MBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin

[Next Man Up]

As USee did, I too went back and watched the plays in question several times. My overall observations are largely congruent with his analysis. Additionally, I'll try to incorporate a point or two that USee didn't reference but which I picked up on from other previous posts.

1. W's Schreiber goes up for a layup, and IWU's Heflin does indeed put both hands in the middle of Schreiber's back.
Schreiber runs into the basket support and ends up on the floor writhing in supposed pain. Don't let the fact that the trailing ref made the call rather than the ref right under the basket cloud your perspective of the call. Every game of the year features multiple calls by a ref other than the one closest to the play. The flagrant call was bull**** because Heflin touched Schreiber with about the same degree of force you would use to pick up a baby. Further evidence of the lack of flagrant force is the fact that Schreiber finally bounced back up like he was shot out of a canon, and his person exhibited no external sign of any injury or impairment of any kind from head to toe.

2. Schreiber comes down the lane, takes a dish, and goes up for a layup. IWU's Mitchell goes up to block the shot, clearly fouls Schreiber, and gets his nose bloodied in the process. Schreiber does not throw an elbow or otherwise commit any type of felonious assault upon Mitchell. Mitchell pleads his case using the prima facie evidence of his bloody nose as the basis of his argument that as the one with the bloody nose, how could he be the one who committed the foul? Problem is when a guy comes out of a physical play with a bloody nose, that doesn't automatically eliminate him as being the guilty party as far as who committed the foul. Alas, the court rules against him leaving him feeling wronged on two fronts. Mitchell feels a need for retribution which he attempts to extract by walking straight toward Schreiber and purposely banging into his shoulder on the way back to the bench. Mitchell just plain lost his cool, and purposely committed an act which hurt his team, and which was rightfully deemed worthy of his being hit with a T.

3. Yoder drives in for a layup and basically gets thrown to the floor in a football like tackle by Schreiber. At the minimum, this should have been a Flagrant 2. Yoder was wronged big time. Schreiber should have been ejected. What the hell were the refs looking at? In this case, the question "Are you blind" was warranted. But then, IWU's renowned bad ass Cory Noe completely lost it. Rather than maintaining his cool and keeping his mind on the objective of winning the game, Mr Tough Guy rushed in and slammed Schreiber in chest with both hands. An absolutely stupid move by Noe that was a primary factor in IWU's season coming to an end.
As some IWU fans have said, Noe had a poor night both playing basketball and thinking.

4. I question how much help Ron Rose got from his assistants last night. As the sequence of events in the #3 scenario above played out, they appeared more incensed about the calls and non calls involved in the play than did Rose. Rather than concentrating on the game situation and thinking about what they might suggest in the way of strategy to help win the game, they were more concerned with berating the refs, jumping around and yelling rather than paying attention to the team goal.

5. Before the game. I actually thought there was no way IWU could lose. An extremely talented team, led by great coaching, playing on their home floor, and backed by a majority of rabid home fans, how could they be denied?
The apparent answer was W. not only played better, but took the Weenies out of their game both physically and mentally.

[Next Man Up]

Ron Rose was a class act during and after the game. Always has been. It's one reason I can't hate the Titans with as much animosity as I would like. He does things the right way.

So you just hate them a little bit, without the high degree of animosity that otherwise would be a natural response?   

[Gregory Sager]

3. Yoder drives in for a layup and basically gets thrown to the floor in a football like tackle by Schreiber. At the minimum, this should have been a Flagrant 2. Yoder was wronged big time. Schreiber should have been ejected.

No, Mark, that just isn't true. It was a hard foul, and Flagrant 1 was the right call, because the contact was excessive. But it was not carried out with the intent to injure (e.g., deliberately swinging an elbow at a head, pushing someone into a stanchion, etc.) that is cause for a Flagrant 2 call. How do we know this? Because we have photographic proof (courtesy of Twitter user @voiceofseason) that Schreiber was making a play on the ball rather than trying to hurt Yoder. The picture shows Schreiber with his right arm actually on top of the ball while the left arm is swinging up to support the block. It wasn't a "football-like tackle" at all, because Schreiber didn't come in with his arms low to grab Yoder. He came in with his arms high to attempt to block the layup.

It's obviously excessive contact because of the violence with which Schreiber's body struck Yoder; the whole post-contact grabbing is problematic, because it's impossible to ascertain intent from two off-kilter bodies flailing in the air trying to gain equilibrium prior to a hard landing. Protecting oneself from an injurious collision with the floor has to be assumed in this case.

Flagrant 1 was the right call.

[USee]

Ron Rose was a class act during and after the game. Always has been. It's one reason I can't hate the Titans with as much animosity as I would like. He does things the right way.

So you just hate them a little bit, without the high degree of animosity that otherwise would be a natural response?   

My animosity toward IWU has plenty of fuel from the football program, where it has it's origins. I really like Ron Rose as a person and have a ton of respect for what he has done with the program. I actually have a lot of friends who are IWU alums and are great people which provides great back and forth around the marquee sporting contests. In basketball, Dennie Bridges made it a lot easier to dislike IWU during his tenure and Norm Eash, well.....that's the gift that keeps on giving.

[Gregory Sager]

Ron Rose was a class act during and after the game. Always has been. It's one reason I can't hate the Titans with as much animosity as I would like. He does things the right way.

So you just hate them a little bit, without the high degree of animosity that otherwise would be a natural response?   

My animosity toward IWU has plenty of fuel from the football program, where it has it's origins. I really like Ron Rose as a person and have a ton of respect for what he has done with the program. I actually have a lot of friends who are IWU alums and are great people which provides great back and forth around the marquee sporting contests. In basketball, Dennie Bridges made it a lot easier to dislike IWU during his tenure and Norm Eash, well.....that's the gift that keeps on giving.

If we separate coaches from fans, which are two very different groups of people, it appears that you and I think along similar lines when it comes to Illinois Wesleyan. I share your laudatory opinion of Ron Rose, of course, and I'll add that I think pretty highly of his female counterpart at IWU, Mia Smith. My interactions with her, both during my days as scorekeeper and then as broadcaster, have never been anything but positive. She is a consummate professional, and she's one of my favorite people in the league on the women's basketball side of things.

I agree with you about Dennie Bridges. Because he felt that the clock started a heartbeat too late on an inbounds play on North Park's final possession that allowed Vikings forward Paul Heesch to hit the game-winning shot in the crackerbox during the 1985-86 season, he made it a point to walk over to the scorer's table before every IWU @ NPC/NPU game until his retirement a decade and a half later in order to give a pregame lecture that invariably began with the words, "Now, gentlemen, we are not going to have a problem with the clock tonight, are we?" (I'll never understand how Dennis Prikkel, who kept the book at the North Park scorer's table during that era, managed to hold his tart tongue through year after year of that nonsense from Bridges.) I have heard some second-hand stories about his AD days at Illinois Wesleyan that amplify that impression of him, although in his defense I also know several non-IWU folks from around the CCIW who think very highly of Bridges. The cartoon villainy of Norm Eash goes without saying; it's hard to imagine a head coach in any sport in CCIW history who has ever been as thoroughly disliked by both fellow CCIW head coaches and opposing fans as Stormin' Norman.

IWU baseball coach Dennis Martel has been a pain in the backside on several occasions when the Titans have visited NPU, and that's all I'll say about that. IWU head men's soccer coach Kyle Schauls seems pleasant, and I know that he gets along well with NPU's athletic director (and former men's soccer head coach) John Born and current men's soccer head coach Kris Grahn. I've never had any direct interactions with any other current IWU coaches, or heard any remarks pro or con about them.

By the way, I think that Eric Stock and Joel Swanson are very solid and articulate broadcasters who do a great job of calling Titans games. They're nice guys, too. They're not as entertaining and engaging as Chris Ford and Dan Sand over at Augustana, but who is? I've heard umpteen two-man booths in D3 basketball, and as far as I'm concerned Chris and Dan are the gold standard.

I have had little interaction with any of the current Illinois Wesleyan sports information staff, but I'll add that I really liked retired IWU SID Stew Salowitz. Stew was a terrific host whenever I called a game at IWU.

[Greek Tragedy]

So, can someone post a link to the IWU v Wabash game so, I too, can over analyze the plays in question?? Just kidding. I may just want to watch it as a simple fan. Thanks in advance.

[itsnotmeitsyou]

So, can someone post a link to the IWU v Wabash game so, I too, can over analyze the plays in question?? Just kidding. I may just want to watch it as a simple fan. Thanks in advance.

It's VERY easy to find yourself:
- Go to D3hoops.com
- select "Scores" in the top banner
- select "NCAA Tournament"
- click on the date of the Regional Finals - "Sat 3/12"
- scroll down to the Wabash v IWU score panel
- click on "Video" (blow thru the ad that pops up!)
- scroll down mid-page to select "On Demand"
- find the desired game...press Play.

The plays in question - among the many IWU fans have problems with - occur in the Second Half: 16:56 and 7:33.

[itsnotmeitsyou]

For the  uninformed, there are SPECIFIC factors that define a Flagrant 1 and 2 foul. Directly from the 2021-22 Men's Basketball Rule Book:
Rule 4 (Definitions), Section 15. Foul, Article 2-c Flagrant Personal Fouls.
"Flagrant fouls are personal fouls that are deemed to be a more serious offense than a common foul. The penalty for a Flagrant 1 foul is two free throws and possession of the ball for a throw-in. The penalty for a Flagrant 2 foul is two free throws, possession of the ball for a throw-in, and ejection of the offending player.
1.  Flagrant 1 personal foul. A Flagrant 1 personal foul is a personal foul that is deemed to be excessive in nature (unwarranted or too much) and/or unnecessary (avoidable, uncalled for or not required by the circumstances of the play), but is not based solely on the severity of the act. Examples include but are not limited to:
a) Causing excessive or unnecessary contact with an opponent;
b) Contact with an opponent that is not a legitimate attempt to play the ball or player;
c) Pushing or holding a player from behind to prevent a score. Depending on the severity of the contact and potential for injury, this type of foul could rise to the level of a Flagrant 2 foul;"
(there are five other provisions of this definition that do not apply in these situations)
2.  Flagrant 2 personal foul. A Flagrant 2 personal foul is a personal foul that involves contact with an opponent that is not only excessive, but also severe (brutal, harsh, cruel) or extreme (dangerous, punishing) while the ball is live. In determining whether a foul has risen to the level of a flagrant 2, officials should consider the following:
a) The severity of the contact;
b) Whether the player is making a legitimate effort to block a shot. Note that a player may still be assessed a flagrant 2 foul on an attempted blocked shot when there are other factors, such as hard contact to the head or the defender winding up or emphatically following through with the contact. Depending on the nature of the contact, this foul also could be considered a flagrant 1 or common foul personal foul.
c) The potential for injury resulting from the contact (e.g. blow to the head or a foul committed while the player is in a vulnerable position). Depending on the nature of the contact, or the result of the contact, the foul could also be considered a flagrant 1 or common personal foul;
(there are two other provisions of this definition that do not apply in these situations)

Based on the above definitions that officials are very familiar with, BOTH of the plays in question (16:56 and 7:33) fit the Flagrant 1 Foul definition.

The 7:33 play - a Flagrant 1 by Schreiber (which stopped the clock) followed by a Dead Ball Contact Technical Foul by Noe - constituted a "False Double foul" (Rule 4-15.34) defined as: "A false double foul occurs when there are fouls by both teams, the second of which occurs before the game is started after it is stopped for the first."

In this situation, each foul carries it's own penalty (2 free throws and possession of the ball). However, when the last foul (of the false double foul) is a single flagrant technical foul or a single dead-ball contact technical, the ball shall be put in play as though the last foul (meaning the Noe foul) was the only one administered.  Despite what prominent IWU fanatics on Twitter (and everywhere else) said, THAT is the reason why Wabash received possession of the ball to resume play. There was an F1 called on Schreiber AND a Dead-Ball Contact Technical Foul on Noe.

(Noe is lucky there wasn't TV Replay available to the crew because his actions very easily could've/should've been deemed a Flagrant 2 Contact Technical Foul (excessive/severe/extreme contact during a dead ball) that would've resulted in his ejection.)

[itsnotmeitsyou]

I believe the significant contributing factor in the negative body language/behavior toward game officials by IWU players/coaching staff is the home crowd. As we all know, IWU fans have NEVER, EVER seen their players commit a foul in the past 70 years and react accordingly during games. They not only rile themselves up but, more importantly, cause the players/coaching staff to lose their composure - especially in competitive games. There is a distinct difference in the tenor of a one possession game vs a 10-15pt contest in Bloomington. Of course this scenario occurs often across the collegiate sports landscape (think Kentucky or Indiana basketball, Arkansas baseball, or Notre Dame football among others). It is, however, more pronounced at IWU as they have so few competitive games in Bloomington.

It's like situational psychosis or circumstantial insanity. Once removed from that environment, like a postgame press conference, a return to their mature and respectful personalities occurs.

The IWU faithful? Well that's another story...

[Pat Coleman]

You seem like someone who has coached/officiated.

Once removed from that environment, like a postgame press conference, a return to their mature and respectful personalities occurs.

If you've coached/officiated, you probably know this is true among many coaches and is hardly unique to this particular situation. Frankly, it's so common that I didn't even see it as noteworthy when I was in Bloomington last weekend.

[Gregory Sager]

So, can someone post a link to the IWU v Wabash game so, I too, can over analyze the plays in question??

LOL!

Personally, I'd rather be discussing the amazing defense Elmhurst played two nights in a row on three different occasions (Calvin's last possession on Friday night, UMHB's last possession in regulation, and then UMHB's last possession in overtime on Saturday night), or that missed-free-throw-fueled barnburner between Marietta and Christopher Newport on Saturday that had Ban Johnson Arena practically vibrating due to the noise. I've tried on both fronts, but ... well, let's just say that controversy is what sparks conversations on d3boards.com, not mere close-and-exciting basketball games.

For the  uninformed, there are SPECIFIC factors that define a Flagrant 1 and 2 foul. Directly from the 2021-22 Men's Basketball Rule Book:
Rule 4 (Definitions), Section 15. Foul, Article 2-c Flagrant Personal Fouls.
"Flagrant fouls are personal fouls that are deemed to be a more serious offense than a common foul. The penalty for a Flagrant 1 foul is two free throws and possession of the ball for a throw-in. The penalty for a Flagrant 2 foul is two free throws, possession of the ball for a throw-in, and ejection of the offending player.
1.  Flagrant 1 personal foul. A Flagrant 1 personal foul is a personal foul that is deemed to be excessive in nature (unwarranted or too much) and/or unnecessary (avoidable, uncalled for or not required by the circumstances of the play), but is not based solely on the severity of the act. Examples include but are not limited to:
a) Causing excessive or unnecessary contact with an opponent;
b) Contact with an opponent that is not a legitimate attempt to play the ball or player;
c) Pushing or holding a player from behind to prevent a score. Depending on the severity of the contact and potential for injury, this type of foul could rise to the level of a Flagrant 2 foul;"
(there are five other provisions of this definition that do not apply in these situations)
2.  Flagrant 2 personal foul. A Flagrant 2 personal foul is a personal foul that involves contact with an opponent that is not only excessive, but also severe (brutal, harsh, cruel) or extreme (dangerous, punishing) while the ball is live. In determining whether a foul has risen to the level of a flagrant 2, officials should consider the following:
a) The severity of the contact;
b) Whether the player is making a legitimate effort to block a shot. Note that a player may still be assessed a flagrant 2 foul on an attempted blocked shot when there are other factors, such as hard contact to the head or the defender winding up or emphatically following through with the contact. Depending on the nature of the contact, this foul also could be considered a flagrant 1 or common foul personal foul.
c) The potential for injury resulting from the contact (e.g. blow to the head or a foul committed while the player is in a vulnerable position). Depending on the nature of the contact, or the result of the contact, the foul could also be considered a flagrant 1 or common personal foul;
(there are two other provisions of this definition that do not apply in these situations)

Based on the above definitions that officials are very familiar with, BOTH of the plays in question (16:56 and 7:33) fit the Flagrant 1 Foul definition.

This. I would've pasted 4.15.2 into my post last night and delved into why b) applied properly by the officials made Schreiber's foul a Flagrant 1 rather than a Flagrant 2, but as you can tell from the time stamp of my post it was extremely late, and today's a work day.

The 7:33 play - a Flagrant 1 by Schreiber (which stopped the clock) followed by a Dead Ball Contact Technical Foul by Noe - constituted a "False Double foul" (Rule 4-15.34) defined as: "A false double foul occurs when there are fouls by both teams, the second of which occurs before the game is started after it is stopped for the first."

In this situation, each foul carries it's own penalty (2 free throws and possession of the ball). However, when the last foul (of the false double foul) is a single flagrant technical foul or a single dead-ball contact technical, the ball shall be put in play as though the last foul (meaning the Noe foul) was the only one administered.  Despite what prominent IWU fanatics on Twitter (and everywhere else) said, THAT is the reason why Wabash received possession of the ball to resume play. There was an F1 called on Schreiber AND a Dead-Ball Contact Technical Foul on Noe.

To be fair, at least one "prominent IWU fanatic" (who also happens to be a d3hoops.com Top 25 voter and a d3boards.com Hall of Famer) backed off of his Twitter accusation that the officials blew the call, after former Wabash assistant coach Brandon Ramsey tweeted a pic of the official PBP that proved that Schreiber had, indeed, been assessed a Flagrant 1.

Bob did retweet some questionable accusations from IWU fans on Saturday night (including one from a B-N area sports journalist who really ought to know better), but to his credit he admitted his mistake. He said that the gym was too loud for him to hear the P.A. guy announce that Schreiber had been given a Flagrant 1.

(This weekend was a victory for d3boards.com over Twitter, as far as I'm concerned. I saw a whole lotta evidence of people putting thirty seconds or so into unloading their anger onto their phones and then sending their abbreviated accusations out into the Twitterverse, as opposed to the at-least-marginally more thought-out and measured responses we usually see here. Gut reactions and angry flare-ups don't usually make for the sort of public statements that you want to leave for posterity.)

(Noe is lucky there wasn't TV Replay available to the crew because his actions very easily could've/should've been deemed a Flagrant 2 Contact Technical Foul (excessive/severe/extreme contact during a dead ball) that would've resulted in his ejection.)

I think that the garden-variety Dead Ball Contact Technical on Noe was the right call. There were two officials literally right next to the two players when Noe shoved Schreiber to the floor. In fact, the baseline ref had Schreiber fall right into his shins. The two of them were in a better position than anybody, aside from Noe and Schreiber themselves, to assess the severity of Noe's contact.

[WUPHF]

You seem like someone who has coached/officiated.

Once removed from that environment, like a postgame press conference, a return to their mature and respectful personalities occurs.

If you've coached/officiated, you probably know this is true among many coaches and is hardly unique to this particular situation. Frankly, it's so common that I didn't even see it as noteworthy when I was in Bloomington last weekend.

Yeah, people were really impressed how he handled the press conference.  I often watch the press conferences and most coaches handle those in a similar manner.  It is part of their job after all.

[Pat Coleman]

Bob did retweet some questionable accusations from IWU fans on Saturday night (including one from a B-N area sports journalist who really ought to know better), but to his credit he admitted his mistake. He said that the gym was too loud for him to hear the P.A. guy announce that Schreiber had been given a Flagrant 1.

It was absolutely too loud -- the building erupted on the first half of the PA announcement ... so loud that they could not hear the second. And I chuckled to myself at the time because I was pretty sure that second half of the call was also important.

[Greek Tragedy]

So, can someone post a link to the IWU v Wabash game so, I too, can over analyze the plays in question?? Just kidding. I may just want to watch it as a simple fan. Thanks in advance.

It's VERY easy to find yourself:
- Go to D3hoops.com
- select "Scores" in the top banner
- select "NCAA Tournament"
- click on the date of the Regional Finals - "Sat 3/12"
- scroll down to the Wabash v IWU score panel
- click on "Video" (blow thru the ad that pops up!)
- scroll down mid-page to select "On Demand"
- find the desired game...press Play.

The plays in question - among the many IWU fans have problems with - occur in the Second Half: 16:56 and 7:33.

Thanks.

[GoPerry]

Watching the post-game conference right after the game, I felt for Coach Rose and how devastated he was.  Even so, I did expect him to at least congratulate Coach Brumett and Wabash on the win notwithstanding his disappointment.  But there really wasn't a word crediting how good a team Wabash was or how well they played.  My impression was disappointment along with a measure of lingering animosity for the chippiness of the game?

Coach Brumett on the other hand was more than complimentary about IWU and the program.  Much easier for the winner of course.