Guest Rob Marshall Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 That "win" should be an embarrassment to the team the fans and the school. Oh, yeah, and OUR CONFERENCE. I'm ashamed that that's the best we can get from our conference. Kind of like being an Oregon Ducks football fan, eh? Or an OU Sooner basketball fan a few years ago when the clock operator "assisted" in the Sooners having enough time on the clock to make a final shot "before the horn" but after actual time expired against Texas Tech. As long as there is a human element involved, there will be imperfect outcomes. The kid from Oakland still had to make both FTs and he did. Talk about pressure to convert from thespian to Steve Bontrager at the line all within 30 seconds ... that shows a terrific diversity in abilities for that kid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stl VU Fan Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 I seem to recall hearing the name Bart Lajenki(sp?), another favorite official of ours, as popular as JD I'm glad I read this thread. I didn't pick up on the fact that the the foul was "running over" a player who was already in bounds. I was still trying to figure out how the guy with the ball out of bounds could have been fouled if no time went off the clock. Unless you are saying, Rob, that they should not have guarding in the backcourt at all, I don't see how this foul could have avoided simply by being careful. If I'm getting it right, I would think the lesson here is rather that there should have been another Golden Eagle in the backcourt calling the screen. Of course, I'm not saying that the call was a good one, since as has been pointed out, the game is not on TV anywhere. Good thing this game had no bearing on next weekend Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rob Marshall Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 I'm glad I read this thread. I didn't pick up on the fact that the the foul was "running over" a player who was already in bounds. I was still trying to figure out how the guy with the ball out of bounds could have been fouled if no time went off the clock. Unless you are saying, Rob, that they should not have guarding in the backcourt at all, I don't see how this foul could have avoided simply by being careful. STL, the ORU player was guarding the inbounds passer; when the OU player ran the base line "leading" ORU's player into the "foul trap" ... my point is this, tell the kid, "Look King, you're guarding the man throwing the ball in. IF he proceeds to "run the baseline" LET HIM GO AND DO NOT FOLLOW!!! ... that would be a sure sign of a "foul trap" coming." In other words, NO advantage is gained by Oakland to run the baseline UNLESS they are setting up THE ONLY PLAY THEY CAN THAT WILL GIVE THE BEST OPPORTUNITY TO WIN THE GAME ... which Oakland did, and I'm sure they baited the official by telling him what they were going to do and to watch for it SO THE REF ANTICIPATED THE CALL. If ORU lets the Oakland player run free on the baseline and doesn't follow him, what do they lose? Easy to say now, but it's certainly not the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORUTerry Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 According to Steve Neely (announcer) and Scott Sutton, the 'foul' never occured. Kangas flopped without being touched - or at least barely a touch. If that is true then the call should not have been made. No way a referee allows a flop to decide the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stl VU Fan Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 STL, the ORU player was guarding the inbounds passer; when the OU player ran the base line "leading" ORU's player into the "foul trap" ... my point is this, tell the kid, "Look King, you're guarding the man throwing the ball in. IF he proceeds to "run the baseline" LET HIM GO AND DO NOT FOLLOW!!! ... that would be a sure sign of a "foul trap" coming." Gotcha. One might ask why bother even guarding the inbounds passer if that is what you are afraid of. Of course, you want to guard it just to avoid some kind of lucky down court pass and tip. Tough situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stl VU Fan Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 According to Steve Neely (announcer) and Scott Sutton, the 'foul' never occured. Kangas flopped without being touched - or at least barely a touch. If that is true then the call should not have been made. No way a referee allows a flop to decide the game. Agreed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmh8286 Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 Terry's right. Scott said that in the time out they told Shawn NOT to follow the inbounding player six or seven times, and he still did it. I suppose the better option would have been to pull Shawn off completely and have him in the back court with the other players. That way there's no temptation to follow the player he was guarding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rob Marshall Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 According to Steve Neely (announcer) and Scott Sutton, the 'foul' never occurred. Kangas flopped without being touched - or at least barely a touch. If that is true then the call should not have been made. No way a referee allows a flop to decide the game. Unfortunately, Terry, the referee JUST did. I'm telling you, great coaching by Kampe as I'm 200% sure he pulled the official's coat to look for it and he got the call ... "air" flop, "minor contact" flop or whatever kind of flop, it got the call. THEN, Kangas STILL had to make BOTH FTs. To me, IF I were Scott Sutton I would have been going nuts over the "let's review the replay" thing to put more time on the clock. That same thing happened to Missouri State in a last second loss at St. Louis University back in December. MSU got hosed by a GOOD officiating crew "reviewing" a replay on a nonofficial camera that did NOT show an accurate clock count. ESPN did a story on that and IF MSU's bubble bursts again this season that "loss" will be pointed to as one that might have gotten them in had they "won." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmh8286 Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 Kind of like being an Oregon Ducks football fan, eh? Or an OU Sooner basketball fan a few years ago when the clock operator "assisted" in the Sooners having enough time on the clock to make a final shot "before the horn" but after actual time expired against Texas Tech. I was actually thinking of the OU/Oregon comparison myself, Rob! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORUTerry Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 Sorry, I meant to say: No way a quality referee allows a flop to decide the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rob Marshall Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 Terry's right. Scott said that in the time out they told Shawn NOT to follow the inbounding player six or seven times, and he still did it. I suppose the better option would have been to pull Shawn off completely and have him in the back court with the other players. That way there's no temptation to follow the player he was guarding. I was listening to the post-game and I missed Scott saying they did that. I heard him say King was told to "watch out for (that)" but did not hear Scott say King was told six or seven times NOT to follow him. Again as I've always said, that's what's frustrating about 18, 19, and 20 year old kids running around on a basketball court with the coaches' paychecks in their mouths. Coaches can instruct players but when they do not execute, what do you do? I didn't think I heard Scott call King out like that on the post-game show, that would surprise me if Scott did that. A coach can say things like, "well we got killed on the boards" or "we have to make our FTs" or "we have to do a better job of getting the ball inside" or whatever in terms of "team opportunities" to explain a loss, but typically coaches don't call out individual players. What I heard Scott say was short of calling out King, but if he said what was suggested above then that's something different. I really don't think Scott did that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rob Marshall Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 Sorry, I meant to say: No way a quality referee allows a flop to decide the game. Gotcha! Clutch job at the FT line though by Kangas to make both so can we agree the referee "improved" Oakland's prospects of winning the game rather than the official himself deciding the outcome? ... Kangas shooting two (2) or .4 seconds to toss the ball the length of the court, catch and make a shot, which sounds like something worth betting on? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORUJason Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 I have no problem with Scott saying that. We have moaned about Scott being outcoached in 2 recent losses, and I was glad he said that so that I knew that the coaches were doing the right thing, even if the players didn't. He didn't say that Shawn blew it, or anything like that, he just basically said, you tell the players several times not to do something, and then they go and do it. He was frustrated, just like we are. Now our RPI will drop, and I doubt highly that any selection committee member will actually know what happened at the end of this game, so it will just look like a loss, and if we are fortunate enough to make the NCAA tournament, it is probably the difference between a 14 seed and a 15 seed. And this year that is a big difference in my opinion. What this game tells me is that ORU still does not carry a lot of "clout" with the Mid-Con. The refs did almost everything they could to give Oakland the win. At this point, with Valpo leaving, ORU is the most successful athletic program in the 2 most high profile men's sports over the last few years (basketball and baseball), but they still treat us like we just entered the league. I guarantee you that if this game was Valpo vs. Oakland, and Valpo was not leaving to go to the Horizon conference, then that call would NEVER have been called against Valpo, and Valpo would get the win. It is an embarrassment to the head of referees, and the ref who made that call, and kept overruling calls throughout the game, should never ref in the Mid-Con again. I certainly hope that ORU has enough pull to ensure that he does NOT ref in the Mid-Con tournament. He clearly has an anti-ORU agenda, and it showed! In case you hadn't noticed, I feel strongly about this, and I'm sure Scott Sutton and Mike Carter do as well........ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OKC Eagle Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 I'm glad I missed the game. I was fuming over the horrible officiating at the Utah State game and no one mentioned it on here. To have ORUTerry and TMH this upset, the situation probably would have popped blood vessels in my head. I would be as much upset about the 25 fouls called against us. Why do MidCon officials feel like they have to blow the whistle every possession of the second half. It always seems like new refs come out after halftime who call fouls for sneezing on someone. This was a big problem for us against Utah State. Those refs swallowed their whistles and the MidCon has conditioned us to have no idea how to play that way. MidCon officiating does no favors to MidCon teams playing in the post season because the officiating will make it seem like a different game with different rules. Too bad we can't follow Valpo and get out of Dodge. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Minyard Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 Steve Neely (announcer) Mark Neely Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORUTerry Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 Can't wait to see the box score.... didn't Neely say that Green did not go to the line until about 10 minutes left in the game? I may be wrong on the time and/or the times he went to the line. Wish we had a play-by-play. Will be interesting to hear what the Maniacs have to say about the game. Bottom line is that we need to concentrate on the next three games. Revenge is a dish best served cold..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmh8286 Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 Stats are up on the Mid-Con web site here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORUTerry Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 Sorry.... morphed Mark Neely and Steve Cooper into Steve Neely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.