MBB: North Coast Athletic Conference

[goscots]

Anybody who defends the type of foul that Jolson committed as something that is "just part of the game" is not a true basketball fan. It was never part of the game.

In soccer if you take out a player from behind with no intent to play the ball - you are gone. Its in the rules. In high school the suspension is two games. That sport has it right.

Giving the fouled team an extra possesion for a dangerous foul is not enough.  A team could be down twenty points (as was the case at Hiram) and there is little cost. There needs to be more personal accountability and a suspension is appropriate.

[scotty]

got an idea...lets all wait until a player gets really hurt, lets say paralyzed or so...then we can have an honest discussion...guys, this aint the NBA its college and more importantly its D3...you can be aggressive without being aggressive...

[smedindy]

There seems to be a big rush to judgement, though, on the part of Wooster fans, to tar and feather a kid for what has been described, as I read it, a foul that I've seen a few times a year in various games at all levels.

The intentional foul penalty works just fine. It seemed to be different than the Pfouts foul. We have jaundiced-eye views of it.

Bodies fly through the air - someone is trying to stop points from being scored - it happens. Like I said, the same thing happened seemingly at a high school game Friday night and no intentional foul was called. The ref said he tried for the ball, even though he had to go through a players' back for it. I sure thought it warranted an intentional foul, yes, but a suspension? Come on.


And of course, it's a long way from 'it happens' to 'it's a part of the game and should be sacrosanct' - some of you are really stretching things out of context.

[WoosterBNel]

How bout we get down to business. Only 2 good games happen in the ncac every year and one is about to go down at the HPER center in less than 10 days. As a Wooster fan I have to admit that I am a little apprehensive about this game. Witt is a solid team from top to bottom and near impossible to beat at home.

[smedindy]

Ahem.

Better watch that provincialism there. It's disingenuous to say the other 8 teams aren't capable at all of creating 'good' games.

I would contend, that while it does not feature top teams, that the Kenyon - Hiram game this year was a 'good' game. A close contest, with 12 ties and 10 lead changes, decent shooting, and not many turnovers, plus a game winning shot at the buzzer. Now that's a 'good' game and would be good no matter who was playing.

A friend of mine who refs says that he sometimes likes doing games with two struggling teams because they're close and both teams think they can win so they really try hard.

And lest we forget the many battles that Wabash has had (Ok, not this year) with Witt and Wooster in the past at Chadwick. Mind you, they've always gone to the visitor, but the games have been tight, taut, and well played.

[imderekpoe]

How bout we get down to business. Only 2 good games happen in the ncac every year and one is about to go down at the HPER center in less than 10 days. As a Wooster fan I have to admit that I am a little apprehensive about this game. Witt is a solid team from top to bottom and near impossible to beat at home.

I agree with Smeds.  Lets not be so quick to write everyone else off.  There are many good games every year, just not many for first place.  But as pointed out, Wabash, Earlham, and Allegheny have given both Wooster and Witt all they could handle from time to time.  And lets not forget that Denison beat Witt just last year. 

Lets also not forget that both Wooster and Witt have 2 games to play before the big one next weekend.  The Scots play Earlham, who took them to OT earlier this year.  And this time the Scots probably won't have one of their best players in the lineup. 

While I'm as anxious as anyone for next Saturday, I'll hold off getting too excited until both Wooster and Witt have knocked off Earlham (if they do!) this week.

[woosterbooster]

Smedindy -

You certainly have a strong opinion on something that you didn't even see.  You keep comparing it to a foul, or fouls, that you have seen.  How on earth is this possible?

I don't know how to describe the foul that I saw better than I already have.  It WAS intentional.  It was NOT accidental.  It was NOT malicious.  It WAS possibly dangerous.  Bodies were NOT flying through the air, only Vandervaart was airborne.  The Kenyon player pulled up behind Vandervaart, and while on the ground, shoved him.

Three or four guys on this forum alone saw it, and all have basically the same take on it.  Yet you, who did not, continue to say that we're wrong.

I don't ever dispute what you've seen at Wabash games.  Why won't you take our word about what we saw and understand that maybe this was NOT similar to the incidents that you've been seeing.

[scotty]

Wooster Booster, it is the fraternity of Brotherhood that binds him...it seems like anything successful is a rallying point...

by the way, whats up with the Juco Amish/Nazarene baseball transfers at Woo...ESPN is waiting for the story...

[Li'l Giant]

Until there is a rule for "malicious foul" then we're going to have to accept that "intentional foul" is as good as it gets. No one has disputed that this foul was "intentional". The contact is intentional, the injury isn't. I think that's intuitive.

Intentional fouls get called, there's two free throws, you get the ball back, but no one gets sent to Death Row.

This foul almost, and certainly could have, caused a serious injury. But it didn't.

There are all kinds of instances where "almost" doing something is treated completely differently from actually doing something.

If I take my trusty .38 and shoot at a cop and miss I will go to prison. If I shoot at the cop and kill him I get The Needle. "Almost" and "did" are two completely different things with two completely different consequences.

[jscwittfan]

I just have to wonder if a Wooster player committed the same type of foul if all of the Wooster people would be calling for ejections and suspensions for that player.  I highly doubt it.

[sac]

WooBoo,

You should be happy with your nickname, I have been called DD and even Double D.  How would you like to be called Double D?

That makes me think of Kenyon's swim team again....

Too much drag DC.

Women's swimming makes me think of Summer Sanders. 

[sac]

"I'm sensing some hypersensitivite reactions..."

From Wooster folk......nah never happens, they handled the Albion/Wooster game with............ah well nevermind. 

[drt]

Weighing in belatedly on last weekend's Witt-Allegheny game.  POW considerations for Dane Borchers were largely ignored, probably due to lack of Wittenberg involvement on this board, but 29 points, 10 boards (6 offensive) and 9-for-9 from the charity stripe can hardly be disregarded.  This kid carried Witt on his back in a game where the hosts came out hungry for respect against the #1 team in the nation, and Dan Russ was never a factor (although he had one of the most amazingly athletic moves for a bucket I've ever seen a 6'9" D3 player make.)  It was an incredibly physical game, and Allegheny came up big, with great 3-point shooting in the first half, and forcing Witt to miss numerous lay-ups and gimme's.

[David Collinge]

Weighing in belatedly on last weekend's Witt-Allegheny game.  POW considerations for Dane Borchers were largely ignored, probably due to lack of Wittenberg involvement on this board, but 29 points, 10 boards (6 offensive) and 9-for-9 from the charity stripe can hardly be disregarded.  This kid carried Witt on his back in a game where the hosts came out hungry for respect against the #1 team in the nation, and Dan Russ was never a factor (although he had one of the most amazingly athletic moves for a bucket I've ever seen a 6'9" D3 player make.)  It was an incredibly physical game, and Allegheny came up big, with great 3-point shooting in the first half, and forcing Witt to miss numerous lay-ups and gimme's.

I don't think the Week for which Borchers might be the Player (of) has finished yet; I think he's a candidate for this go-'round (although his stat line against Wabash might knock him out of contention--the NCAC seems to like back-to-back big stat line games.)  But I was all over Borchers in my commentary of the Witt/'Gheny game, so it's not really accurate to say he was 'ignored' in here.

Or am I just being another hypersensitive Wooster fan? 

[woosterbooster]

I just have to wonder if a Wooster player committed the same type of foul if all of the Wooster people would be calling for ejections and suspensions for that player.  I highly doubt it.

Screw you, too, Wittenbastard.