I don't know how its the rule, but it is the rule and the official blew it.

 

Not trying to be argumentative at all Wireman , but I have tried to find the rule this morning and have thus far been unable to. I would like to see how it is written and if it is a hard and fast rule. I'm not trying to get all caught up in it, I'm just curious for my own sake. I've watched college basketball for years and my husband is a former college player, and we both thought it was a no call.:confused:

It was definately a no call. Incidental contact. Man it was fun to be at the game last night this place was rockin.

The Cats are still alive and gets to play at lease one more game.GO CATS!!!!!

Hopefully its another home game at Memorial

On tripping, from the 2009 NCAA rule book

 

Rule 10, Section 1, Art 1

A player shall not hold, push, charge, trip or impede the progress

of an opponent by extending arm(s), shoulder(s), hip(s) or knee(s) or by

bending his or her own body into other than a normal position; nor use any

unreasonably rough tactics.

 

I couldn't find anything else more specific. Feel free to look if you'd like.

link

 

It wasn't a foul by that definition.

^^Okay, that makes sense. I guess it is in the interpretation? I honestly thought the UNLV player ran into the UK player's leg. I guess I would have to watch it again.

Everyone that thinks that the trip was a good "No Call", that are NOT KY Fans, olease raise your hands. I don't see any hands.

 

If this call or no call, went against KY, this thread would be full of hate. It is funny to listen how rational everyone is when the call / no call works in their teams favor and how horrible and unfair it is when it goes against them.

 

Causes me to laugh.

If BG wins the game will be Monday night!

Everyone that thinks that the trip was a good "No Call", that are NOT KY Fans, olease raise your hands. I don't see any hands.

 

If this call or no call, went against KY, this thread would be full of hate. It is funny to listen how rational everyone is when the call / no call works in their teams favor and how horrible and unfair it is when it goes against them.

 

Causes me to laugh.

I think the ref made the right call on the play. When they replayed it the UNLV man stepped on the back of Millers foot. There was no trip involved that I could see. Also Miller was not even facing the ball handler. Laugh all you want but the ref got it right.:lol::lol::lol:

On tripping, from the 2009 NCAA rule book

 

 

 

I couldn't find anything else more specific. Feel free to look if you'd like.

link

 

It wasn't a foul by that definition.

 

Looks like the ref made the correct call there. Miller was looking and running the other way and the UNLV player ran into him. There was no out of the ordinary movements, good call by the officials.

I still think it should have been a tripping foul and I'm a huge Cat fan. I'll take the no call AND the victory, however :thumb:

I tell you this much, if I'm an UNLV fan I am more upset over my coach's mishandling of the team after the no call. No calls, bad calls, questionable calls are all part of the game and they suck when they go against your team. However, to completely come unglued and lose control of your team at such a pivotal point is inexcusable. They were still only down 3 points, had all the momentum, UK was on its heels and plenty of time left. Kruger's fit took them completely out of their game and his mishandling of the timeout was critical. As far as no calls go, the lack of a technical on Kruger was huge as well. Maybe the officials thought he was justified, but he should have been T'ed up when he continued to rant several minutes after the play. What is the point? Officials do no go back and change calls that have already occurred. Kruger has been around long enough to know he should have gathered his troops and kept going. I truly thought they were going to beat UK--but Kruger couldn't get past the tripping no call.

I don't know how tripping could be called an automatic foul.

What if a player on defense is standing at the top of the key, his feet planted, arms at his side and the player with the ball comes dribbling by and trips on the defensive players foot. Is that an automatic foul on the defense?

Where are all the basketball BGP gurus that would have the answer to this tripping foul question.

I still think it should have been a tripping foul and I'm a huge Cat fan. I'll take the no call AND the victory, however :thumb:

 

And Kentucky gets no calls. :sssh:

I still think it should have been a tripping foul and I'm a huge Cat fan. I'll take the no call AND the victory, however :thumb:

 

Based on what? Miller was there and the player tripped over him?

 

Miller obviously wasn't trying to trip him, and was actually moving away.

 

Rules on legal guarding position:

 

Art. 6. To maintain a legal guarding position after the initial position has

been attained, the guard:

a. Is not required to continue having the torso face the opponent;

 

b. Is required to have either one foot or both feet on the playing court

(cannot be out of bounds);

 

c. May raise the hands or may jump within his or her own vertical

plane;

 

d. May shift to maintain guarding position in the path of the dribbler,

provided that the guard does not charge into the dribbler or otherwise

cause contact;

 

e. May move laterally or obliquely to maintain position provided such

a move is not toward the opponent when contact occurs;

 

f. Is not required to have the feet on the playing court when shifting in

the path of the dribbler or when moving laterally or obliquely; and

 

g. May turn or duck to absorb shock when contact by the dribbler is

imminent. In such a case, the dribbler shall not be absolved from the

responsibility of contact

If that play is a foul by rule, then I believe that you could intentionally foul out any player that you wanted by tripping over his feet whenever he is not looking.

 

I would not argue that call if the roles were reversed, it's an obvious no-call.