seanmc94]

The refs were horrible both ways, just horrible.

The only play I hold against them is the Giffey flagrant. They reviewed it on tape, it shouldn't have been a flagrant. It was incidental contact, IMO. It would have been one thing if it was his hand or elbow that hit the GTown player but it wasn't.

Sadly it was the difference in the game. Though the bigger issue was Napier getting injured. He must have been a plus 20 or so on the night.

Doesn't matter if its incidental, BE refs have been instructed to call flagrants on ANY contact above the shoulders

 

[BoatShow]

So I spent a good 20 minutes on espn3 finding the perfect moment for this screenshot and here it is...

blurry but still appears to be on the line to me. HOW DO YOU NOT REVIEW THIS?????????

 

[upstater]

Doesn't matter if its incidental, BE refs have been instructed to call flagrants on ANY contact above the shoulders

So a flagrant should have been called on Georgetown?

 

[BoatShow]

The good news, with the c-7 attempting to buy the Big East is that PC can continue its tradition of being basement dwellers in the Big East.

 

[caw]

Doesn't matter if its incidental, BE refs have been instructed to call flagrants on ANY contact above the shoulders

So Big Ten refs are given different instructions? I thought it was a NCAA rulebook.

Theoretically, if you are correct the Gtown player should have been called as well for the chokehold prior.

 

[upstater]

So Big Ten refs are given different instructions? I thought it was a NCAA rulebook.

Theoretically, if you are correct the Gtown player should have been called as well for the chokehold prior.

I'm not buying what some people are trying to sell. The defender was all over Giffey and fouling him. If Giffey unintentionally hits due to getting mauled, that's not on Giffey.

 

[caw]

I'm not buying what some people are trying to sell. The defender was all over Giffey and fouling him. If Giffey unintentionally hits due to getting mauled, that's not on Giffey.

By some people, you must mean the resident PC fan who is just doing his passive aggressive gloating because a catholic school team beat UConn.

 

[Mantle]

First, Markel Starks is NOT related to John Starks. Secon, even if Smith-Rovera's foot was on the line Porter would have made a 3 instead of the layup. In any event he was fouled when he made the game winning layup.

 

[caw]

First, Markel Starks is NOT related to John Starks. Secon, even if Smith-Rovera's foot was on the line Porter would have made a 3 instead of the layup. In any event he was fouled when he made the game winning layup.

First, Markel Starks wishes he was related to John Starks. Second, bahahaha, I can see logic isn't taught at Gtown, but being able to read possible futures, is. Third, you don't want to go bad non-call for bad-non call.

 

[BoatShow]

Yeah I did some real half-assed googling with the whole John/Markel thing, my bad. I'm really relieved to know that Porter would have hit a 3 anyway and I can stop worrying about it.

 

[gtcam]

Yes, that was Lubick, but the ref blew the whistle before Lubick ran into him. He saw Napier carry the ball.

The problem is, you CAN carry the ball when you have yet to put your pivot foot down. Bazz picked up his dribble there. And that's why they call it, "picking up your dribble."

But the ref seemed to think picking up your dribble is against the rules. The ref was unaware that taking too many steps is against the rules, but picking up your dribble is not against the rules.

The refs in most every game make ruling mistakes-not bad calls-ruling mistakes

 

[uconnfan68]

It isn't right but the only part that is reviewable is the contact to the head of a player. Anything else that happens before that, apparently including wrapping your arm around another player's neck, is not reviewable.

It's like reviewing a catch in the NFL. They cannot go back and say, "It was incomplete BUT there was pass interference on the play."

I don't agree with it but it is the rule.

So it's OK to grab someone around the neck, but you can't touch their head?

 

[BoatShow]

The "above the shoulder contact" rule needs to be looked at this off season. Twice this year we've been screwed by a literal interpretation of the rule. SJU where the dude runs into Wolf's stationary elbow, and last night.

 

[upstater]

The refs in most every game make ruling mistakes-not bad calls-ruling mistakes

It was a bad call.

The ref thought he saw traveling. There wasn't any. In other words, it was a bad call. I'm pretty sure the ref knew the rule for traveling. Or I should hope so.

 

[caw]

Anyone watching Marquette vs Rutgers. Refs went to the monitor, elbow to the head on post up. No foul called. Unintentional contact was the ruling.

 

[BoatShow]

Anyone watching Marquette vs Rutgers. Refs went to the monitor, elbow to the head on post up. No foul called. Unintentional contact was the ruling.

 

[mauconnfan]

Geno blew a chance to make them go to the monitor last night when he got T'd up.......should have just asked them to review the forearm/elbow to the throat and the ND girl would have gotten a #1.........

 

[seanmc94]

The NCAA needs to look at this. I've watched games where they go to the monitor and make the call; explaining that incidental or not; if there is contact they have to make the call. Other times, they look at it and determine intent. I have no problem with the rule; it protects players, but it has to be enforced consistently.

 

[caw]

Anyone watching Marquette vs Rutgers. Refs went to the monitor, elbow to the head on post up. No foul called. Unintentional contact was the ruling.

Should have said "Incidental contact"

 

[caw]

The NCAA needs to look at this. I've watched games where they go to the monitor and make the call; explaining that incidental or not; if there is contact they have to make the call. Other times, they look at it and determine intent. I have no problem with the rule; it protects players, but it has to be enforced consistently.

Pretty much. Last night PC could have (should have by the standards set?) been called for one when Batts swung his arms around on the ground and nailed the big on SHU. SHU kid went out for a bit. I then went back to watching Justified.