Outrageous Injustice: Penn State Lacrosse Robbed of Championship Dream by NCAA Refs (article link attached)

[CJFisJoePaII]

Here is THE LINK.

The absolute most ludicrous thing about this situation is that Crease, and other shot violations, are Replay Reviewable under the NCAA's Women's Lacrosse Replay Rules for the Women's NCAA Championship.

Here's THE LINK. And here is the specific citation as to it being reviewable - see bolded scenario below: as excerpted directly from NCAA Rulebook.

Video reviews will be allowed in the following scenarios:​

• To correct the game clock and/or possession clock when there is a malfunction or timing error. This review would be at the request and discretion of the head official.
• To determine when the release of a shot at the end of a possession, quarter or overtime period occurred in relation to the expiration of time for the game clock and/or the possession clock. This review would be at the request and discretion of the head official.
• To determine whether the ball deflects off a player of the attacking team. This review would be at the request and discretion of the head official.
• To determine whether the whole ball crossed the goal line. This review would be at the request and discretion of the head official, head coach or any player on the field of play at the time of the shot.
• To determine whether the player shooting has stepped on or into the goal circle, or any other player of the attacking team has entered the goal circle, and if so, if the act of stepping onto or into the goal circle was the result of a foul. This review would only be in response to a goal or no-goal signal and at the request and discretion of the head official, head coach or any player on the field of play at the time of the shot.

 

[republion]

How many threads are you going to start? Hell, even the team is over it by now.

 

[CJFisJoePaII]

How many threads are you going to start? Hell, even the team is over it by now.

I've only started two threads on the topic a-hole. And I've only started one thread that points out the utterly absurd NCAA Rules Committee has two different Replay Review Rules for Men's and Women's Lacrosse as to whether a potentially ILLEGAL GOAL (let alone an ILLEGAL GAME WINNING GOAL) can be reviewed. That makes zero sense and reflects horrendously on the NCAA as an organization.

 

[knickslions]

I didn’t know this was a lacrosse board 4 threads on same thing

 

[CJFisJoePaII]

I didn’t know this was a lacrosse board 4 threads on same thing

I didn't know that you controlled what can and can't be talked about on this PSU Athletics Board??? By the way, one of the threads you reference is titled: "Men's Lacrosse VS Duke in the Final Four TOMORROW", so how precisely is that the same topic???

 

[Psugo823]

How many threads are you going to start? Hell, even the team is over it by now.

Team probably isn't over it. It's all over sports news and yeah it was awful.

 

[republion]

I've only started two threads on the topic a-hole. And I've only started one thread that points out the utterly absurd NCAA Rules Committee has two different Replay Review Rules for Men's and Women's Lacrosse as to whether a potentially ILLEGAL GOAL (let alone an ILLEGAL GAME WINNING GOAL) can be reviewed. That makes zero sense and reflects horrendously on the NCAA as an organization.

Alrighty then.

 

[LMTLION]

You wonder sometimes much of this kind of thing is incompetence and how much of it is intentional.

 

[Erial_Lion]

You wonder sometimes much of this kind of thing is incompetence and how much of it is intentional.

Maybe you do…nothing about yesterday seemed “incompetent” or “intentional” to me…just a rough call in a key moment that unfortunately couldn’t use replay to correct. Unless you think men’s lacrosse didn’t put replay review into their rules simply in the hopes of screwing PSU some day.

 

[NewEra 2014]

Maybe you do…nothing about yesterday seemed “incompetent” or “intentional” to me…just a rough call in a key moment that unfortunately couldn’t use replay to correct. Unless you think men’s lacrosse didn’t put replay review into their rules simply in the hopes of screwing PSU some day.

Agreed. I like to criticize referees and the corruption of the Big Ten and the NCAA as much as anyone. But when I saw that play live, it was not obvious that the Duke player was in the crease. It was only after it was shown on replay that the crease violation was obvious.

There are three things to blame for the loss that occurred in the final minutes: 1) the asinine rule that a crease violation cannot be reviewed by replay; 2) Penn State being offsides near the end of the fourth quarter, when every possession near the end of the game is critical; and 3) not getting a shot off when being a man up at the end of regulation.

Penn State needed to do more to take that game from Duke. They had a decent chance of doing so, but they didn't quite have enough at the end.

 

[CJFisJoePaII]

Here is an article from a National unbiased Lacrosse Magazine: HIT THIS LINK.

This excerpt from the article supports my contention that PSU's Defense immediately began pointing to the exact spot of the Crease Violation to the Official directly behind the play who was running past them into the goal mouth (and confidently, and arrogantly, ignoring them shaking his head "no"). As the article points out, PSU Short-Stick Midfield Defender Grant Haus (and his teammates - he was not the only one pointing and yelling at Officials) was absolutely right and the Official absolutely wrong:

Leadmon would put the ball in the back of the cage, the officials signaled good goal, and the Blue Devils bench came roaring off the sideline in celebration. Upon the ball bouncing in Grant Haus pointed at the crease, arguing that Leadmon’s foot had stepped over the line. The replay would prove the Penn State SSDM (Short-Stick Defensive Midfielder) right. Leadmon’s foot was indeed on the line and it should have been a no goal call.

All of PSU's player's around the goal mouth began pointing and yelling at the Official running into goal-mouth from directly behind play pointing out that the Goal Circle had been clearly violated - the Official had a clear view of the shooter's feet from directly behind the play and was running in directly toward the goal-mouth; this notion that the Official could not see a foot completely severing a bright-white Goal Circle line because of a "shadow" is ridiculous (a shadow does not make a bright-white line being completely severed by a foot "unseeable" - that's laughable nonsense, it doesn't change the color of a bright-white line or the ability to see that the line is disappearing under a foot).

The more plausible explanation is that the off Official (backside Official to play) was not looking at the shooter's feet as he is supposed to, but instead looking for an "inner circle" violation (which is the other Official's Job) - when NCAA Lacrosse created the "Dive Rule" several years ago, they created an Inner and Outer Circle, such that a player can "Dive" into the Goal Mouth (as the Duke Shooter did on this play) as long as two conditions are met: i) The shooter does not Violate the outer circle, including the Circle Line, with his feet (i.e., his plant foot/feet must be completely outside Outer Circle Line when Shooter initiates his "Dive"), AND ii) No part of the Shooter's body lands or Violates the Inner Circle Line upon landing. Prior to "Dive Rule" there was only one Circle and you could not violate the Circle period - with feet or diving into Crease.

Again, the most plausible explanation here is that the Official simply blew the call via poor mechanics by anticipating the dive, taking his eyes off the shooter's feet and focusing on whether any part of the shooter's body violates the Inner Circle on landing.

 

[CJFisJoePaII]

Agreed. I like to criticize referees and the corruption of the Big Ten and the NCAA as much as anyone. But when I saw that play live, it was not obvious that the Duke player was in the crease. It was only after it was shown on replay that the crease violation was obvious.

There are three things to blame for the loss that occurred in the final minutes: 1) the asinine rule that a crease violation cannot be reviewed by replay; 2) Penn State being offsides near the end of the fourth quarter, when every possession near the end of the game is critical; and 3) not getting a shot off when being a man up at the end of regulation.

Penn State needed to do more to take that game from Duke. They had a decent chance of doing so, but they didn't quite have enough at the end.

Sorry, but the NCAA looks incompetent when the NCAA Men's and Women's Replay Review Rule essentially reads identical except for this last "reviewable scenario" in the Women's Rulebook which is not in the Men's Replay Review Rule:

• To determine whether the player shooting has stepped on or into the goal circle, or any other player of the attacking team has entered the goal circle, and if so, if the act of stepping onto or into the goal circle was the result of a foul. This review would only be in response to a goal or no-goal signal and at the request and discretion of the head official, head coach or any player on the field of play at the time of the shot.

Ludicrous that the NCAA "Rules Committee" can understand the appropriateness of this rule in terms of integrity, and fairness, of the game for student-athletes in regards to the Women's Rulebook, but didn't understand it for the Men's Rulebook.... - sorry, but there is a complete and utter logical fail in your position. The NCAA Rules Committee looks like the incompetent assholes they are - utterly embarrassing, which is sadly typical for the NCAA as an organization in general.

 

[CJFisJoePaII]

You wonder sometimes much of this kind of thing is incompetence and how much of it is intentional.

Would say this demonstrates incompetence on the part of both the Official and the NCAA. The Official via poor mechanics and the NCAA via a complete incompetence by their "Rules Committee" that could create identical Replay Rules for the Men's and Women's Games but for the most important, and fundamental, rationale for even having a replay rule: the scenario of overturning CLEARLY incorrect "Goal or No-Goal" calls by the Officials - especially in OT as the NCAA OT rule is first "LEGAL GOAL" scored ends game. So somehow the NCAA Rules Committee understood the importance of this most basic, and fundamental, reasons to have a Replay Rule in the Women's Rulebook, but not the Men's Rulebook..... and that complete and utter logical fail, and absurd inconsistency, is not clear evidence of the NCAA's legendary incompetence as an organization???

 

[LandoComando]

Team probably isn't over it. It's all over sports news and yeah it was awful.

All over is an exaggeration...no one will mention it as of Monday. It sucks but calls are missed and it's not reviewable. Had chances to win prior to that.

 

[CJFisJoePaII]

Directly excepted from THIS ARTICLE :

The call was so egregious that the NCAA blocked replies to the account’s tweet announcing the final score.

LMAO, fairly typical of the corrupt, incompetent NCAA - let's just use censorship rather than be accountable for our failures.... pathetic.

 

[LandoComando]

Directly excepted from THIS ARTICLE :



LMAO, fairly typical of the corrupt, incompetent NCAA - let's just use censorship rather than be accountable for our failures.... pathetic.

The quote is inaccurate. The overreaction of some lead them to prevent replies. There's a correct way to hold them accountable and have changes made moving forward. Crazy fans ranting on social media isn't the way to do that.

 

[CJFisJoePaII]

The quote is inaccurate. The overreaction of some lead them to prevent replies. There's a correct way to hold them accountable and have changes made moving forward. Crazy fans ranting on social media isn't the way to do that.

The quote isn't inaccurate dipshit - the NCAA absolutely did engage in censorship and prevented replies to their tweet. Censorship and shutting down comment is the diametric opposite of accountability dumbass.

 

[Erial_Lion]

“Censorship”…lol. Our founding fathers must be rolling over in their graves for this injustice to society.

 

[LandoComando]

The quote isn't inaccurate dipshit - the NCAA absolutely did engage in censorship and prevented replies to their tweet. Censorship and shutting down comment is the diametric opposite of accountability dumbass.

Read the post again then read my comment again then if you can't comprehend it....actually you still won't. Go with God.

 

[CJFisJoePaII]

Read the post again then read my comment again then if you can't comprehend it....actually you still won't. Go with God.

You're such a moron - you talking about "comprehension" is comedy show material. I put a quote excerpted directly from the article I referenced - you then posted the following in response:

The quote is inaccurate. The overreaction of some lead them to prevent replies. There's a correct way to hold them accountable and have changes made moving forward. Crazy fans ranting on social media isn't the way to do that.

The quote is absolutely "accurate" - excepted word-for-word from THIS ARTICLE which I referenced and linked in my post you responded to....

100% accurate directly word-for-word from article I referenced.... as in the diametric opposite of the word you used, "inaccurate", you insufferably stupid idiot that uses terms like "comprehension" when you clearly haven't a clue what the word means.

 

[LandoComando]

You're such a moron - you talking about "comprehension" is comedy show material. I put a quote excerpted directly from the article I referenced - you then posted the following in response:



The quote is absolutely "accurate" - excepted word-for-word from THIS ARTICLE which I referenced and linked in my post you responded to....

100% accurate directly word-for-word from article I referenced.... as in the diametric opposite of the word you used, "inaccurate", you insufferably stupid idiot that uses terms like "comprehension" when you clearly haven't a clue what the word means.

Again "the quote is inaccurate. The call being "so egregious" isn't what caused the reaction. The call could have been correct and the same reaction would have occurred. That's sports. See all the complaints with Heat-Celtics game 6 despite replay getting them correct. It's the same story all the time when a fan base needs to create an excuse. The amount of posts you have on this is insane from someone who never talks about LAX.

 

[NewEra 2014]

Sorry, but the NCAA looks incompetent when the NCAA Men's and Women's Replay Review Rule essentially reads identical except for this last "reviewable scenario" in the Women's Rulebook which is not in the Men's Replay Review Rule:



Ludicrous that the NCAA "Rules Committee" can understand the appropriateness of this rule in terms of integrity, and fairness, of the game for student-athletes in regards to the Women's Rulebook, but didn't understand it for the Men's Rulebook.... - sorry, but there is a complete and utter logical fail in your position. The NCAA Rules Committee looks like the incompetent assholes they are - utterly embarrassing, which is sadly typical for the NCAA as an organization in general.

You are arguing with me when I actually agree with you. A crease play should be reviewable for both men’s and women’s lax. Take yes for an answer.

 

[lion4ever76]

Thanks for posting CJF as this is very relevant. We all know Penn St wears the black hat since the Sandusky nonsense. I was at the game and the crowd went nuts when they showed the replay (just once) and it was clear that #1 violated the crease. Just another one to add to the list of PSU screw jobs. It is not accidental.

 

[knickslions]

Thanks for posting CJF as this is very relevant. We all know Penn St wears the black hat since the Sandusky nonsense. I was at the game and the crowd went nuts when they showed the replay (just once) and it was clear that #1 violated the crease. Just another one to add to the list of PSU screw jobs. It is not accidental.

Lmao

 

[lion4ever76]

Lmao

LMAO at a cuck NBA fan

 

[LandoComando]

It is not accidental.

lol

 

[Ian]

It’s insane to think that any championship caliber events do not have replay capabilities for at least scoring. That’s how contests/championships are determined! What nut case didn’t allow this for MLax? Once again the NCAA has out done itself.

 

[CJFisJoePaII]

It’s insane to think that any championship caliber events do not have replay capabilities for at least scoring. That’s how contests/championships are determined! What nut case didn’t allow this for MLax? Once again the NCAA has out done itself.

Especially when the OT Rule is "1st Legal Goal Scored Sudden Death" (i.e., no chance for a team to overcome an Officials horrendously wrong call regarding an Illegal Goal -- also true at very end of game which is why many sports have mandatory reviews inside last 2 minutes of regulation.).

The NCAA looks particularly asinine, which they are, that their Rules Committee has near identical Replay Review Rules for both Men's and Women's Lacrosse, but for one scenario:

• To determine whether the player shooting has stepped on or into the goal circle, or any other player of the attacking team has entered the goal circle, and if so, if the act of stepping onto or into the goal circle was the result of a foul. This review would only be in response to a goal or no-goal signal and at the request and discretion of the head official, head coach or any player on the field of play at the time of the shot.

This scenario is included in the NCAA's Women's Lacrosse Replay Review Rule, but not the Men's Replay Review Rule. How does that make any sense whatsoever that the NCAA Rules Committee includes the most fundamental, and seminal, reason to even have replay (reverse incorrect Goal / No Goal plays - especially potentially outcome changing scores such as an ILLEGAL Sudden Death OT Goal), but doesn't have the same clause in the Men's Lacrosse Replay Review Rule??? Just embarrassing the level of incompetency an absurd inconsistency and injustice requires from a "Rules Committee" whose entire existence is to protect the integrity and equity of the game for the competitors. Just ridiculously foul.