Valley's coordinator of officials

[Beninator]

I couldn't do any worse!

I'll bet you could.

--just got the call from Doug Elgin to ref a couple of games in St Louis-

I am getting my suitcase ready as we speak.
1 whistle
1 striped shirt
1 pair of black pants
1 pair sunglasses
1 white cane
1 silver dollar to toss to determine which team to call a foul on..

yep I'm ready to be a ref in the MVC!

[MacabreMob]

--just got the call from Doug Elgin to ref a couple of games in St Louis-

I am getting my suitcase ready as we speak.
1 whistle
1 striped shirt
1 pair of black pants
1 pair sunglasses
1 white cane
1 silver dollar to toss to determine which team to call a foul on..

yep I'm ready to be a ref in the MVC!

LOL! This is reminding me of the episode from Curb Your Enthusiasm when he tries to be a car salesman.

[houstontxbrave]

Houston, I usually agree with your posts but you are dead wrong in two areas. 1.) It was not a flagrant foul , it was an intentional foul and there penalities are very different. 2.) Officials are to work the game for 40 minutes by the rules. That would have been an intentional foul if it was in the first minute its just to bad that it came at a critical time, but we needed the clock stopped. I'm not going to change your mind but you're looking through your rose colored glasses and ignoring the rule book. You may be able to do that but officials can not. Did it hurt us yes but we did it. Did it cost us the game,no not unless we shot 100% and didn't turn the ball over all night and we know that didn't happen so lets move on. I'm not saying the officiating is good in this conference. I'm just saying you get what you pay for. Those guys make a lot of money and the good ones work in the conferences that pay good money and enjoy the visability. Lets see work Duke vs N.C. tonight or Drake vs UNI. I know what game I want and not because of the money difference. These people who officiate don't care who wins and they surely don't need the money.

I am going to defer to you on this because I think you probably know more about the rule book then I do and the assessing of the rules during a game.

But was the play by Dunston really an Intentional foul? I am just guessing here, but an intentional foul should show intent to intentionally harm another player.. IE under cutting. The play we are talking about happened on an inbound play, with the two players intangled, can an official seriously make the judgement that Dunston was intentionally trying to harm or even impede the opposing player?

I guess I just do not know what is considered an intentional foul. I would beleive intentional is just that intentional, I never saw or thought Dunston was fouling the UNI player intentionally.

I understand rules are rules and I agree they should be assessed equally throughout the game, but even if an arm of Dunstons got up near the players head/neck was he intentionally trying to harm that player? Was his intent to harm or impede the opposing player. We do not really know, but an official is also human and should be able to make a judgement, also knowing what his judgement will do to change the course of a game.

Many of us have seen players entangle even shove in a line waiting for an inbound play, how often do we see an intentional foul called versus when an official steps in and seperates or just makes a foul call?

There was no need to make the call in the fashion the official made, even if the rules give him the leway to make a call as he did. It just does not come off as quality work.

[lefty]

LOL! This is reminding me of the episode from Curb Your Enthusiasm when he tries to be a car salesman.

How did he do as a salesman....I may need somebody

[OrangeandBlack74]

Maybe some of you guys on here could volunteer to do the games for free since we all think we are better than the officials... We'd get better called games and think of all the money we could be saving the MVC.

Post of the Year candidate...

[Beninator]

LOL! This is reminding me of the episode from Curb Your Enthusiasm when he tries to be a car salesman.

lol

[wily coyote]

I am going to defer to you on this because I think you probably know more about the rule book then I do and the assessing of the rules during a game.

But was the play by Dunston really an Intentional foul? I am just guessing here, but an intentional foul should show intent to intentionally harm another player.. IE under cutting. The play we are talking about happened on an inbound play, with the two players intangled, can an official seriously make the judgement that Dunston was intentionally trying to harm or even impede the opposing player?

I guess I just do not know what is considered an intentional foul. I would beleive intentional is just that intentional, I never saw or thought Dunston was fouling the UNI player intentionally.

I understand rules are rules and I agree they should be assessed equally throughout the game, but even if an arm of Dunstons got up near the players head/neck was he intentionally trying to harm that player? Was his intent to harm or impede the opposing player. We do not really know, but an official is also human and should be able to make a judgement, also knowing what his judgement will do to change the course of a game.

Many of us have seen players entangle even shove in a line waiting for an inbound play, how often do we see an intentional foul called versus when an official steps in and seperates or just makes a foul call?

There was no need to make the call in the fashion the official made, even if the rules give him the leway to make a call as he did. It just does not come off as quality work.

Houston, NO an intentional foul has nothing to do with HARM. That would be a flagrant foul . Which it wasn't. Why it was called an intentional foul was DD intentionally foul the UNI player to stop the clock and put him at the line to shoot 1 or 2 free throws. Not sure if they were in the super bonus or not but the intentional foul was the worst thing he could do because they would get the ball back. hence thats what happened. If DD had fouled the UNI player after he had the ball and was making a legal attempt at the ball we wouldn't be having this typing practice. Hope that clears it up for you. I know you won't agree with it but it was the correct call as Bain has said. Wether you agree or disagree the rule book is for using all the rules not just the ones that would benefit us. If I was that officials supervisor and I saw the tape and no call was made on that play , I wouldn't be very happy with him.

[Out of Balance]

Maybe some of you guys on here could volunteer to do the games for free since we all think we are better than the officials... We'd get better called games and think of all the money we could be saving the MVC.

I couldn't do any worse!

I know you could do better, Benni I'll be the time keeper But you will have to do the Football Full Arm Circle thing, so I know when to start the clock

[SFP]

Maybe some of you guys on here could volunteer to do the games for free since we all think we are better than the officials... We'd get better called games and think of all the money we could be saving the MVC.

MM I usually 99% of the time agree with you, unless you are being sarcastic this time which it could be but it is going over my head this time. So I have to disagree with you. I am not trying to say I could do a better job but reffing is not the profession I chose so if I did I would probably be better then these clowns that seem to do most of our games. If these guys did the games for free then I'd respect them a hell of a lot more then I do now. Because they are getting paid they should learn how to do their job. There should be no on the job training in our league otherwise it is no better then a bush league.

[MacabreMob]

MM I usually 99% of the time agree with you, unless you are being sarcastic this time which it could be but it is going over my head this time. So I have to disagree with you. I am not trying to say I could do a better job but reffing is not the profession I chose so if I did I would probably be better then these clowns that seem to do most of our games. If these guys did the games for free then I'd respect them a hell of a lot more then I do now. Because they are getting paid they should learn how to do their job. There should be no on the job training in our league otherwise it is no better then a bush league.

You know me, SFP, I was only joking around. That's why I put in the "twisted/evil/WINKING smiley".

[real fan]

We must have some really good mind readers as officials since they know 100% for sure that D.Dunson committed an intentional foul towards the end of the game, please give us all a break as it was a rediculous call and the only person that believes it wasn"t has to be an official themself.

[wily coyote]

We must have some really good mind readers as officials since they know 100% for sure that D.Dunson committed an intentional foul towards the end of the game, please give us all a break as it was a rediculous call and the only person that believes it wasn"t has to be an official themself.

Real fan Mind reading had nothing to do with the call on DD. It was within the description of the rule. The rule says the defender must be making a legal attempt to get the ball. Since the offensive player was in a head lock by DD without the ball it became a very easy call wether you like it or not doesn't matter. The official was covered by rule, hence the call was made ,end of story

[SFP]

Real fan Mind reading had nothing to do with the call on DD. It was within the description of the rule. The rule says the defender must be making a legal attempt to get the ball. Since the offensive player was in a head lock by DD without the ball it became a very easy call wether you like it or not doesn't matter. The official was covered by rule, hence the call was made ,end of story

Wily come on! Since when has the officials followed the letter of the rule in this case! NEVER except when they really feel like it. Head lock? Maybe a little bit tangled. But as you said they were covered... unfortunatley a cop shooting a guy who is unarmed because he apparently reaches into his pocket is covered. A good cop would have avoided the shooting.

[real fan]

On that particuliar play all that I saw was several players in one area trying to break free for an inbounds pass and probably a hold on Dunson but there was no headlock, this same thing happens all the time during a game on an inbounds play and when has an official ever called it an intentional foul? Chuck Buescher even made a comment on how he never in all the years he has been coaching or watching basketball has he ever seen that call made.
Wily Coyote, you never answered my question? Are you an official or a retired one ?

[wily coyote]

On that particuliar play all that I saw was several players in one area trying to break free for an inbounds pass and probably a hold on Dunson but there was no headlock, this same thing happens all the time during a game on an inbounds play and when has an official ever called it an intentional foul? Chuck Buescher even made a comment on how he never in all the years he has been coaching or watching basketball has he ever seen that call made.
Wily Coyote, you never answered my question? Are you an official or a retired one ?

Real fan I appreciate your zeal for the Braves as I do. I have had season tickets since 1965 on and off. My off years were because I officiated for 23 years.I had the tape and I assure you DD had his arm around the UNi players head. I will not debate that any longer. Its what I saw. If you chose to say he didn't this topic is over. I've rerun the play many times and the headlock was there. I respect Coach Bish also and I worked MANY games for him in my career but, all due respect thats why we call him Coach Bish. I think the world of Bish but if you believe all the officiating comments that come from TV commentators don't put money on there knowledge of the rules. I am a die hard BU fan but I also believe in going by the rules. If an official makes an error I will not support the call but in this case the stripes were right. Even if we didn't like it.