1/6 - MBB vs. Boston College

lv20gt

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,581
I would agree if the decision was the foul was the result of the hook and hold but I thought it was pretty obvious it was foul and then hook and hold. Did you see it differently?

What matters is what was initially called, which I can only speculate on. My guess is they initially called the BC defender for the high contact and that prompted the replay to see if it should be upgraded. During the replay they saw the hook and hold and deemed the high contact was a result of the hook and hold flagrant and so took the common foul off. If that is what happened then it was a correct application of the rules. Kelly clearly had a hold of the defenders arm and was the reason it was up around his neck. IMO he was trying to sell getting hit in the face rather than actually trying to hold it but iiwii.

You could argue there was a shoulder bump prior to the hook and hold. I would be surprised if that was the initial call because it was Kelly going to where the defender was. The thing that hurt Kelly in that respect is that he tried to sell the contact by throwing his head back and it wouldn't surprise me if the refs deemed that to also be when Kelly started hooking the defender's arm when he, meaning Kelly, brought his arms up. Given how the rest of the play happened I doubt the ref was going to give Kelly the benefit of the doubt on the replay. But again, I would be very surprised if that was the initial call.
 

YoungSting

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
297
Terrible idea. It was a clear hook & hold. And I thought the non traveling call that led to the tech was also debatable and, in fact, I was leaning towards the official being right. The officials were actually right significantly more than wrong in this game. The close calls are being exaggerated cause of the frustrations that GT let Bc have the lead at that point.

What does holding officials accountable to you mean? You’ll be surprised that officials are held accountable in many ways. This is not a game to “punish” the refs. They called a good game. I’m sure their bosses will provide info on what they can do better.

One might ask what led to the hook and hold? And then the trap call was terrible when a guy falls down on his own, the ref isn’t even looking and Just falls down. And then gets in their feelings because our coach is there (which he is a calm guy)

I don’t care what side you were on tonight, you will not be able to say with a straight face that the refs did a good job
 

awbuzz

Helluva Manager
Staff member
Messages
12,104
Location
Marietta, GA
What matters is what was initially called, which I can only speculate on. My guess is they initially called the BC defender for the high contact and that prompted the replay to see if it should be upgraded. During the replay they saw the hook and hold and deemed the high contact was a result of the hook and hold flagrant and so took the common foul off. If that is what happened then it was a correct application of the rules. Kelly clearly had a hold of the defenders arm and was the reason it was up around his neck. IMO he was trying to sell getting hit in the face rather than actually trying to hold it but iiwii.

You could argue there was a shoulder bump prior to the hook and hold. I would be surprised if that was the initial call because it was Kelly going to where the defender was. The thing that hurt Kelly in that respect is that he tried to sell the contact by throwing his head back and it wouldn't surprise me if the refs deemed that to also be when Kelly started hooking the defender's arm when he, meaning Kelly, brought his arms up. Given how the rest of the play happened I doubt the ref was going to give Kelly the benefit of the doubt on the replay. But again, I would be very surprised if that was the initial call.
When I saw the reviews, what you described is what I thought I saw, but having already deleted the recording, I couldn't verify.
Thank you for basically verifying what I thought I remembered seeing.
 

YlJacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,260
What matters is what was initially called, which I can only speculate on. My guess is they initially called the BC defender for the high contact and that prompted the replay to see if it should be upgraded. During the replay they saw the hook and hold and deemed the high contact was a result of the hook and hold flagrant and so took the common foul off. If that is what happened then it was a correct application of the rules. Kelly clearly had a hold of the defenders arm and was the reason it was up around his neck. IMO he was trying to sell getting hit in the face rather than actually trying to hold it but iiwii.

You could argue there was a shoulder bump prior to the hook and hold. I would be surprised if that was the initial call because it was Kelly going to where the defender was. The thing that hurt Kelly in that respect is that he tried to sell the contact by throwing his head back and it wouldn't surprise me if the refs deemed that to also be when Kelly started hooking the defender's arm when he, meaning Kelly, brought his arms up. Given how the rest of the play happened I doubt the ref was going to give Kelly the benefit of the doubt on the replay. But again, I would be very surprised if that was the initial call.
What I saw was the defender wrapping his arm around Kelly’s neck and then the hook and hold. That is what PO’d me. Now I agree Kelly oversold his case. He had the call. And the BC guy was asking for a call
 

Tom

Georgia Tech Fan
Messages
30
One might ask what led to the hook and hold? And then the trap call was terrible when a guy falls down on his own, the ref isn’t even looking and Just falls down. And then gets in their feelings because our coach is there (which he is a calm guy)

I don’t care what side you were on tonight, you will not be able to say with a straight face that the refs did a good job
One, I’ve already said that I believed Kelly was fouled before the hook & hold but what what Kelly did was very obvious. I don’t know how NCAA rules handle that situation when one is a common foul and another is a flagrant.

Two, the guy was absolutely bumped into but you can argue that he shuffled his feet before contact.

Three, I wouldn’t say coach was just standing there being calm next to the ref lol That was the most emotion I’ve seen him give yet and I don’t blame him. That was a very frustrating set of sequence that had just happened. (I do think the tech was quick but we don’t know what was said)

The only thing that I thought was an obvious missed call was the foul they called on Ndongo which replay showed was a clear block. However, the other GT player did hit the shooter’s arm during that play so they might’ve saw the contact but got the wrong number. They got it way more right than wrong the whole game.
 

lv20gt

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,581
What I saw was the defender wrapping his arm around Kelly’s neck and then the hook and hold. That is what PO’d me. Now I agree Kelly oversold his case. He had the call. And the BC guy was asking for a call

I would suggest going back and watching the replay then if you haven't. You could argue there was a foul before the high contact, but the contact above the neck was pretty clearly a result of Kelly bringing his arms up, the hooking portion, and then keeping them up as he went past, the hold. IMO Kelly wasn't trying to hook and hold and was trying to sell contact to the face but ended up hooking the arm none the less.
 

SandySpringsJacket

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
259
A lot of discussion about the flagrant foul call. But the real problem was blowing a 16 point second half lead, and it cannot all be attributed it to that. This team can go from very good to very bad and vice versa so quickly. And they never seem to be able to stop the bleeding.

And why did we use all but one time out so early in the second half? We could have used some time outs later when things were falling apart.
 

kg01

Get-Bak! Coach
Featured Member
Messages
15,171
Location
Atlanta
A lot of discussion about the flagrant foul call. But the real problem was blowing a 16 point second half lead, and it cannot all be attributed it to that. This team can go from very good to very bad and vice versa so quickly. And they never seem to be able to stop the bleeding.

And why did we use all but one time out so early in the second half? We could have used some time outs later when things were falling apart.

I assumed we all recognized that as a given.
 

Steverc

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
331
What I saw was Kelley flailing around trying to bait the referees into a call. It seemed equivalent to flopping. Hopefully, he won't try that again.
 

GT33

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,182
I would suggest going back and watching the replay then if you haven't. You could argue there was a foul before the high contact, but the contact above the neck was pretty clearly a result of Kelly bringing his arms up, the hooking portion, and then keeping them up as he went past, the hold. IMO Kelly wasn't trying to hook and hold and was trying to sell contact to the face but ended up hooking the arm none the less.
The original call was that Miles got hit in the face while driving to the basket. The refs went to the monitor and reviewed the game tape. They had to rule there was no initial foul by the BC player prior, no contact with his face. They then ruled there was a clear foul on Miles where he hooked the BC players arm and held it against his neck faking a foul against him. For it to be flagrant they had to rule he did it purposefully to deceive the other ref because to that point no foul could have occurred by rule, and not just Miles trying to embellish contact that had happened to try to draw a foul. It should be pretty clear on the replay, not only that he was purposefully faking a foul but it should be unquestionably clear otherwise you don't overturn the call on the floor. I'm going to find a replay of the game, but I seriously doubt it happened anything like that. If I was given all the time I needed to make a correct call at work that had significant consequences & I blew it there would be consequences for me. These people are going to sleep tonight without a worry in the world because the ACC does not give a crap about GT or BC which is why we got this crew. We have to get better so we're not always stuck with the bottom of the bottom of the barrell.
 

YlJacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,260
I would suggest going back and watching the replay then if you haven't. You could argue there was a foul before the high contact, but the contact above the neck was pretty clearly a result of Kelly bringing his arms up, the hooking portion, and then keeping them up as he went past, the hold. IMO Kelly wasn't trying to hook and hold and was trying to sell contact to the face but ended up hooking the arm none the less.
I did look at the replay. A couple of times. I did not see it that way. I’ll leave it at that
 

lv20gt

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,581
The original call was that Miles got hit in the face while driving to the basket. The refs went to the monitor and reviewed the game tape. They had to rule there was no initial foul by the BC player prior, no contact with his face. They then ruled there was a clear foul on Miles where he hooked the BC players arm and held it against his neck faking a foul against him. For it to be flagrant they had to rule he did it purposefully to deceive the other ref because to that point no foul could have occurred by rule, and not just Miles trying to embellish contact that had happened to try to draw a foul. It should be pretty clear on the replay, not only that he was purposefully faking a foul but it should be unquestionably clear otherwise you don't overturn the call on the floor. I'm going to find a replay of the game, but I seriously doubt it happened anything like that.

They don't have to rule that there was no contact to the face. They have to rule that the contact that was called for the foul was a result of the hook and hold flagrant. That takes the common foul off by rule even if there was contact.

But yes, the replay makes it clear that Kelly was trying to deceive the refs. He threw his head back as if he got hit in the face but the defender's arms were at his side with his hand closer to Kelly's thigh than chin. It wasn't until Kelly raised his arm to sell contact to the face, that the defender's arm raised, and only when Kelly was holding onto the arm as he ran past that the high contact was made between the defender and Kelly at all.

BTW I went back to the replay on watchespn. It's at the ~1:20:15 mark.
 

Techwood Relict

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,419
Sadly, there's a high probability you are correct.

We have basketball Jekyll and Hyde syndrome.

Edit: I wrote the above before reading Techwood Relict's post above.
Jimmy Fallon Twins GIF by The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon
 

reckrider

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
377
Location
Suwanee Georgia
I love our guys. Miles and Kyle gave great answers and are fantastic representatives of GT. I’m on board with Coach but I really didn’t get a warm and fuzzy from him for how this season might work out. Are we already throwing in the towel because he can’t fix things in the limited practices that we have left?
 

g0lftime

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,917
I love our guys. Miles and Kyle gave great answers and are fantastic representatives of GT. I’m on board with Coach but I really didn’t get a warm and fuzzy from him for how this season might work out. Are we already throwing in the towel because he can’t fix things in the limited practices that we have left?
How about working on free throw shooting and in bound plays?
 
Top