3/9 8PM Wheelersburg (24-0) v Alexander (17-7)

[Crab's Brother]

As far as the game goes....Tanner Holden is so good. He is a great player. His supporting cast is very average. He makes them all so much better which is the sign of a great player. Miller was fantastic on defense. McCorkle was a difference maker.

Wheelersburg has a couple of several liabilities on defense. They have guards that have played a lot of basketball that flat out cannot guard the straight line drive. Wheelersburg's best line up is the 3 sophomores, Tanner, and whoever can make a spot up jump shot that night. That lineup gives them a chance.

[Ed Ott]

Wow I thought everything that happened in the southeast district was common definite known knowledge by every team in the southeast district. I heard about holden wearing his wsu warm up before oak hill game all the way up here in Chillicothe, didn’t care but heard it. Kids went undefeated good for them. Let them enjoy it

[wobycat]

The intentional foul call was absolutely the correct call. Intentional fouls are not just based on "intent". They are also used for excessive and dangerous contact.

Holden did not intentionally foul Terry that hard in my opinion. But the contact was excessive so the call was made correctly.

Neither one of the below happened on that particular play. You could make a slight argument for "d." but anyone with sound judgement would know that he came down in regards to protect himself which should never be held as excessive unless you see that he's trying to throw in a cheap shot, which in this scenario didn't happen. If that's the case, there were two incidents prior to that when an Alexander player pulled a couple of burg players to the floor that could've been considered a lot more excessive. Late in the game, an alexander player was attempting a foul to stop the game, and he literally pulled the jersey of the player in front of the burg bench. Ater kept his cool but he had every right to lose it.

ART. 3

An intentional foul is a personal or technical foul that may or may not be premeditated and is not based solely on the severity of the act. Intentional fouls include, but are not limited to:

a. Contact that neutralizes an opponent's obvious advantageous position.

b. Contact away from the ball with an opponent who is clearly not involved with a play.

c. Contact that is not a legitimate attempt to play the ball/player specifically designed to stop the clock or keep it from starting.

d. Excessive contact with an opponent while the ball is live or until an airborne shooter returns to the floor.

e. Contact with a thrower-in as in 9-2-10 Penalty 4.

[greygoose]

I'm confused! You said it was the right call but then you go and say Holden was trying to brace his foul, so what makes that an intentional foul???

There are intentional fouls in the last few seconds that are way worse than that play. I've seen players grab another player from behind by the jersey to stop the clock. That is an intentional foul but it never gets called.

Watching the video of it Holden could have gotten hurt bad if he had not of grabbed Terry

Yes it was the correct call it was intentional but you said what maybe I didn't do a good job of explaining, I think he done it to avoid possible injury. He was in a really awkward position as he was going down,so he just reached out and grabbed the guys shoulders as he was going down. This slowed down his momentum and sort of turned him to land flat. I don't think it was intentionally trying to foul but more of a defensive move from possibly injury. Hope that makes sense, I didn't mind him take that foil just because it probably keep from injury. It's an intentional foul when you reach out, intentionally and pull the guy down from the shoulder area, both shoulders mind you, which is what he did. Neither guy got hurt and big man hit both free throws. The way he was positioned I was sitting there thinking no no, because he was going to hit at a bad angle.

Makes sense but what do you think about when a defender grabs the person with the ball from behind trying to stop the clock but is nowhere near the ball?

You meaning to just send them to the line?? Something ticky tack as just grabbing a jersey they're not going to call an intentional.

[greygoose]

Better question.. who took the picture and uploaded It here. I get it. It’s cocky but honestly who cares? I’m sure they were made specifically for their undefeated regular season.

They said who uploaded it. Regular season is just a warm up for what really matters honestly, if you win your conference great, but everyone pays attention to tourney time.

Ok then the question would be why? Someone took a photo of the team on the way out. I doubt it was a coach. The intentional foul was horrendous. Beyond bad. Holden did not intentionally go into the air just so he could grab the other player for fear of hitting the floor. This was a common foul.

Oh I completely agree with you that he wasn't trying to hurt the player he was simply avoiding a rather awkward fall he was going to take. However, the boy was getting ready to go back up and Tanner grabbed his shoulders yanking him back downward thus making it the proper call as it was excessive. I don't think the refs can say he done because of ...... they have to view it as he grabbed the young man pulling him downward and backwards as well and done it up high.

[wobycat]

They said who uploaded it. Regular season is just a warm up for what really matters honestly, if you win your conference great, but everyone pays attention to tourney time.

Ok then the question would be why? Someone took a photo of the team on the way out. I doubt it was a coach. The intentional foul was horrendous. Beyond bad. Holden did not intentionally go into the air just so he could grab the other player for fear of hitting the floor. This was a common foul.

Oh I completely agree with you that he wasn't trying to hurt the player he was simply avoiding a rather awkward fall he was going to take. However, the boy was getting ready to go back up and Tanner grabbed his shoulders yanking him back downward thus making it the proper call as it was excessive. I don't think the refs can say he done because of ...... they have to view it as he grabbed the young man pulling him downward and backwards as well and done it up high.

Put it this way, Can anyone recall an incident where an offensive player has shot faked a defender causing him to leave his feet, then go back straight up drawing contact, that resulted in an intentional at any level? I can't.

I have seen plenty of those plays that resulted in common fouls leading to foul shots and I have watched a lot of basketball.

The problem was Holden and Terry play above the rim. Tanner coming down from a jump is going to look different than you or I. I do not agree with the call.

[wobycat]

Yes it was the correct call it was intentional but you said what maybe I didn't do a good job of explaining, I think he done it to avoid possible injury. He was in a really awkward position as he was going down,so he just reached out and grabbed the guys shoulders as he was going down. This slowed down his momentum and sort of turned him to land flat. I don't think it was intentionally trying to foul but more of a defensive move from possibly injury. Hope that makes sense, I didn't mind him take that foil just because it probably keep from injury. It's an intentional foul when you reach out, intentionally and pull the guy down from the shoulder area, both shoulders mind you, which is what he did. Neither guy got hurt and big man hit both free throws. The way he was positioned I was sitting there thinking no no, because he was going to hit at a bad angle.

Makes sense but what do you think about when a defender grabs the person with the ball from behind trying to stop the clock but is nowhere near the ball?

You meaning to just send them to the line?? Something ticky tack as just grabbing a jersey they're not going to call an intentional.

c. Contact that is not a legitimate attempt to play the ball/player specifically designed to stop the clock or keep it from starting.

I agree they aren't going to call that but it truly is a violation of the rule and they already opened up that can of worms with Holden earlier. If they believed his was, then that play was definitely intentional.

[Crab's Brother]

The intentional foul call was absolutely the correct call. Intentional fouls are not just based on "intent". They are also used for excessive and dangerous contact.

Holden did not intentionally foul Terry that hard in my opinion. But the contact was excessive so the call was made correctly.

Neither one of the below happened on that particular play. You could make a slight argument for "d." but anyone with sound judgement would know that he came down in regards to protect himself which should never be held as excessive unless you see that he's trying to throw in a cheap shot, which in this scenario didn't happen. If that's the case, there were two incidents prior to that when an Alexander player pulled a couple of burg players to the floor that could've been considered a lot more excessive. Late in the game, an alexander player was attempting a foul to stop the game, and he literally pulled the jersey of the player in front of the burg bench. Ater kept his cool but he had every right to lose it.

ART. 3

An intentional foul is a personal or technical foul that may or may not be premeditated and is not based solely on the severity of the act. Intentional fouls include, but are not limited to:

a. Contact that neutralizes an opponent's obvious advantageous position.

b. Contact away from the ball with an opponent who is clearly not involved with a play.

c. Contact that is not a legitimate attempt to play the ball/player specifically designed to stop the clock or keep it from starting.

d. Excessive contact with an opponent while the ball is live or until an airborne shooter returns to the floor.

e. Contact with a thrower-in as in 9-2-10 Penalty 4.

No.

The case was already made. In the officials eyes the contact was excessive. End of story. Disagree if you want but that was the call.

$60 and a ton of your free time and you can be the one to make the calls starting next season!

[greygoose]

Ok then the question would be why? Someone took a photo of the team on the way out. I doubt it was a coach. The intentional foul was horrendous. Beyond bad. Holden did not intentionally go into the air just so he could grab the other player for fear of hitting the floor. This was a common foul.

Oh I completely agree with you that he wasn't trying to hurt the player he was simply avoiding a rather awkward fall he was going to take. However, the boy was getting ready to go back up and Tanner grabbed his shoulders yanking him back downward thus making it the proper call as it was excessive. I don't think the refs can say he done because of ...... they have to view it as he grabbed the young man pulling him downward and backwards as well and done it up high.

Put it this way, Can anyone recall an incident where an offensive player has shot faked a defender causing him to leave his feet, then go back straight up drawing contact, that resulted in an intentional at any level? I can't.

I have seen plenty of those plays that resulted in common fouls leading to foul shots and I have watched a lot of basketball.

The problem was Holden and Terry play above the rim. Tanner coming down from a jump is going to look different than you or I. I do not agree with the call.

No I can't either but at the same time, I don't recall a play where the player was coming down and grabbed the offensive player by the shoulders as he was coming down pulling him or preventing him from going back up. I seen a game earlier this year where the offensive player made that fake and got low, defensive guy was at an angle and jump and literally kicked the offensive player in the head and they didn't call it. It's all a mute point as Burg went on to win and now face a good Sandy Valley team, I was just happy did grab the kid because where I was sitting I thought for sure he had a real shot at an injury type of fall especially with big man getting ready to go back up.

[art_vandelay]

Seeing it live, I thought it was correct call. I get the argument that Holden was trying to hold on for his own safety, but when he dragged Terry down to the floor with him, it had to be called. Agreed with greygoose though that regardless of result, it was worth it to Burg as Holden could've been seriously injured had he not grabbed on to Terry (think Blevins against Waverly early in season coming down from high in air for rebound and getting injured when he hit the floor).*

[wobycat]

The intentional foul call was absolutely the correct call. Intentional fouls are not just based on "intent". They are also used for excessive and dangerous contact.

Holden did not intentionally foul Terry that hard in my opinion. But the contact was excessive so the call was made correctly.

Neither one of the below happened on that particular play. You could make a slight argument for "d." but anyone with sound judgement would know that he came down in regards to protect himself which should never be held as excessive unless you see that he's trying to throw in a cheap shot, which in this scenario didn't happen. If that's the case, there were two incidents prior to that when an Alexander player pulled a couple of burg players to the floor that could've been considered a lot more excessive. Late in the game, an alexander player was attempting a foul to stop the game, and he literally pulled the jersey of the player in front of the burg bench. Ater kept his cool but he had every right to lose it.

ART. 3

An intentional foul is a personal or technical foul that may or may not be premeditated and is not based solely on the severity of the act. Intentional fouls include, but are not limited to:

a. Contact that neutralizes an opponent's obvious advantageous position.

b. Contact away from the ball with an opponent who is clearly not involved with a play.

c. Contact that is not a legitimate attempt to play the ball/player specifically designed to stop the clock or keep it from starting.

d. Excessive contact with an opponent while the ball is live or until an airborne shooter returns to the floor.

e. Contact with a thrower-in as in 9-2-10 Penalty 4.

No.

The case was already made. In the officials eyes the contact was excessive. End of story. Disagree if you want but that was the call.

$60 and a ton of your free time and you can be the one to make the calls starting next season!

I used to officiate and I completely disagree with the call.

[Gold Blood]

Wow. Wheelersburg really put it to the Spartans (hard). What a whooping

[Crab's Brother]

Neither one of the below happened on that particular play. You could make a slight argument for "d." but anyone with sound judgement would know that he came down in regards to protect himself which should never be held as excessive unless you see that he's trying to throw in a cheap shot, which in this scenario didn't happen. If that's the case, there were two incidents prior to that when an Alexander player pulled a couple of burg players to the floor that could've been considered a lot more excessive. Late in the game, an alexander player was attempting a foul to stop the game, and he literally pulled the jersey of the player in front of the burg bench. Ater kept his cool but he had every right to lose it.

ART. 3

An intentional foul is a personal or technical foul that may or may not be premeditated and is not based solely on the severity of the act. Intentional fouls include, but are not limited to:

a. Contact that neutralizes an opponent's obvious advantageous position.

b. Contact away from the ball with an opponent who is clearly not involved with a play.

c. Contact that is not a legitimate attempt to play the ball/player specifically designed to stop the clock or keep it from starting.

d. Excessive contact with an opponent while the ball is live or until an airborne shooter returns to the floor.

e. Contact with a thrower-in as in 9-2-10 Penalty 4.

No.

The case was already made. In the officials eyes the contact was excessive. End of story. Disagree if you want but that was the call.

$60 and a ton of your free time and you can be the one to make the calls starting next season!

I used to officiate and I completely disagree with the call.

The official that made the call is still officiating. So the call was his to make. You can disagree all you want. He called it excessive contact and that is part of the rule.

[wobycat]

You’re right his call. My call to disagree and I’d bet money he’s never called an intentional on a defender coming down on a shooter after a shot fake. I’d even bet money that the other two ever have either.

[AnkleBraces]

I took the pic on my way up the stairs during semi-finals in case Alex & Burg both won. I shared on it Facebook in a closed group for Athens county sports. It was posted in good fun, so relax.

I did not share it on peeps, somebody else did.

The intentional foul was called by a ref who has been officiating since the early 90's. He was 5 feet away, I'm sure he had the best look at what happened.

make up call? same ref T'd up Alex player and coach last year in district semifinal

[markymark1969]

As far as the intentional foul call, I can see it from the officials point of view, don't agree with it, but I can his point of view. Thought they should have called one on the take down of Holden in the first quarter by Markins. They're probably weren't any better wrestling moves at the state tournament than that one. It was certainly worse than what Holden did in my estimation.

[yabbadabbadoo]

First it was the picture of the warmup jersey’s worn by Burg that said undefeated. Then the deal where Holden wore the Wright St warmup during the pregame warmups gets brought back up.

Friggin’ pathetic!!

Don’t worry everyone. Holden’s HS Career will come to an end either this week or next and then you all can leave him alone. It’s going to be a sad day in Burg as he is by far the greatest athlete that I’ve ever watched in my 40+ years of watching Burg sports. I like how you all say this coach or that coach would not have let Tanner wear that but why do you care. How many kids from around here have even went on to play DIV 1 basketball? He had just signed that week so can’t he just be proud of that for one brief moment!!!

[scott1297]

First it was the picture of the warmup jersey’s worn by Burg that said undefeated. Then the deal where Holden wore the Wright St warmup during the pregame warmups gets brought back up.

Friggin’ pathetic!!

Don’t worry everyone. Holden’s HS Career will come to an end either this week or next and then you all can leave him alone. It’s going to be a sad day in Burg as he is by far the greatest athlete that I’ve ever watched in my 40+ years of watching Burg sports. I like how you all say this coach or that coach would not have let Tanner wear that but why do you care. How many kids from around here have even went on to play DIV 1 basketball? He had just signed that week so can’t he just be proud of that for one brief moment!!!

Totally agree! Amen brother!

[Sport Fan]

The intentional foul call was absolutely the correct call. Intentional fouls are not just based on "intent". They are also used for excessive and dangerous contact.

Holden did not intentionally foul Terry that hard in my opinion. But the contact was excessive so the call was made correctly.

Neither one of the below happened on that particular play. You could make a slight argument for "d." but anyone with sound judgement would know that he came down in regards to protect himself which should never be held as excessive unless you see that he's trying to throw in a cheap shot, which in this scenario didn't happen. If that's the case, there were two incidents prior to that when an Alexander player pulled a couple of burg players to the floor that could've been considered a lot more excessive. Late in the game, an alexander player was attempting a foul to stop the game, and he literally pulled the jersey of the player in front of the burg bench. Ater kept his cool but he had every right to lose it.

ART. 3

An intentional foul is a personal or technical foul that may or may not be premeditated and is not based solely on the severity of the act. Intentional fouls include, but are not limited to:

a. Contact that neutralizes an opponent's obvious advantageous position.

b. Contact away from the ball with an opponent who is clearly not involved with a play.

c. Contact that is not a legitimate attempt to play the ball/player specifically designed to stop the clock or keep it from starting.

d. Excessive contact with an opponent while the ball is live or until an airborne shooter returns to the floor.

e. Contact with a thrower-in as in 9-2-10 Penalty 4.

No.

The case was already made. In the officials eyes the contact was excessive. End of story. Disagree if you want but that was the call.

$60 and a ton of your free time and you can be the one to make the calls starting next season!

it appears that you can take some of your own advice . LOL I talked with the ref that made the call and he admitted that it was the wrong call, so now what? That is a part of the game period. No ref will be perfect, that is why you have to respond , and I believe that is what the Burg team did

[123xxx]

End this thread, not becoming of anyone.