Question: Since when can you kick a ball on crossover dribble to make a steal







i questioned this as well. the first one was much more disguised, but the second one was blatantly obvious
 


It's a new NCAA interpretation of the rules designed to attract the eyes of millions of illegal immigrants -- whoops, guess we can't use that phrase now, visitors from other lands -- who prefer sports where you can kick the ball but can't use your hands. Unless, of course, you are a goalie or your name is Maradona or Thierry Henry.
 


It is only a kick if there is intent to strike the ball with any part of your body below the knee. The first one I don't believe there was intent, the second one he definitely placed his leg there to block the path of the ball.
 


Section136 said:
I didnt see much kicking. More like Marble just dribbled it off the Baylor's player feet.
Click to expand...

^^^ That's what I remember seeing, at least on that one in the first half. The Baylor player didn't kick the ball - but rather Marble dribbled it off the opposing player's foot. I don't recall the second occasion.
 


Overall, I thought it was a pretty well officiated game. Sure there were a couple head scratchers, but they were consistent and fair for the most part.
 


j21j42m said:
It is only a kick if there is intent to strike the ball with any part of your body below the knee. The first one I don't believe there was intent, the second one he definitely placed his leg there to block the path of the ball.
Click to expand...

While this is evidently a proper interpretation of this rule, until it happened in a game earlier this year against us I don't recall ever seeing a ball that was kicked by a defender and not having it whistled. It happened in a game earlier this year against us and twice last night. I don't recall EVER seeing it in any game I have ever seen, and I am 47 years old, where a kick by a defender was NOT a violation.

Does anyone else ever recall a defender kicking a ball and not having it be a violation?
 




Glad I wasn't the only one picked up on this. I just couldn't believe neither one of those was called. Difference in the outcome of the game? No, but absolute jokes of missed calls. Definitely made a difference at the time.
 


Thawki said:
While this is evidently a proper interpretation of this rule, until it happened in a game earlier this year against us I don't recall ever seeing a ball that was kicked by a defender and not having it whistled. It happened in a game earlier this year against us and twice last night. I don't recall EVER seeing it in any game I have ever seen, and I am 47 years old, where a kick by a defender was NOT a violation.

Does anyone else ever recall a defender kicking a ball and not having it be a violation?
Click to expand...

I know it's been called on White about 10,000 times this year. Granted he had intent every time but the ones last night also had intent.
 


Thawki said:
While this is evidently a proper interpretation of this rule, until it happened in a game earlier this year against us I don't recall ever seeing a ball that was kicked by a defender and not having it whistled. It happened in a game earlier this year against us and twice last night. I don't recall EVER seeing it in any game I have ever seen, and I am 47 years old, where a kick by a defender was NOT a violation.

Does anyone else ever recall a defender kicking a ball and not having it be a violation?
Click to expand...

Other posters are correct. It's not a "kick" if the offensive player just randomly dribbles or throws the ball off the defensive player's foot. There has to be intent on the part of the defender to hit the ball with his leg/foot.
 


DodgerHawki said:
Other posters are correct. It's not a "kick" if the offensive player just randomly dribbles or throws the ball off the defensive player's foot. There has to be intent on the part of the defender to hit the ball with his leg/foot.
Click to expand...

I think we get that it has to be intentional. If you go back and watch the tape... especially the 2nd one the defender intentionally stuck his foot out to hit the ball therefor making it a kick.
 


Both were kicks...noticed right away. It only works when the refs allow the body checking...really have to get up into someone to get away with it.

I don't blame him. If they aren't going to call it then... Now taking on May late in the game proved to be a bit more contact than his body could tolerate.
 


The fact is that the refs did Not cost us the game last night. The other fact is that college bb officiating is absolutely horrible.
 


Bout as bad as no more T's for doing chin up's on the Rim :) and Baylor did that several times last night to.
 




WindsorHawk said:
Both were kicks...noticed right away. It only works when the refs allow the body checking...really have to get up into someone to get away with it.

I don't blame him. If they aren't going to call it then... Now taking on May late in the game proved to be a bit more contact than his body could tolerate.
Click to expand...

It looked to me, like Baylor watched the Michigan St tape. They knew they could take us out of our game, by being physical.

I maintain that this is more important that having a dead-eye shooter moving forward. We have to get some more physical players. Our guys are "tough", but they're all thin and easily pushed around. If Ingram leaves (as some have suggested might happen) I'd love to see a JUCO banger come in.
 




You must log in or register to reply here.


Latest posts

Share this page






Top