BTO’s Kentucky Postgame Report

#129
#129
cncchris33 said:
Not sure the entire cotext of this running discussion or your understanding of it, but Zeigler did receive a tech. You may already know that, and my apologies if that's the case.
Click to expand...
Right. I evidently flabbergasted one or two people in the game thread last night when I said I expect Zeigler to be called for a tech. They said that the UK guy caused Zeigler to initiate the physical contact, and therefore Zeigler shouldn't get a tech for the shove.
 
#130
#130
Chris4Vols22 said:
Right. I evidently flabbergasted one or two people in the game thread last night when I said I expect Zeigler to be called for a tech. They said that the UK guy caused Zeigler to initiate the physical contact, and therefore Zeigler shouldn't get a tech for the shove.
Click to expand...

It seemed much more that you blamed everything on ZZ and basically said the UK staff member was innocent. The UK staff member jumped up and went chest to chest with Vescovi who deflected him over to ZZ. He is also screaming and pointing down towards Fulkerson as if he's trashing him before the other guys arrive. My friend has a back side video of it and they nearly rip Fulky's jersey off as he's trying to exit the scrum too.
 
#131
#131
VolArmy74 said:
It seemed much more that you blamed everything on ZZ and basically said the UK staff member was innocent. The UK staff member jumped up and went chest to chest with Vescovi who deflected him over to ZZ. He is also screaming and pointing down towards Fulkerson as if he's trashing him before the other guys arrive. My friend has a back side video of it and they nearly rip Fulky's jersey off as he's trying to exit the scrum too.
Click to expand...

Haha this is exactly what he said. Trying to change his tune a little now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: walkenvol
#132
#132
Chris4Vols22 said:
Right. I evidently flabbergasted one or two people in the game thread last night when I said I expect Zeigler to be called for a tech. They said that the UK guy caused Zeigler to initiate the physical contact, and therefore Zeigler shouldn't get a tech for the shove.
Click to expand...
Gotcha. I don't see any way you can issue a T to one side and not the other in that instance. Obviously, little fella on UK's bench was the instigator, but ZZ definitely put hands on him, right or wrong. In that instance, I think the proper thing is to just separate everyone, review to see that nothing dangerous or insanely unsportsmanlike occurred, and then get back to playing ball.

In the end, the double technical hurt Tennessee more than Kentucky because it was a personal on Zeigler, who actually affects the outcome of the game, plus a T against him (another and he's ejected). Meanwhile, UK's mighty mouse could get sent packing and no one would notice.

In that instance, especially with the benefit of video review, you just determine that nothing awful happened and get back to playing with a warning to both sides. The situation was over-officiated and it hurt the "less guilty" team more than the instigating team.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolsSince78, Lankykong, gainesvol82 and 2 others
#133
#133
Chris4Vols22 said:
Right. I evidently flabbergasted one or two people in the game thread last night when I said I expect Zeigler to be called for a tech. They said that the UK guy caused Zeigler to initiate the physical contact, and therefore Zeigler shouldn't get a tech for the shove.
Click to expand...

That’s not what you said last night. And I never said the UK guy was the first to touch ZZ.
 
#134
#134
VolArmy74 said:
It seemed much more that you blamed everything on ZZ and basically said the UK staff member was innocent. The UK staff member jumped up and went chest to chest with Vescovi who deflected him over to ZZ. He is also screaming and pointing down towards Fulkerson as if he's trashing him before the other guys arrive. My friend has a back side video of it and they nearly rip Fulky's jersey off as he's trying to exit the scrum too.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I 100% blame Zeigler for consciously deciding to put hands on the guy, and I expect a tech to be called in that situation. I don't disagree that the UK guy needlessly inserted himself into the situation. Even though he inserted himself, that's not a free pass to make physical contact and expect no consequences. So yes, Zeigler alone is responsible for the shove and the consequences of the refs seeing the physical contact.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Larkin
#135
#135
Chris4Vols22 said:
Yeah, I 100% blame Zeigler for consciously deciding to put hands on the guy, and I expect a tech to be called in that situation. I don't disagree that the UK guy needlessly inserted himself into the situation. Even though he inserted himself, that's not a free pass to make physical contact and expect no consequences. So yes, Zeigler alone is responsible for the shove and the consequences of the refs seeing the physical contact.
Click to expand...

Vescovi shoved him too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Larkin
#136
#136
Chris4Vols22 said:
Yeah, I 100% blame Zeigler for consciously deciding to put hands on the guy, and I expect a tech to be called in that situation. I don't disagree that the UK guy needlessly inserted himself into the situation. Even though he inserted himself, that's not a free pass to make physical contact and expect no consequences. So yes, Zeigler alone is responsible for the shove and the consequences of the refs seeing the physical contact.
Click to expand...

The guy had no business doing anything but standing back and away from the situation. I like that ZZ will go into the scrum to help a teammate. The staff member instigated it, ZZ reacted. Both got techs, but it wasn't ZZ's fault the situation developed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: walkenvol and gainesvol82
#137
#137
cncchris33 said:
Gotcha. I don't see any way you can issue a T to one side and not the other in that instance. Obviously, little fella on UK's bench was the instigator, but ZZ definitely put hands on him, right or wrong. In that instance, I think the proper thing is to just separate everyone, review to see that nothing dangerous or insanely unsportsmanlike occurred, and then get back to playing ball.

In the end, the double technical hurt Tennessee more than Kentucky because it was a personal on Zeigler, who actually affects the outcome of the game, plus a T against him (another and he's ejected). Meanwhile, UK's mighty mouse could get sent packing and no one would notice.

In that instance, especially with the benefit of video review, you just determine that nothing awful happened and get back to playing with a warning to both sides. The situation was over-officiated and it hurt the "less guilty" team more than the instigating team.
Click to expand...
I agree and said as much in the game thread. In my perfect world, that's a play on with nothing called. Given the history of calls and enforcement, I expected a double tech, like you said, which is what happened.

To clarify one thing, I don't think I said in the same post that I also expected the UK guy to also get a tech. Not sure if that makes a difference in the debate; I'm mainly arguing against the idea that Zeigler didn't deserve one/was forced to initiate contact.
 
#140
#140
VolArmy74 said:
The guy had no business doing anything but standing back and away from the situation. I like that ZZ will go into the scrum to help a teammate. The staff member instigated it, ZZ reacted. Both got techs, but it wasn't ZZ's fault the situation developed.
Click to expand...

You can't be serious. So you're OK with putting 100% of the blame on the UK guy, but Zeigler's shove had nothing to do with anything? We're going to act like he had no hand in the situation?
 
#141
#141
cncchris33 said:
Gotcha. I don't see any way you can issue a T to one side and not the other in that instance. Obviously, little fella on UK's bench was the instigator, but ZZ definitely put hands on him, right or wrong. In that instance, I think the proper thing is to just separate everyone, review to see that nothing dangerous or insanely unsportsmanlike occurred, and then get back to playing ball.

In the end, the double technical hurt Tennessee more than Kentucky because it was a personal on Zeigler, who actually affects the outcome of the game, plus a T against him (another and he's ejected). Meanwhile, UK's mighty mouse could get sent packing and no one would notice.

In that instance, especially with the benefit of video review, you just determine that nothing awful happened and get back to playing with a warning to both sides. The situation was over-officiated and it hurt the "less guilty" team more than the instigating team.
Click to expand...
If ZZ had just put his hands up and didn’t shove, that should have been 100% on UK. Not sure they still would have called it that way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gainesvol82
#143
#143
60-45 and absolutely no explanation, or even acknowledgement of the call, when there was a lane violation on Aidoo’s first free throw. No video shown. Not a word from the announcers. ZZ and KC looked very confused by the whistle while they were near mid court.
 
#144
#144
GBO18 said:
How you were blaming it 100% on ZZ. And acting like the UK dude had nothing to do with ZZs reaction.
Click to expand...
I'm not saying that people aren't human and will react unexpectedly in stressful situations. I am saying that every individual, including Zeigler, have the sentience and free will to choose to do or not do things. Zeigler alone is responsible for shoving the guy. It did not have to be done, and no one forced him to do it.

Again, like I said last night, it's not even a big deal, and in no way did I want or expect this mind numbing argument.
 
#145
#145
Chris4Vols22 said:
You can't be serious. So you're OK with putting 100% of the blame on the UK guy, but Zeigler's shove had nothing to do with anything? We're going to act like he had no hand in the situation?
Click to expand...

If my friend falls and I'm going to help him up and someone jumps in front of me, cutting me off from him for reasons I can't fathom, I'm probably going to shove him. So no, I don't blame ZZ for reacting how he did. It's how most humans would react. The unusual event in all of it is the UK assistant deciding to flex on Santi and ZZ.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolsSince78 and chuckiepoo
#146
#146
Chris4Vols22 said:
I'm not saying that people aren't human and will react unexpectedly in stressful situations. I am saying that every individual, including Zeigler, have the sentience and free will to choose to do or not do things. Zeigler alone is responsible for shoving the guy. It did not have to be done, and no one forced him to do it.

Again, like I said last night, it's not even a big deal, and in no way did I want or expect this mind numbing argument.
Click to expand...

I think I technically, "letter of the law" agree with you but I also think it's a common sense thing. The guy clearly was trying to be intimidating and was basically looking for a reason. Yes ZZ (and Vescovi) "shoved" him but honestly it was more of a "move out of the way" shove, not a typical shove that happens when tempers flare. I think the guy's reaction made it seem way worse than it actually was. This wasn't a start a fight shove.
 
#147
#147
Thunder Good-Oil said:
60-45 and absolutely no explanation, or even acknowledgement of the call, when there was a lane violation on Aidoo’s first free throw. No video shown. Not a word from the announcers. ZZ and KC looked very confused by the whistle while they were near mid court.
Click to expand...
Actually, the Tennessee guards walked inside the circle 3 times that I noticed. That was before the ball was actually bounced to the shooter, but I kept thinking they would call that.
 
#148
#148
cncchris33 said:
Gotcha. I don't see any way you can issue a T to one side and not the other in that instance. Obviously, little fella on UK's bench was the instigator, but ZZ definitely put hands on him, right or wrong. In that instance, I think the proper thing is to just separate everyone, review to see that nothing dangerous or insanely unsportsmanlike occurred, and then get back to playing ball.

In the end, the double technical hurt Tennessee more than Kentucky because it was a personal on Zeigler, who actually affects the outcome of the game, plus a T against him (another and he's ejected). Meanwhile, UK's mighty mouse could get sent packing and no one would notice.

In that instance, especially with the benefit of video review, you just determine that nothing awful happened and get back to playing with a warning to both sides. The situation was over-officiated and it hurt the "less guilty" team more than the instigating team.
Click to expand...
Boy, I usually think pretty close to you but we’re miles apart on this one. Your way more understanding of an adult who isn’t involved in the game injecting himself into it in an inflammatory way with the players. if it’s completely unacceptable for players to go into the stands then why is it ever ok for a grown assed man to come from behind their bench and engage with our players? If it had been our S&C guy I’d be calling for his dismissal. Security should have escorted him from the building.
 
#149
#149
VolsSportsFan said:
I think I technically, "letter of the law" agree with you but I also think it's a common sense thing. The guy clearly was trying to be intimidating and was basically looking for a reason. Yes ZZ (and Vescovi) "shoved" him but honestly it was more of a "move out of the way" shove, not a typical shove that happens when tempers flare. I think the guy's reaction made it seem way worse than it actually was. This wasn't a start a fight shove.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I agree with all of that. It wound up not really making a difference from a foul perspective, but my concern in those situations giving up FTs and possession. It's really not a big deal and Zeigler's reaction is more than understandable; it just leaves a little to be desired in the discipline ballpark. I don't want any Vols needlessly putting the team in a disadvantaged position.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chuckiepoo
#150
#150
cardvolfan said:
Actually, the Tennessee guards walked inside the circle 3 times that I noticed. That was before the ball was actually bounced to the shooter, but I kept thinking they would call that.
Click to expand...

I was wondering if maybe Santi went to the lane after Aidoo was given the ball. I didn’t see it and ESPN missed it completely. Didn’t say one word about Aidoo only having one free throw. Too busy hearing themselves talk I think.
 
  • Like
Reactions: walkenvol and chuckiepoo
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top