Page 60 of 68 FirstFirst ... 1050565758596061626364 ... LastLast
Results 1,181 to 1,200 of 1355

Thread: New bellarmine thread

  1. #1181
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Findlay OH
    Posts
    55
    Contribute to D2
    Rep Power
    61

    Default Re: New bellarmine thread

    dude, the officials have never made a mistake and given the wrong player a foul? The foul was correct the offender was wrong. I just watched the highlights on YouTube, why wasn't that play included? It was definitely an important part of the game.
    Quote Originally Posted by Knightmoves View Post
    Dude, they called a fould on #21 (Coles), not #31(Chitty). So your statement is an admission that it was a bad call. There may have been minor contact from Chitty, but Kimbrough was running on a direct line full speed into Coles.

  2. #1182

    Default Re: New bellarmine thread

    They called Coles for "blocking", they did not give the wrong number, the intent of the ref was to call a foul on Coles. Coles had no idea that Kimbrough was there until he crashed into Coles' back.

    I do want to thank you for allowing me to vent, despite its uselessness.

  3. Default Re: New bellarmine thread

    As a fan of D II I would love to see Scotty get the chance. Pearl and Harper both proved they can win at the next level. I would love to see Scotty bring his offensive style to the next level as he would pick teams apart...in my opinion.


    Quote Originally Posted by #1KnightFan View Post
    Why would Scotty look at any other D1 job if Crawford is right?

    CRAWFORD | The future of University of Louisville basketball
    http://www.wdrb.com/story/37700211/c...lle-basketball
    (Via WDRB News)

  4. #1184
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Louisville Metroplex
    Posts
    1,220
    Rep Power
    76

    Default Re: New bellarmine thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Knightmoves View Post
    I love Eric Crawford, but wish he would keep his mouth (or pen, or keyboard) quiet. His column is a nice example of reverse engineering. He knows Davenport is the best option for UofL, so he creates a job description that matches Davenport. There is a part of me that would like to see Scotty get the chance, but I'm hoping UofL doesn't have the courage or intelligence to take a chance on a D2 coach.
    Amen. This is the one time I wish Crawford would bite his proverbial tongue.

  5. #1185

    Default Re: New bellarmine thread

    I wasn't going to say anything else but that picture proves my point. Kimbrough is only reaching for the ball at this point and not gotten possession. He is obviously going into Coles who was stationery trying to rebound. Kimbrough was not the offensive player that required Coles to have "defensive position", it was a loose ball and Kimbrough clearly was the one on the move creating the contact. That was the worst call possible. Again, it was either a foul on Kimbrough or a no call and ball out of bounds to BU.

  6. #1186

    Default Re: New bellarmine thread

    Quote Originally Posted by kdubnation View Post
    No dog in the fight here, but from watching it via the live stream and subsequent replays on the stream, it did seem to be questionable. What I think the decision making for the call was is that it appeared that Kimbrough ran in and actually was able to grab the ball before he ran into the BU player, which if you decide that he has possession of the ball when the collision occurred, the BU player was not in legal defensive position so it has to be a block, not a charge. I'm not saying I necessarily agree...just that I think that's the explanation you'd get if you talked to the officials. It DID appear that the Findlay player had the ball in his arms when he collided with the BU player, though I don't know if you'd consider that to be true possession or not.

    The subsequent foul on the 3 was definitely the right call.
    Problem with that explanation is that Kimbrough never had possession of the ball. He created the contact even before he touched the ball.

  7. Default Re: New bellarmine thread

    Quote Originally Posted by KnightStalker View Post
    Problem with that explanation is that Kimbrough never had possession of the ball. He created the contact even before he touched the ball.
    I've watched this play about 15 times. Just didn't happen the way some people are describing it. Not an easy call, and maybe a no call was in order. I wouldn't be arguing against it if that was the call. Now some are even complaining about the 3-point attempt as not being a foul. The net of the calls in the game that could go either way that resulted in baskets -- Bellarmine.
    Last edited by GMAC2018; 03-12-2018 at 03:55 PM.

  8. Default Re: New bellarmine thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Knightmoves View Post
    They called Coles for "blocking", they did not give the wrong number, the intent of the ref was to call a foul on Coles. Coles had no idea that Kimbrough was there until he crashed into Coles' back.

    I do want to thank you for allowing me to vent, despite its uselessness.
    I could not wait to watch the end of the game "on demand" even without the call controversy.

    1st, any fan in the country would be upset at the call at the end if it was against their team. I completely get all BU fans on this one and I am not going to trash your feelings. I have watched it over a dozen times pausing it etc. Something the official could not do.

    2nd, the call was the "right" call. #21 did not "block out" Findlay guy cause him to go over back. The ball was traveling more parallel to the baseline and failing "between" their positions. Each had equal right to the ball, it was a matter of who would get there first. Also what I also noticed is it appears that #21 was "falling" not because of contact with Findlay but because his feet got tangled up with #11 or Findlay's center. If you look closely #21 is going down while ball is still in the air. The picture shows him tripping not being pushed down in my opinion. With #21 falling to ground and making contact with Findlay player as he gets ball official has to call foul or a crazy "out of bounds" off BU. (I've seen crazy calls like this when player has lay up and defense swipes down and knocks ball of offense knee. Instead of calling reach in foul ref gives ball to offense under basket.) Either way Findlay ends up taking ball out under basket.

    Again, this is just my opinion after watching it many times - especially #21 feet getting tangled up. That doesn't mean that if it was my team instead of BU I wouldn't be complaining like everything!

  9. #1189

    Default Re: New bellarmine thread

    Any way you cut it that's a tough way to end your season.

  10. Default Re: New bellarmine thread

    Just returned from the Quarterback Club meeting, where Billy Reed was guest speaker. He made an impassioned case that Scott Davenport is the only logical choice to become the next UL coach. He referenced an interview he recently did with UL Board Chair David Grissom, who wants a coach who will be a team player and embrace the academic side. Reed also drew attention to the column he wrote two weeks ago, linked below. With Reed and Crawford now openly calling for Scotty, seems like the momentum is moving in that direction. Scotty cancelled his TV show tonight so he could attend the UL/Northern Ky NIT game.

    I didn't think Scotty would look at any other D1 job, at his age and not wanting to move. But when your alma mater calls . . . This is the one job, that if it is offered, I think he would take. Hope Scott Wiegand has a list of candidates in case we are in need of a coach.

    http://catholicsportsnet.com/louisvi...e-davenport--1

  11. #1191

    Default Re: New bellarmine thread

    Quote Originally Posted by #1KnightFan View Post
    Just returned from the Quarterback Club meeting, where Billy Reed was guest speaker. He made an impassioned case that Scott Davenport is the only logical choice to become the next UL coach. He referenced an interview he recently did with UL Board Chair David Grissom, who wants a coach who will be a team player and embrace the academic side. Reed also drew attention to the column he wrote two weeks ago, linked below. With Reed and Crawford now openly calling for Scotty, seems like the momentum is moving in that direction. Scotty cancelled his TV show tonight so he could attend the UL/Northern Ky NIT game.

    I didn't think Scotty would look at any other D1 job, at his age and not wanting to move. But when your alma mater calls . . . This is the one job, that if it is offered, I think he would take. Hope Scott Wiegand has a list of candidates in case we are in need of a coach.

    http://catholicsportsnet.com/louisvi...e-davenport--1
    Kentucky basketball guru Oscar Combs Tweeted much the same the other day - that UL would be nuts not to hire Scotty.

  12. #1192

    Default Re: New bellarmine thread

    Quote Originally Posted by WKYDave View Post
    I could not wait to watch the end of the game "on demand" even without the call controversy.

    1st, any fan in the country would be upset at the call at the end if it was against their team. I completely get all BU fans on this one and I am not going to trash your feelings. I have watched it over a dozen times pausing it etc. Something the official could not do.

    2nd, the call was the "right" call. #21 did not "block out" Findlay guy cause him to go over back. The ball was traveling more parallel to the baseline and failing "between" their positions. Each had equal right to the ball, it was a matter of who would get there first. Also what I also noticed is it appears that #21 was "falling" not because of contact with Findlay but because his feet got tangled up with #11 or Findlay's center. If you look closely #21 is going down while ball is still in the air. The picture shows him tripping not being pushed down in my opinion. With #21 falling to ground and making contact with Findlay player as he gets ball official has to call foul or a crazy "out of bounds" off BU. (I've seen crazy calls like this when player has lay up and defense swipes down and knocks ball of offense knee. Instead of calling reach in foul ref gives ball to offense under basket.) Either way Findlay ends up taking ball out under basket.

    Again, this is just my opinion after watching it many times - especially #21 feet getting tangled up. That doesn't mean that if it was my team instead of BU I wouldn't be complaining like everything!
    I would just say that according to your facts (BU player tripped up by other UF player, causing contact with Kimbrough) the logical call would have been a no-call and therefore ball out off Findlay player, Bellarmine's ball. Why would the refs contrive a no foul call but give it to the team whose player last touched? In fact who the ball went out on is reviewable (and you know Scotty would be screaming for that!) Good effort at explaining the refs rationale and you are right about one thing, BU fans got a perfectly good reason to complain about that ending.

  13. Default Re: New bellarmine thread

    Quote Originally Posted by KnightStalker View Post
    I would just say that according to your facts (BU player tripped up by other UF player, causing contact with Kimbrough) the logical call would have been a no-call and therefore ball out off Findlay player, Bellarmine's ball. Why would the refs contrive a no foul call but give it to the team whose player last touched? In fact who the ball went out on is reviewable (and you know Scotty would be screaming for that!) Good effort at explaining the refs rationale and you are right about one thing, BU fans got a perfectly good reason to complain about that ending.
    Had every call been made with this kind of scrutiny and review, UF would have had an 8-point lead with 60 sec left.

  14. #1194
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Louisville Metroplex
    Posts
    1,220
    Rep Power
    76

    Default Re: New bellarmine thread

    Quote Originally Posted by #1KnightFan View Post
    Hope Scott Wiegand has a list of candidates in case we are in need of a coach.[/url]
    Ugh. If we have to look for a new coach, I hope it goes better than it did for D-I lacrosse after the great McGetrick passed; Burns has been kind of a bust, the recent upset of #18 Marquette notwithstanding.

  15. #1195

    Default Re: New bellarmine thread

    Quote Originally Posted by GMAC2018 View Post
    Had every call been made with this kind of scrutiny and review, UF would have had an 8-point lead with 60 sec left.
    But end of the game plays are always scrutinized more. Mainly, because there is no chance to make up for it. The team on the end of the bad call, doesn't have time to overcome it as it would if the call was made with 10 minutes left to play. In fact that is why your second claim there, UF up by 8,etc. (not sure how you get that anyway) is ridiculous and has no way to be proven.

  16. #1196

    Default Re: New bellarmine thread

    Fortunately, there are way too many uninformed, but nonetheless vocal, UofL fans who could not stand for hiring Scotty. The only way UofL ends up with Scotty is that if they can't buy a big name because of doubts about NCAA future sanctions.

  17. Default Re: New bellarmine thread

    Quote Originally Posted by KnightStalker View Post
    But end of the game plays are always scrutinized more. Mainly, because there is no chance to make up for it. The team on the end of the bad call, doesn't have time to overcome it as it would if the call was made with 10 minutes left to play. In fact that is why your second claim there, UF up by 8,etc. (not sure how you get that anyway) is ridiculous and has no way to be proven.
    Bad calls, missed calls no matter when create advantage for or disadvantage against a team. A marginal majority of calls favored BU when a scoring opportunity was at stake. Of course it can’t be proven, or disproven.

  18. Default Re: New bellarmine thread

    Quote Originally Posted by KnightStalker View Post
    I would just say that according to your facts (BU player tripped up by other UF player, causing contact with Kimbrough) the logical call would have been a no-call and therefore ball out off Findlay player, Bellarmine's ball. Why would the refs contrive a no foul call but give it to the team whose player last touched? In fact who the ball went out on is reviewable (and you know Scotty would be screaming for that!) Good effort at explaining the refs rationale and you are right about one thing, BU fans got a perfectly good reason to complain about that ending.
    Glad you understand that I am not discrediting you all as I would feel same way. That said, looking at replay it looks like BU #11 tripped BU #21, by putting his left foot in front of #21's right foot. When #21 moves toward baseline for rebound his right foot clips #11 causing him to fall forward and into Findlay shooter/rebounder. You have to pause video to see this....if I am seeing it correctly. It was a bang-bang play so I don't know how Ref could have seen it.

  19. Default Re: New bellarmine thread

    My thoughts on the Findlay game: I think we played our guts out against a very talented team and absolutely deserved the win. I do question, however, Scotty’s decisions the last 5 minutes of the game. With a 6pt lead, I do not understand why Weyer was in the game because defense is not his speciality. He hasn’t been on the court during tight games (at the end) the whole season. I know Chitty came in at the very end but needed to be in during that spurt or what about Ramser? We had the lead and needed stops. I love Ben’s 3pt shooting and that sure helped us get to where we were in the region, but not sure why Scotty decided to change things up.

  20. Default

    If Scotty does leave then does His son get a chance? Would be a smooth transition I would think. I’m sure the system wouldn’t change. Seems like a no brainer.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •