Getting the call

#52
#52
UT IE 95 said:
Obviously you are only seeing what you want to see. BW initiated contact and went over the back. If you don't see it, no big deal. We won regardless.
Click to expand...

There was no contact until the armlock that was initiated by the UGA player. Also, BW didn't MOVE. So explain how he could have initiated contact, big guy. He was standing there, and the ball came down directly above them. BW grabbed it, never left his feet, and didnt push Barnes. So, explain yourself, foo
 
#54
#54
Thrasher865 said:
There was no contact until the armlock that was initiated by the UGA player. Also, BW didn't MOVE. So explain how he could have initiated contact, big guy. He was standing there, and the ball came down directly above them. BW grabbed it, never left his feet, and didnt push Barnes. So, explain yourself, foo
Click to expand...

That play happens any other time in the game and it's an easy call. Williams gets the foul, pouts about it, and hangs his head with a WTF look on his face.

Since it was in the final seconds the ref did the right thing and let them play it out. We won. But to claim the ball "came down directly above them" is plain wrong. It was about as easy an over the back call as could be made.
 
#56
#56
UT IE 95 said:
"practically" a head lock. BW wraps his right arm around the defenders head as he grabs the ball.
Click to expand...

"Practical" headlocks, near headlocks, and thoughts of maybe headlocking an opponent are all expressly forbidden in the rules. It's all in the section that says you can slide across the floor on your butt after picking up your dribble.
 
#57
#57
I guess it's hard for me to believe that TV Teddy would swallow his whistle at any point in any ball game.
 
#59
#59
StepCross said:
"Practical" headlocks, near headlocks, and thoughts of maybe headlocking an opponent are all expressly forbidden in the rules. It's all in the section that says you can slide across the floor on your butt after picking up your dribble.
Click to expand...

Ahhh, good point. We have people on this board looking at slow motion replays and rule books arguing that wasn't travelling. Just like some are doing with the over the back no call.
 
#60
#60
The problem is this delusion that some people have that because Barnes "has position" he is somehow entitled to the rebound. That is simply not true. BW never touches the guy, he takes a step backwards and grabs the rebound over Barnes' head.

He doesn't get him in a "headlock." Watch the freakin video I linked. Specifically the angle at about 0:40. He reaches his arms around Barnes' head to grab the ball, and Barnes reaches back over his shoulders and grabs BW's right arm.

I'll admit, the refs would probably have called it if it weren't at the very end of the game, because it borderline looked like a foul live, and the refs are just as misguided as the rest of the population about the existence of some phantom "over the back" rule that doesn't exist.
 
#61
#61
Thrasher865 said:
The problem is this delusion that some people have that because Barnes "has position" he is somehow entitled to the rebound. That is simply not true. BW never touches the guy, he takes a step backwards and grabs the rebound over Barnes' head.

He doesn't get him in a "headlock." Watch the freakin video I linked. Specifically the angle at about 0:40. He reaches his arms around Barnes' head to grab the ball, and Barnes reaches back over his shoulders and grabs BW's right arm.

I'll admit, the refs would probably have called it if it weren't at the very end of the game, because it borderline looked like a foul live, and the refs are just as misguided as the rest of the population about the existence of some phantom "over the back" rule that doesn't exist.
Click to expand...

So you're also of the belief that the Vandy kid that slid across the lane on his arse wasn't travelling either. Right?

Oh, and you're video - the same one that was linked earlier in the thread, clearly shows the foul.
 
#62
#62
Explain yourself. It clearly shows "the foul."

Oh, excellent case. Does Williams check him with his body? No. Does he "headlock" him? No. There can't be a pushing foul when Brian is clearly moving away from barnes during the rebound.

And there you go jumping to conclusions ignorantly. I don't know the traveling rule specifically but have always heard you can't go to the ground with the ball, so if that's the case, then it was a travel.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#63
#63
UT IE 95 said:
So you're also of the belief that the Vandy kid that slid across the lane on his arse wasn't travelling either. Right?

Oh, and you're video - the same one that was linked earlier in the thread, clearly shows the foul.
Click to expand...

Perhaps it's time to move on from this one.
 
#64
#64
UT IE 95 said:
So you're also of the belief that the Vandy kid that slid across the lane on his arse wasn't travelling either. Right?

Oh, and you're video - the same one that was linked earlier in the thread, clearly shows the foul.
Click to expand...

Your are not very smart. :loco:
 
Last edited:
#68
#68
utvolpj said:
in my opinion if the UGA defender puts a body on BW we either get OT or they win on ft's with little to no time left. The defender watched the ball and BW put it back in. The call looked correct to me (especially in that situation)
Click to expand...

After watching the replay about 10 times... I agree. Looked like the UGA player went up for the ball late and BW was already grabbing the basketball (without making contact over the back) and when he when up for the ball, he grabbed BW's arms... good no call both ways
 
#70
#70
Pearl said something like since he had both hands on the ball it was a good no call. I don't get it , but i'm glad it worked in the Vols favor.
 
#71
#71
I just know we'd all be screaming about getting ripped if it was our guy in that spot instead of the UGA player
 
#72
#72
Talked to a former official about that call, and he said it was a good no call. Both players have the right to their position and a right to the ball. Williams got the ball and the Georgia player was moving back into him. In that situation neither player gained an advantage and no foul should be called.
 
#73
#73
the6chambers said:
I've watched it 100 times...I have no idea how you can say Brian was fouled. The guy couldn't have fouled him if Brian hadn't leaped over his back.

I'm glad we won, but between that and the shot clock violation, we got lucky.
Click to expand...

Sir, your argument is horribly, horribly flawed.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top