Should CDR have given a technical foul for slamming the ball?

[Original Rookie]

Which is wrong..

 

If you'd call it 5 minutes in you have to call it with 5 minutes to go.

 

:thumb:

 

There aren't separate rule books for different parts of the game.

[PutMeInCoach]

 

There aren't separate rule books for different parts of the game.

 

:thumb:

[greendevil]

It's like the unwritten rules of the game... If a guy gives up the game tying lay up with .1 on the clock and accidentally cusses would you T him and give them 2 shots for the game? No you would say, I heard that kid and you are lucky you didn't cost your team the game don't do it again.

[madman]

There's no doubt that it should have been a technical.

[Italian Stallion]

:thumb:

 

There aren't separate rule books for different parts of the game.

 

 

But here's the thing. There is. A lot of referee's, not all but most, in any sport call the game different in the waning moments of the game. If something is deemed as too insignificant to be worth having the effect of the entire game it will be ignored. Or if they feel the call to just not be necessary in that moment they will not make the call. Don't believe me? See Jordan vs Jazz, and tell me if they make that push off call midway through a game in the regular season...

 

Having a stupid act of slamming the ball which had absolutely no affect on the game actually affect the game would have been the worst move they could've made, and knowing this they made a no call.

[Italian Stallion]

It's like the unwritten rules of the game... If a guy gives up the game tying lay up with .1 on the clock and accidentally cusses would you T him and give them 2 shots for the game? No you would say, I heard that kid and you are lucky you didn't cost your team the game don't do it again.

 

 

Thank you. There are different rules for different scenarios. Plain and simple.

[oldrambler]

Yes. I also think the undercut of Rush at the beginning should have been an intentional.

 

I agree on both.

[oldrambler]

I can honestly can see why some are saying no bc of the time that it occured during the game. No, he was not doing it to taunt a player or at an official but the fact is that he slammed the ball down and did so in a pretty dang obvious manner imo. That is a "T" and imo it was hard to ignore or let slide" bc it was so obvious and blatant no matter what the intent was.

[Original Rookie]

But here's the thing. There is. A lot of referee's, not all but most, in any sport call the game different in the waning moments of the game. If something is deemed as too insignificant to be worth having the effect of the entire game it will be ignored. Or if they feel the call to just not be necessary in that moment they will not make the call. Don't believe me? See Jordan vs Jazz, and tell me if they make that push off call midway through a game in the regular season...

 

Having a stupid act of slamming the ball which had absolutely no affect on the game actually affect the game would have been the worst move they could've made, and knowing this they made a no call.

 

We will have to agree to disagree. And the majority agree with me on this one.

[pigman]

If you're comparing NBA officiating to college that's a stretch in itself.

[NobizLikeShowbiz]

Thank you. There are different rules for different scenarios. Plain and simple.

 

That may be true, but it is not right. If it is a foul 2 minutes into the game, then it is a foul with 20 seconds left and the game tied. Plain and Simple.

[Sharp]

No matter what the call is it should be the same at anytime during the game. Slamming the ball is a T and should be called no matter what the circumstance. Sure CDR was made at himself, but that doesn't make it right. The Rush undercut should have been an intentional foul. The intentional foul has to be one of the biggest jokes in College Basketball. It needs to be done away with and just have the flagrant foul called. I also think that if a flagrant foul is called it should have a stiffer penalty of some kind. Like giving the player who comments the foul 2 fouls. One for the foul and one for it being flagrant. IMO, Refs are way to inconsistent on their calls. Some swallow their whistles at the end of the game on the same thing they have been calling all game. I don't care what time of the game it is a violation is still a violation. Why does it have to change in the last 2 minutes of the game. Is there something in the rule book that says in the final 2 minutes that the Refs can change the the existing rules. The game should be called the same from beginning to end. So what if a call at the end is a game changing call, so be it. Swallowing the whistle at the end is a cowards way out, JMO.

[malachicrunch]

Yes. I also think the undercut of Rush at the beginning should have been an intentional.

 

I do agree with this.

[PutMeInCoach]

But here's the thing. There is. A lot of referee's, not all but most, in any sport call the game different in the waning moments of the game. If something is deemed as too insignificant to be worth having the effect of the entire game it will be ignored. Or if they feel the call to just not be necessary in that moment they will not make the call. Don't believe me? See Jordan vs Jazz, and tell me if they make that push off call midway through a game in the regular season...

 

Having a stupid act of slamming the ball which had absolutely no affect on the game actually affect the game would have been the worst move they could've made, and knowing this they made a no call.

 

He didn't push off, duh..

 

And having a kid act stupid and cuss would end up with a T, He broke the rule, grow some and make the call.

[aequitas oryx]

You don't make that call at that point in the game. Instead of it being a topic on every talk show the day after the game, it has basically been forgotten about, and thats how it should be. Great great no call.

 

:thumb:

Great no call at the collegiate level. At high school level, it might be a different story.