Michigan State 60, Illinois 53 POSTGAME

Makes no difference where the ball is in relation to the rim. It hit the backboard before Kendrick caught a piece of it. Easy call.

I do not believe that is true. According to NCAA rules:

Section 34. Goaltending

Art. 1. Goaltending shall have occurred when a defensive player touches
the ball during a field-goal try and each of the following conditions is met:
Exceptions: Rules 10-3.6; 10-6.1.i
a. The ball is in its downward flight; and
b. The entire ball is above the level of the ring and has the possibility,
while in flight, of entering the basket and is not touching the
cylinder.RULE 4 / DEFINITIONS 75

Art. 2. It is goaltending to touch the ball outside the cylinder during a free
throw, regardless of whether the free throw is on its upward or downward
flight.

Art. 3. When the entire ball is above the level of the ring during a field-goal
try and contacts the backboard, it is considered to be on its downward flight.
In such a case, it is goaltending when the ball is touched by a player.
 
Champaign
I do not believe that is true. According to NCAA rules:

Section 34. Goaltending

Art. 1. Goaltending shall have occurred when a defensive player touches
the ball during a field-goal try and each of the following conditions is met:
Exceptions: Rules 10-3.6; 10-6.1.i
a. The ball is in its downward flight; and
b. The entire ball is above the level of the ring and has the possibility,
while in flight, of entering the basket and is not touching the
cylinder.RULE 4 / DEFINITIONS 75

Art. 2. It is goaltending to touch the ball outside the cylinder during a free
throw, regardless of whether the free throw is on its upward or downward
flight.


Thanks Obelix, I knew that wasn't right. At the game, I couldn't tell if the ball hit the backboard, which it apparently did.

Art. 3. When the entire ball is above the level of the ring during a field-goal
try and contacts the backboard, it is considered to be on its downward flight.
In such a case, it is goaltending when the ball is touched by a player.
 
Decatur, IL
I do not believe that is true. According to NCAA rules:

Section 34. Goaltending

Art. 1. Goaltending shall have occurred when a defensive player touches
the ball during a field-goal try and each of the following conditions is met:
Exceptions: Rules 10-3.6; 10-6.1.i
a. The ball is in its downward flight; and
b. The entire ball is above the level of the ring and has the possibility,
while in flight, of entering the basket and is not touching the
cylinder.RULE 4 / DEFINITIONS 75

Art. 2. It is goaltending to touch the ball outside the cylinder during a free
throw, regardless of whether the free throw is on its upward or downward
flight.

Art. 3. When the entire ball is above the level of the ring during a field-goal
try and contacts the backboard, it is considered to be on its downward flight.
In such a case, it is goaltending when the ball is touched by a player.
 
Not sure where to put this but does anyone know why Mike Latulip did not dress last night?
 
Our history with transfers, especially under Groce, isn't very encouraging.

Especially Under Groce??

McLaurin, Ekey, and Rice were all very solid additions to the team. Paul has yet to be seen but is expected to get big minutes next year. The only miss Groce has had on a transfer so far is Cosby.

I think you're confusing Groce's Transfers with Weber's.
 
Los Angeles
I do not believe that is true. According to NCAA rules:

Section 34. Goaltending

Art. 1. Goaltending shall have occurred when a defensive player touches
the ball during a field-goal try and each of the following conditions is met:
Exceptions: Rules 10-3.6; 10-6.1.i
a. The ball is in its downward flight; and
b. The entire ball is above the level of the ring and has the possibility,
while in flight, of entering the basket and is not touching the
cylinder.RULE 4 / DEFINITIONS 75

Art. 2. It is goaltending to touch the ball outside the cylinder during a free
throw, regardless of whether the free throw is on its upward or downward
flight.

Art. 3. When the entire ball is above the level of the ring during a field-goal
try and contacts the backboard, it is considered to be on its downward flight.
In such a case, it is goaltending when the ball is touched by a player.

That's still contingent on it touching the backboard, no? If the ball was above the rim and not in downward flight that's still blockable.
 
Ekey and McLaurin were nice 1 year band aids for 7th place B1G teams but long term that's not how you build championship type rosters. Starks and Cosby were backup types that as starters did not work out so well. RR worked out. I can't think of too many B1G programs that have been built long term through transfers, Nationally, Iowa State and maybe SDSU come to mind. Others??
 
Champaign
Ekey and McLaurin were nice 1 year band aids for 7th place B1G teams but long term that's not how you build championship type rosters. Starks and Cosby were backup types that as starters did not work out so well. RR worked out. I can't think of too many B1G programs that have been built long term through transfers, Nationally, Iowa State and maybe SDSU come to mind. Others

Doesn't Gonzaga have a couple this year?
 
Ekey and McLaurin were nice 1 year band aids for 7th place B1G teams but long term that's not how you build championship type rosters. Starks and Cosby were backup types that as starters did not work out so well. RR worked out. I can't think of too many B1G programs that have been built long term through transfers, Nationally, Iowa State and maybe SDSU come to mind. Others??

I wasn't saying transfers are how to build championships. I was just pointing out the flaw in one of the previous poster's comments that Groce's transfers were not successful. IMO he's been good on 4/5. The jury is still out on Paul.

I honestly see no problem in going after transfers. Groce and staff are pretty darn good at talent evaluation.
 
I do not believe that is true. According to NCAA rules:

Section 34. Goaltending

Art. 1. Goaltending shall have occurred when a defensive player touches
the ball during a field-goal try and each of the following conditions is met:
Exceptions: Rules 10-3.6; 10-6.1.i
a. The ball is in its downward flight; and
b. The entire ball is above the level of the ring and has the possibility,
while in flight, of entering the basket and is not touching the
cylinder.RULE 4 / DEFINITIONS 75

Art. 2. It is goaltending to touch the ball outside the cylinder during a free
throw, regardless of whether the free throw is on its upward or downward
flight.

Art. 3. When the entire ball is above the level of the ring during a field-goal
try and contacts the backboard, it is considered to be on its downward flight.
In such a case, it is goaltending when the ball is touched by a player.

I don't think the entire ball was above the ring, so based on this, I don't believe it should have been goaltending. I believe this is the point you were making as well.

My bad....I was thinking above the ring, not above the LEVEL of it.

:shield:
 
Last edited:
I wasn't saying transfers are how to build championships. I was just pointing out the flaw in one of the previous poster's comments that Groce's transfers were not successful. IMO he's been good on 4/5. The jury is still out on Paul.

I honestly see no problem in going after transfers. Groce and staff are pretty darn good at talent evaluation.

It depends on your definition of successful. If one year of honorable mention All B1G amongst 4 guys is considered good then yes they've been successful. :)
 
That's still contingent on it touching the backboard, no? If the ball was above the rim and not in downward flight that's still blockable.

The rule is pretty clear. If the ball is above the level of the ring during a field-goal try AND contacts the backboard, it is goaltending if a player touches the ball.

So your earlier statement that "makes no difference where the ball is in relation to the rim. It hit the backboard before Kendrick caught a piece of it," is incorrect.

It is not a sufficient condition to hit the backboard, the ball has to be above the rim as well. But once the ball is above the rim AND touches the backboard, it is considered on its way down (even if it is still going up) so a player touching it (like Nunn) is goaltending.
 
Decatur, IL
The rule is pretty clear. If the ball is above the level of the ring[/B] during a field-goal try AND contacts the backboard[/B], it is goaltending if a player touches the ball.

So your earlier statement that "makes no difference where the ball is in relation to the rim. It hit the backboard before Kendrick caught a piece of it," is incorrect.

It is not a sufficient condition to hit the backboard, the ball has to be above the rim as well. But once the ball is above the rim AND touches the backboard, it is considered on its way down (even if it is still going up) so a player touching it (like Nunn) is goaltending.

The thing is, thats how it is always called. Happens all the time. You here the announcers and everyone always say it when checking the replay. "yep, it hit the backboard first, thats a goaltend, good call" That may not be how its written in the book but thats how its called. The only time I have ever heard the "above the rim level" or whatever, is when the ball is literally over the rim and would have likely dropped in. But never is it mentioned in relation to hitting the backboard.
 
I don't think the entire ball was above the ring, so based on this, I don't believe it should have been goaltending. I believe this is the point you were making as well.

:shield:

I am actually making the opposite point. It was close and inconclusive watching it live (I thought it was very close) but the replay (I also have it taped) pretty much confirmed that a) the ball was above rim level when it hit the backboard, and b) Nunn hit the ball after it hit the backboard.

It was the correct call.
 
The thing is, thats how it is always called. Happens all the time. You here the announcers and everyone always say it when checking the replay. "yep, it hit the backboard first, thats a goaltend, good call" That may not be how its written in the book but thats how its called.

You can play with hypotheticals, but the announcers had the right rule and call last night. They mentioned the position of the ball above the rim and hitting the backboard.

But in general (not last night) what the announcers call or say during the game is irrelevant as far as the rule or call. The refs make the call, independent on what the announcers say or perceive to be the right call.

The refs made the right call last night. Simple as that.
 
It depends on your definition of successful. If one year of honorable mention All B1G amongst 4 guys is considered good then yes they've been successful. :)

JG has smartly used fifth-year transfers as role players to fill specific holes in the rotation. He doesn't rely on transfers to build championship-level teams but to fill secondary roles. Without McLaurin as a 4/5 defender/rebounder, we don't reach the Dance in 2013. Without Ekey as our sixth man, we don't get to the postseason at all last year. As a multi-year transfer, RR turned out better than anyone could expect. Imagine how bad we'd be without his 16 ppg, 5 rpg, defense and ballhandling.
 
I am actually making the opposite point. It was close and inconclusive watching it live (I thought it was very close) but the replay (I also have it taped) pretty much confirmed that a) the ball was above rim level when it hit the backboard, and b) Nunn hit the ball after it hit the backboard.

It was the correct call.

Yep. Was a goaltend. Still a spectacular play by KN, though. He's a terrific athlete. If he can stay healthy this offseason, I think he's going to make another big jump in his play next year with an improved right-handed dribble among other skills.
 
I am actually making the opposite point. It was close and inconclusive watching it live (I thought it was very close) but the replay (I also have it taped) pretty much confirmed that a) the ball was above rim level when it hit the backboard, and b) Nunn hit the ball after it hit the backboard.

It was the correct call.

Yep. Was a goaltend. Still a spectacular play by KN, though. He's a terrific athlete. If he can stay healthy this offseason, I think he's going to make another big jump in his play next year with an improved right-handed dribble among other skills.

Yeah, I edited my post..I was wrong. I misunderstood it I guess.
 
Geneseo, IL
I wasn't saying transfers are how to build championships. I was just pointing out the flaw in one of the previous poster's comments that Groce's transfers were not successful. IMO he's been good on 4/5. The jury is still out on Paul.

I honestly see no problem in going after transfers. Groce and staff are pretty darn good at talent evaluation.

I think you are pretty generous with the word "good." Ekey wasn't that good of a player, he played a lot because Illinois had a weak roster. Everyone was talking last year how good the Illini were going to be adding Starks, Cosby, and Paul. How is that working out? Cosby is already transferring, Starks has been a disappointment, Paul isn't on this year's team. Awesome. Only Rice has been a major force. Please take off the beer goggles. I was responding to a post about getting help next year at the point and in the post. I doubt you are going to get major help from transfers at those positions for next year.
 
I think you are pretty generous with the word "good." Ekey wasn't that good of a player, he played a lot because Illinois had a weak roster.

Imagine how much weaker the roster would have been last year without Ekey. JG recruited him as a one-year stop-gap at the 4, and Ekey provided 20-25 valuable mpg there. He wasn't a star, but he was a good defender and hit some big shots for us, like the game winner at Iowa, and provided important depth. Without him, we probably would have had a losing record. Same with McLaurin. As a stop-gap measure, using transfers to fill spots here and there can and has worked out for numerous schools, even elite schools like Syracuse (Gbjinje) and Duke (Hood) this year and last year. JG shouldn't rely heavily on them, but BW left the program in bad shape, so JG felt he needed to supplement the roster with transfers while at the same time building it up with HS recruits for the longer haul. If he has to do it one more time with a fifth-year transfer big again if he's not confident in Morgbert and DP for next year, he doesn't have a lot to lose. If the transfer plugs a role in the rotation, great. If not, JG is only stuck with him for a year.
 
Orange Krush Class of 2013
Rochester, MN
I think you are pretty generous with the word "good." Ekey wasn't that good of a player, he played a lot because Illinois had a weak roster. Everyone was talking last year how good the Illini were going to be adding Starks, Cosby, and Paul. How is that working out? Cosby is already transferring, Starks has been a disappointment, Paul isn't on this year's team. Awesome. Only Rice has been a major force. Please take off the beer goggles. I was responding to a post about getting help next year at the point and in the post. I doubt you are going to get major help from transfers at those positions for next year.

Starks has been pretty good when he's in the role he was recruited for instead of filling in at PG.
 
Los Angeles
The rule is pretty clear. If the ball is above the level of the ring during a field-goal try AND contacts the backboard, it is goaltending if a player touches the ball.

So your earlier statement that "makes no difference where the ball is in relation to the rim. It hit the backboard before Kendrick caught a piece of it," is incorrect.

It is not a sufficient condition to hit the backboard, the ball has to be above the rim as well. But once the ball is above the rim AND touches the backboard, it is considered on its way down (even if it is still going up) so a player touching it (like Nunn) is goaltending.

Huh, I had no idea that's how the rule was written. Thanks for taking me to school.