GDT: Summit League Championship vs SDSU

[NDSUFan_Sav]

Nobody was beating that Kansas team last Monday... I'm still walking with a limp

Haha nope, they were on a mission. Just had to take a jab at you. I think they could beat Kansas in semi finals if they meet.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

[Professor Chaos]

http://www.ncaapublications.com/prod...loads/BR17.pdf
Page 48
e. Contact dead ball technical foul. A contact dead ball technical foul occurs when the ball is dead and involves contact that is unnecessary, unacceptable and excessive, but does not rise to the level of a flagrant 2 contact technical foul.

http://www.ncaapublications.com/prod...ds/BKBCB16.pdf (I couldn't fine a perfect scenario in the Case Book, but I read this as the POI rule isn't in effect if there is a contact dead ball technical)
Page 58
A.R. 179. With Team B leading 50-48, A1 releases the ball for a try for a two-point goal. B1 fouls A1 in the act of shooting and while the ball is in flight, the game-clock horn sounds, indicating that time has expired for the second half. The try is unsuccessful. After time expires, A1 shoves B1 and the official assesses a contact dead ball technical foul against A1.
RULING: Since a single contact dead ball technical foul has been committed, the point of interruption is not in effect. This is a false double foul and each foul shall carry its own penalty and each penalty shall be administered in the order of occurrence of the fouls. A1 shall attempt two free throws for the foul committed by B1. When A1 misses the first or second try, the game is over. When A1 is successful with the two free throws, any player from Team B shall attempt the two free throws for A1’s contact dead ball technical foul.
When the first try is successful, the game is over. When both tries are unsuccessful, an extra period(s) shall be played. Play is resumed with a throw-in to Team B on either side of the division line for the contact dead ball technical by A1.
(Rule 8-6.2, 8-8.1 and 10-1 Penalty g)

Page 75
A.R. 240. Team A has the ball on the block when B1 is called for a personal foul. Following the whistle, A1 retaliates by illegally contacting B1 and is penalized with a contact dead ball technical. Team A is in the bonus.
RULING: This is a false double foul since the second foul, the contact dead ball technical foul charged to A1, occurred while the clock was stopped for the first foul. The fouls will be penalized in the order they occurred because the second foul is a contact dead ball technical foul. A1 will attempt the bonus free throws for the personal foul by B1 with no players in the marked lane spaces. Following the free throws by A1, any eligible player or team member from Team B is permitted to shoot the two free throws with no players in the marked lane spaces for the contact dead ball technical foul by A1. Play would resume with a throw-in to Team B at the division line.
(Rule 10-1 Penalty g)

It would be very, very interesting to get the officials take on what was called, why, and their reasoning for how things played out. I also found some stuff that indicated that the play should have been reviewed on the monitor, I don't remember that happening, but I was a little worked up right then.

Thanks for digging that up. It looks like they may have enforced it correctly then. However, it just further perplexes me that a referee would make that call in that situation on such a questionable scenario. The best referees pull the player or players involved in a situation like that aside and give them a stern warning making it clear they're in danger of significantly hurting their team with those types of actions. Perhaps, like Longhorn mentioned, the referees had already talked to Miller and told him to knock it off earlier in the game but I didn't see anything like that happen (although I could've easily missed it). Whatever... water under the bridge. It's clear Paul Miller has some growing up to do, hopefully he does that in the offseason.

[bisonp]

For crying out loud people, he obviously pushed him.

It may not have looked as bad in replay as it looked in real time but it was very stupid to push him in the first place so we shouldn't over-analyze the ref calling it. It was, indeed, a foul. Get over it!

The discussion about "well it shouldn't be called at that point of the game" is a big reason why I typically only watch college basketball in March and have completely lost interest in the NBA. I can't stand how the game is officiated. Well, that and the Timberwolves being just an awful franchise.

[westnodak93bison]

For crying out loud people, he obviously pushed him.

It may not have looked as bad in replay as it looked in real time but it was very stupid to push him in the first place so we shouldn't over-analyze the ref calling it. It was, indeed, a foul. Get over it!

The discussion about "well it shouldn't be called at that point of the game" is a big reason why I typically only watch college basketball in March and have completely lost interest in the NBA. I can't stand how the game is officiated. Well, that and the Timberwolves being just an awful franchise.

And Paul looked at the ref knowing the call was likely

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[NDSUFan_Sav]

We should of never been in that situation, that Technical didn't cause us to lose that game and didn't have any impact.

People say why didnt we double Daum more, well when we doubled him that was one of the factors why we lost the game. We rarely trap and if you don't run a defense like that stay away from it. Showed too, problem was when we trapped the guards looked lost and didn't know how to rotate which is key. By rotating on a trap you don't exactly get on one guy around the key but you rotate between the guards so you can react to a skip pass. That and the 3 by Parks and foul to cause 4 pt play was the turning point in the game.

Along with the stretch in there we constantly ran the weave and had a guy attack and pivot, pick up his dribble, and then pass it back out. Causing a rushed shot due to the shot clock. When we had success it was attacking the rim and when they came off the weave Khy would give a floater or pivot and put up a successful shot.

People say Daum hurt us, I disagree Dexter held his ground the first half daum was 3/4 from FT line and 2/5 FG for a total of 7 points nothing special. I would of let Werner hold his ground and force him towards the baseline.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

[EndZoneQB]

We should of never been in that situation, that Technical didn't cause us to lose that game and didn't have any impact.

People say why didnt we double Daum more, well when we doubled him that was one of the factors why we lost the game. We rarely trap and if you don't run a defense like that stay away from it. Showed too, problem was when we trapped the guards looked lost and didn't know how to rotate which is key. By rotating on a trap you don't exactly get on one guy around the key but you rotate between the guards so you can react to a skip pass. That and the 3 by Parks and foul to cause 4 pt play was the turning point in the game.

Along with the stretch in there we constantly ran the weave and had a guy attack and pivot, pick up his dribble, and then pass it back out. Causing a rushed shot due to the shot clock. When we had success it was attacking the rim and when they came off the weave Khy would give a floater or pivot and put up a successful shot.

People say Daum hurt us, I disagree Dexter held his ground the first half daum was 3/4 from FT line and 2/5 FG for a total of 7 points nothing special. I would of let Werner hold his ground and force him towards the baseline.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

I agree, I thought Dex played a great first half and basically made Daum a non-factor. He started to get the better of him later in the game, but I think we should have kept Dex attacking Daum as he was in foul trouble - and even when he wasn't, Dex was pretty much abusing him anyway. Dex did get overzealous at the end, instead of just bodying up and standing tall. What I also thought worked well against Daum was Brown fronting him and denying him the ball.

[NDSUFan_Sav]

I agree, I thought Dex played a great first half and basically made Daum a non-factor. He started to get the better of him later in the game, but I think we should have kept Dex attacking Daum as he was in foul trouble - and even when he wasn't, Dex was pretty much abusing him anyway. Dex did get overzealous at the end, instead of just bodying up and standing tall. What I also thought worked well against Daum was Brown fronting him and denying him the ball.

Exactly!!! But I never would have doubled Daum, the only time it worked is when he went baseline and couldn't see what was coming from the side then you had a solid trap. But they tried too much and it got guys way out of position. Early in the game AJ was in the lane looking to double if the ball came down. Ball was opposite wing well they swung it all the way to his guy out on the wing and guy makes an easy uncontested 3. They all had the mind set to look to double/trap which caused many defensive collapses. I am fine with AJ sagging off his guy in that situation but not that far into the lane, should never be past the block. Always taught to have your guy and the ball in your vision, he didn't have his guy in his vision.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

[Bison"FANatic"]

Exactly!!! But I never would have doubled Daum, the only time it worked is when he went baseline and couldn't see what was coming from the side then you had a solid trap. But they tried too much and it got guys way out of position. Early in the game AJ was in the lane looking to double if the ball came down. Ball was opposite wing well they swung it all the way to his guy out on the wing and guy makes an easy uncontested 3. They all had the mind set to look to double/trap which caused many defensive collapses. I am fine with AJ sagging off his guy in that situation but not that far into the lane, should never be past the block. Always taught to have your guy and the ball in your vision, he didn't have his guy in his vision.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

We didn't double him in the game in Brookings 2 weeks ago and he went off for 20 and controlled the game. He would have done the same thing had we not made him at least pay attention to a double coming. The only teams that have controlled him in the last 6 weeks have done so with a double. He eats man on man alive. Dex did a heck of a lot better than I expected but with the double coming it didn't allow Daum the chance to keep bumping and get the fouls like he did in Brookings.

[NDSUFan_Sav]

We didn't double him in the game in Brookings 2 weeks ago and he went off for 20 and controlled the game. He would have done the same thing had we not made him at least pay attention to a double coming. The only teams that have controlled him in the last 6 weeks have done so with a double. He eats man on man alive. Dex did a heck of a lot better than I expected but with the double coming it didn't allow Daum the chance to keep bumping and get the fouls like he did in Brookings.

Did I not say to do it when he's going baseline and unaware of anyone coming for him? That's the only time I'd do it. He got 18 the other night and 20 in Brookings, I don't consider that going off when you get that many touches. How many times was Dex on him in Brookings?

When they fed him the ball and a guard would come for the double, they didn't disguise it they just came and it didn't help us at all. Imo they did it too much.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

[Bisonator98]

I don't think it was our defense that cost us the game. It was scoring, or the lack there of, we didn't attack enough in the second half.