Sunday calls..

[Heeelz46]

So, Having heard about the uk fans reactions to the officiating sunday and them going insane as well as Calipari passive aggressively bitching about it in the postgame, Im wondering, was the officiating really that one sided?

Some things Im remembering off the top of my head that makes me think uk fans have lost their collective minds

-UK was almost in the bonus at the 1430 mark in the first half(6 fouls on unc)
-Pinson picked up 2 quick ones including one where he "grazed" fox driving in the lane
-Unc spent 3 or 4 minutes with a lineup of woods, white, britt, bradley, and maye on the floor(w pinson/jackson rotating in and out) due to berry tweaking an ankle. Uk couldnt cut into the lead,in fact the gap was widened.
-According to them, the Bam offensive goaltending call was egregious. Ive rewatched it 5 times and the ball was clearly still on the rim. Even if they could somehow claim the ball was "coming off", theres no way anyone would point to this as anything but a judgement call that couldve gone either way. They also are bitching about Fox charge call when stillman ran into him. Again, to me it was clear as day that while stillman lowered his shoulder a bit Fox was still clearly moving. There was nothing out of the ordinary here, it was probably the correct call.
- Willis slapped berrys hand on a loosed ball and the ref blew a late whistle, which probably to biased eyes made it appear like it was a terrible call. On replay though, Willis clearly slapped Berrys wrist as the ball was coming loose.


These appear to be the calls these guys are threatening Higgins' livelihood over. Someone make me see their side of the argument because to me Calipari looks horrible for his postgame comments and the trailer trash is taking it and running with it. Worse than that, it downplays our guys effort and the fact that Pinson and Jackson flat out suffocated and shut down Monk and Fox. Anyway just had to get this off my chest because Ive seen some horrible officiating before and while there were a few weird calls(both ways) this game is hardly one that sticks out to me..

 

[soap - new and improved]

You are on base with all of those. I will say Theo earned his fouls though, as did Woods.
But the common taters calling the game seemed to make a much bigger deal of things that didn't go KYs way, skewing the reality of the foul situations.

We got 7 more FT opportunities, but (EDIT): 3 of those were due to intentional fouls while KY was trying to lengthen the game.

Also saw complaints about Bam's over the back on a tip in. Proper angle shows he hit Meeks in the face with his left arm. Other angles make it look like a bad call.

The "charge" call that took two points off our score and should have been a FT opp for Berry as well hurt us. Berry did push the KY guy, but he did it because he was being hooked around his left arm as he started his drive. Classic case of Ref catching the reaction, not the initial foul.

Refs were better than many games I have seen this year, they tried to call things the same on both ends. It is always a rude awakening for dook and KY when that happens.

 

[HeelFan58]

 

[dadika13]

Listen, there were some BAD calls in the 1st half that went in our favor. I remember specifically thinking how lucky we are to get a few of them.

That said, UK didn't lose this game because of the officials. They lost it because they played like crap and ran nothing for their best shooter all game.

 

[Heeelz46]

You are on base with all of those. I will say Theo earned his fouls though, as did Woods.
But the common taters calling the game seemed to make a much bigger deal of things that didn't go KYs way, skewing the reality of the foul situations.

We got 7 more FT opportunities, but 5 (I think) of those were due to intentional fouls while KY was trying to lengthen the game.

Also saw complaints about Bam's over the back on a tip in. Proper angle shows he hit Meeks in the face with his left arm. Other angles make it look like a bad call.

The "charge" call that took two points off our score and should have been a FT opp for Berry as well hurt us. Berry did push the KY guy, but he did it because he was being hooked around his left arm as he started his drive. Classic case of Ref catching the reaction, not the initial foul.

Refs were better than many games I have seen this year, they tried to call things the same on both ends. It is always a rude awakening for dook and KY when that happens.

Yeah the bam one over the back I forgot about. I remember seeing it live thinking it was a bad call but then they showed the under the basket angle and bam was clotheslining Meeks' neck. It was an obvious call.

 

[Heeelz46]

Listen, there were some BAD calls in the 1st half that went in our favor. I remember specifically thinking how lucky we are to get a few of them.

That said, UK didn't lose this game because of the officials. They lost it because they played like crap and ran nothing for their best shooter all game.

Could you point them out? The ones I posted are the ones U.K. Fans are going nuts over and each one on review in my opinion appear to have been pretty on point.

 

[JuleZ '02 HEEL]

common taters calling the game

I giggled.

 

[soap - new and improved]

Yeah the bam one over the back I forgot about. I remember seeing it live thinking it was a bad call but then they showed the under the basket angle and bam was clotheslining Meeks' neck. It was an obvious call.

10/4. Angles can be critical in making the proper calls, and refs don't always have all of them covered. I admit, they have a very tough job.

Still, when it is all "one way traffic" like teams doubling us up from the FT line it makes it hard to believe it's all coincidence. UNC defensive strategy all the way back to Dean Smith has been move your feet, NOT the slap, grab trip and shove many coaches teach these days.

 

[HeelFan58]

 

[mikeirbyusa]

What was it, 19 fouls called on UK and 18 on us? Yeah, the refs did it.

 

[soap - new and improved]

What was it, 19 fouls called on UK and 18 on us? Yeah, the refs did it.

Mike, (EDIT): 2 of the fouls called on KY were intentional as they sought to lengthen the game. They got Theo once and also Jackson one time.

 

[imajericho]

Why don't uk fans mention the two incorrect calls on out of bounds call in the 1st half that benefitted them?

Like those aren't even judgment calls. Those are just wrong calls.

 

[Mike Lowery]

Could you point them out? The ones I posted are the ones U.K. Fans are going nuts over and each one on review in my opinion appear to have been pretty on point.

Here are a couple that were questionable and I think we got away with. The missed dunk by Maye. He looked like he might of been holding the rim when the ball bounced in. Not sure the rule on that. Could have been goal tending Berry pushed off on a drive and got away with it. You could heat Bill Raftery say nice push off. He was called for it late in the game when he tried it again. The others were judgement calls that could have gone either way. In the end they had a lead and went cold.

 

[heelmanwilm]

Fox got hammered driving at the end of half. We got away with that one. And a goaltending call against them was bad. The over the back is iffy.

 

[shane023]

The offensive foul call on Berry late in the game was a HORRIBLE call. The defender did the head snap back like he pushed off, but he absolutely did not push off. Kinda like a Dookie driving the lane, always have to throw the head back, even when no contact.

 

[gary-7]

So, Having heard about the uk fans reactions to the officiating sunday and them going insane as well as Calipari passive aggressively bitching about it in the postgame, Im wondering, was the officiating really that one sided?

Some things Im remembering off the top of my head that makes me think uk fans have lost their collective minds

-UK was almost in the bonus at the 1430 mark in the first half(6 fouls on unc)
-Pinson picked up 2 quick ones including one where he "grazed" fox driving in the lane
-Unc spent 3 or 4 minutes with a lineup of woods, white, britt, bradley, and maye on the floor(w pinson/jackson rotating in and out) due to berry tweaking an ankle. Uk couldnt cut into the lead,in fact the gap was widened.
-According to them, the Bam offensive goaltending call was egregious. Ive rewatched it 5 times and the ball was clearly still on the rim. Even if they could somehow claim the ball was "coming off", theres no way anyone would point to this as anything but a judgement call that couldve gone either way. They also are bitching about Fox charge call when stillman ran into him. Again, to me it was clear as day that while stillman lowered his shoulder a bit Fox was still clearly moving. There was nothing out of the ordinary here, it was probably the correct call.
- Willis slapped berrys hand on a loosed ball and the ref blew a late whistle, which probably to biased eyes made it appear like it was a terrible call. On replay though, Willis clearly slapped Berrys wrist as the ball was coming loose.


These appear to be the calls these guys are threatening Higgins' livelihood over. Someone make me see their side of the argument because to me Calipari looks horrible for his postgame comments and the trailer trash is taking it and running with it. Worse than that, it downplays our guys effort and the fact that Pinson and Jackson flat out suffocated and shut down Monk and Fox. Anyway just had to get this off my chest because Ive seen some horrible officiating before and while there were a few weird calls(both ways) this game is hardly one that sticks out to me..

I watched their propaganda film (where someone shamefully posted an invitation to trash Higgins' business), and the first thing you hafta do is ignore that buffoon UK announcer.

There were literally only 2 calls in all of their video that were actually missed:
1. The Bam basket interference was a bad call. It probably looked like he hit it with his left hand earlier to the ref, but he didn't. So yes, missed call.
2. Monk getting checked on a cut by JJ. Relatively harmless miss in that it wouldn't have resulted in FTs and JJ was never in foul trouble. Inconsequential.

As you point out, they benefitted as much as we did from the questionable calls, and we had our own foul trouble --- we just managed it better. And again, as I said in my initial analysis, this was a pretty evenly officiated game, and for the most part called competently. The missed calls were the sorts of calls that are reasonably "miss-able" in the heat of action, and the foul numbers and ratio were pretty close as to for how these two particular teams play. UK fans are used to being treated like the golden geese of the SEC. They just actually played in a fairly called game Sunday. The fact is UK fouls a bit more than we do, and that was reflected slightly Sunday.

 

[gary-7]

You are on base with all of those. I will say Theo earned his fouls though, as did Woods.
But the common taters calling the game seemed to make a much bigger deal of things that didn't go KYs way, skewing the reality of the foul situations.

We got 7 more FT opportunities, but (EDIT): 3 of those were due to intentional fouls while KY was trying to lengthen the game.

Also saw complaints about Bam's over the back on a tip in. Proper angle shows he hit Meeks in the face with his left arm. Other angles make it look like a bad call.

The "charge" call that took two points off our score and should have been a FT opp for Berry as well hurt us. Berry did push the KY guy, but he did it because he was being hooked around his left arm as he started his drive. Classic case of Ref catching the reaction, not the initial foul.

Refs were better than many games I have seen this year, they tried to call things the same on both ends. It is always a rude awakening for dook and KY when that happens.

Spot on with all counts, soap. Spot on.

 

[gary-7]

Here are a couple that were questionable and I think we got away with. The missed dunk by Maye. He looked like he might of been holding the rim when the ball bounced in. Not sure the rule on that. Could have been goal tending Berry pushed off on a drive and got away with it. You could heat Bill Raftery say nice push off. He was called for it late in the game when he tried it again. The others were judgement calls that could have gone either way. In the end they had a lead and went cold.

Not true at all. In fact, the best thing Luke did was let go of the rim. By rule that was a legal basket without question. Had Luke hung or pulled the rim down it would have ended up being interference.

 

[tarheelbybirth]

In the end they had a lead and went cold.

In the end, Roy outcoached Cal and put the team into a position to win.

 

[gary-7]

Fox got hammered driving at the end of half. We got away with that one. And a goaltending call against them was bad. The over the back is iffy.

The question by rule there is who initiates the contact. The key is that our guys were vertical. While yes, plays like that often get called in the driver's direction, just as often they don't, as there is also a solid case there for a no-call.

If I'm a uk fan I'm wanting that call, but if I'm a UNC fan I have every bit as strong a case for none. Hell, JB has been sprawled on the floor with no FTs to show for it on way worse.

 

[Heeelz46]

Fox got hammered driving at the end of half. We got away with that one. And a goaltending call against them was bad. The over the back is iffy.

The Fox one I agree with. The goaltending Im not sure if youre talking about willis(Or Bam, I think it was Willis) where he pinned it against the glass where it had already hit the backboard? If so youre wrong, that was an obvious goaltend. Once the ball hits the backboard above the rim,(which it was) the defender cant touch it or its a goaltend no matter what.

 

[gary-7]

The Fox one I agree with. The goaltending Im not sure if youre talking about willis(Or Bam, I think it was Willis) where he pinned it against the glass where it had already hit the backboard? If so youre wrong, that was an obvious goaltend. Once the ball hits the backboard above the rim,(which it was) the defender cant touch it or its a goaltend no matter what.

Don't think anyone's talking about the one off the backboard... at least I hope not. That's a no-brainer correct call.
Bam's was a bad call.

 

[Heeelz46]

Don't think anyone's talking about the one off the backboard... at least I hope not. That's a no-brainer correct call.
Bam's was a bad call.

Yeah. Well I honestly only remembered that one so I can't really comment on any other goaltend call, but I guess there was on on Bam as well.

 

[gary-7]

Yeah. Well I honestly only remembered that one so I can't really comment on any other goaltend call, but I guess there was on on Bam as well.

I believe it was on the other Big --- I'd have to go back and look as to who, but he hit the ball after it hit the glass so that one's automatic.

 

[dadika13]

Here are a couple that were questionable and I think we got away with. The missed dunk by Maye. He looked like he might of been holding the rim when the ball bounced in. Not sure the rule on that. Could have been goal tending Berry pushed off on a drive and got away with it. You could heat Bill Raftery say nice push off. He was called for it late in the game when he tried it again. The others were judgement calls that could have gone either way. In the end they had a lead and went cold.

Also one of the Monk fouls in the first half was super questionable. Refs also stopped a few potential fast breaks for UK by calling a foul during the loose ball scramble.

 

[Archer2]

I believe the game was pretty evenly called. While there were a few missed calls, there always are and they were evenly distributed. The bottom line is that UK had a 5 point lead with 5 minutes to play and then allowed UNC to go on a 10-0 run to regain the lead by 5 points. That stretch is what determined the outcome of the game.

 

[Heelicious]

I believe the game was pretty evenly called. While there were a few missed calls, there always are and they were evenly distributed. The bottom line is that UK had a 5 point lead with 5 minutes to play and then allowed UNC to go on a 10-0 run to regain the lead by 5 points. That stretch is what determined the outcome of the game.

12-0 Arch, to lead by 7. Just like the 12-0 run against Ark. Nice!

 

[Raising Heel]

the common taters calling the game

 

[heelmanwilm]

The Fox one I agree with. The goaltending Im not sure if youre talking about willis(Or Bam, I think it was Willis) where he pinned it against the glass where it had already hit the backboard? If so youre wrong, that was an obvious goaltend. Once the ball hits the backboard above the rim,(which it was) the defender cant touch it or its a goaltend no matter what.

No there was one where the majority of the ball was below the cylinder when a ky player tapped it in. He went to tap it once but held off as the ball was bouncing around then when the ball was clearly out of the cylinder he tapped it.

 

[CanuckChuck]

There were literally only 2 calls in all of their video that were actually missed:
1. The Bam basket interference was a bad call. It probably looked like he hit it with his left hand earlier to the ref, but he didn't. So yes, missed call.

The call where they showed the slo-mo replay and the ball is still on the rim? How is that a bad call? If the ball is still touching the rim isn't that basket interference?

CC

 

[gary-7]

The call where they showed the slo-mo replay and the ball is still on the rim? How is that a bad call? If the ball is still touching the rim isn't that basket interference?

CC

Technically no. Unless they've modified the definition it's a "cylinder" thing. The cylinder extends upward from the rim. Once the entire ball is on the outside of the rim it is fair game. That one was close but had the ball been a bit higher so that part of it was inside the cylinder it would have been interference, if that makes sense.

 

[DeanFor President]

I was unsure about that rule. Out of the cylinder, but still contacting the rim.

 

[dukephysics]

On goaltending like that, why don't they just rely on the video? Just like a 3 pointer, if it's close, they will signal either 2 or 3 and then go check it next dead ball. Is the ball still going up - harder to judge. Is the ball inside the rim, easier. Seems to me on these, let it play on and then check it the next dead ball and take points away if need be.

 

[CanuckChuck]

Technically no. Unless they've modified the definition it's a "cylinder" thing. The cylinder extends upward from the rim. Once the entire ball is on the outside of the rim it is fair game. That one was close but had the ball been a bit higher so that part of it was inside the cylinder it would have been interference, if that makes sense.

Now you made me go and look it up:

"Basket interference occurs when a player: 1. Touches the ball or any part of the basket while the ball is on or within the basket;"

So I would think the call qualified as the ball was still on the rim (basket).

Then again section 2 also applies:

"2. Touches the ball while any part of it is within the cylinder that has the ring as its lower base;"

As part of the ball was still in the cylinder.

CC

 

[gary-7]

Now you made me go and look it up:

"Basket interference occurs when a player: 1. Touches the ball or any part of the basket while the ball is on or within the basket;"

So I would think the call qualified as the ball was still on the rim (basket).

Then again section 2 also applies:

"2. Touches the ball while any part of it is within the cylinder that has the ring as its lower base;"

As part of the ball was still in the cylinder.

CC

Well, that's the rub. It actually wasn't in the cylinder, which extends vertically upward from the top edge of the rim. In other words if the ball is touching the outside of the rim only tangentially (which I believe it was) and not on the top part of the rim (aka, the "lower base" of the cylinder) that would extend upward it's not in the cylinder.

You're right, the actual letter of the rule is a bit nebulous, but that's the way it was always explained in rules seminars.

 

[dadika13]

We're in the final four and there is a large thread discussing the particulars around offensive interference.

Yawn.

 

[tarheel0910]

We're in the final four and there is a large thread discussing the particulars around offensive interference.

Yawn.

Hope this helps.

https://northcarolina.forums.rivals.com/threads/unc-vs-oregon-game-thread-saturday-april-1.52591/

https://northcarolina.forums.rivals.com/threads/oregon-preview-and-matchups.52605/

 

[gary-7]

We're in the final four and there is a large thread discussing the particulars around offensive interference.

Yawn.

Well, it is a basketball board, ICYMI.

 

[Heels Noir]

Some things Im remembering off the top of my head that makes me think uk fans have lost their collective minds.

How do you lose something you never had in the first place?

 

[GoToHeelDook]

Surprised no one has mentioned that foul on Nate when he tied up the ball towards the end of the first half. It was a clean tie up for a jump ball, no question about it, CLEAR AS DAY. That play sent UK to the line where they made 2 free throws and cut into the lead before halftime. Had they called it a jump ball, UK would have retained possession, but likely we would have had the ball first in the second half due to it. It wasn't a game changing play, but in the moment it sure felt like as UK was surging, and more than anything else, it was a flat out terrible call. One of many in a game where we both saw our fair share of "WTF" moments with the officials, which wash IMO.