yak-rbc most of the biggest noise and hyperbole on social media comes from gamblers who lost.  Who really cares about them?  I am sure KD doesn't

Maybe this is what DU bball/fans/alumni/students/players/coaches/etc needs to do....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdQCPlAZjbY

Last edited by townsonkid (12/21/2018 2:58 pm)

CLK wrote:

Phil, I watched several different versions of what happened,  What I saw was KD outside the coaching box and saying "that's bull" as he turns to walk back he was hit with the first "T".  It was quick.  The "cussing, ranting, jumping came after the quick "T".    

Take another look

https://twitter.com/Steve82939049/status/1075892692012412928

 

I took another look.

The best place to see this is on Scott Van Pelt's "Moose" segment when he goes through how the 2 calls affected bettors. They do a great job isolating the whistle for both technicals. It shows that KD was called after hopping up & down, cussing, & being way out of the box.

http://www.espn.com/videohub/video/clip?id=25577409&categoryid=4823314

Right after the block call, through the scrum of players you can see Dambrot going crazy in the background from the baseline camera, before the shot switches to the close-up from the sideline camera on him losing his mind. At the same time the ref that made the block call heads to the scorer's table to report walking directly toward KD. KD gets called for the action during this period. Likewise, KD doesn't ever turn back; not his head nor his body before the whistle sounds. 

Given the fact that KD had undeniably violated a rule that is supposed to result in an automatic technical, it occurs to me that the real question here is whether or not it is cool for a ref to make this call at this stage in a game. I always vote for calling the game the same from beginning to end. I can't stand the way refs swallow their whistles for certain violations during the last few minutes of tight games while calling others that seem ticky-tack because it leads to unnecessary drama like we are currently experiencing.

Folks are 100% entitled to have a different opinion on whether or not the block and/or the first technical are appropriate calls. However, a careful study of the video shows that KD's actions lead directly to the Dukes losing any opportunity to win the game.

 

phil95 wrote:

Hilltopper wrote:

phil95 wrote:

As I was watching live with my 11 year old daughter I said, just before it was called, that he was going to get "teed-up". (she asked what that meant) Just to make sure, I went back to confirm my earlier observation. After re-watching the last minute or so of the game, Dambrot totally deserved the first T. He was cussing, ranting, jumping a bit, & clearly out of the box. 

Earning the second T, his needing to be physically restrained by both coaches & players, & failure to leave the floor like a gentleman were, in my opinion, a horrible example for his team & an embarrassment to the program. His unacceptable behaviour was exacerbated by his lack of humility & accountabilty in his post-game comments. He did not ACT like a champion. It is one of the few times I can recall a basketball coach taking definitive, specific action that resulted in a team losing its opportunity to compete for victory.

I have lost count of the friends & haters that have contacted me today to ask WTF. There has been plenty of press to make KD out to be a raving lunatic. Even Deadspin picked it up.)

Before last night I suspected  the coincidental conclusion of EW's lesson learning before the most winnable of meaningful games was more about winning than teaching. I now know KD is way more interested in winning than developing. Put that together with his poor judgement at Central Michigan, on-air bullying of Ray, & last night's unfortunate events & you have a guy I probably don't like.

Having written that, I really don't care if he is likeable or not. He is a very good coach & this program is lucky to have him. Provided he doesn't break any laws or get in trouble with the NCAA, I am super-high on Coach Dambrot. I just expect more from a guy that is 60 & is being paid 7 figures to be the face of the program.

 

You hate him then, oh wait, you love him -- no cajones?

You got me. I am, sadly, sometimes without testicles. Your sister insists I leave them on her chin between visits. ( Is that manly enough for you?)

It is very simple. From my limited exposure to KD, he seems, as a person, like a tool. However, the same exposure makes me confident that he is a very good coach & the right person for this situation.

Bobby Knight is a complete jackass but is also one of the all-time great college coaches & I was always a fan of his teams. RE seems like a heck of a guy but, is a mediocre, Division I, head coach. Greatness & goodness are not always a set piece.

On further review, I rescind my earlier ignorant aside, as your last paragraph said it all.  Bobby Knight was a most hated coach by both refs and  his IU employers whose hands were tied and couldn't get rid of him - Why?  Because the parents loved the guy.  You know, Knight, at age 25, was already HC at West Point ( Army) where one of his star recruits was none other than Dukes's coach K.  Well, K was just 19 or so when his dad died suddenly so Bobby accompanied K home, staying with the family at their home and is said participated in making final arrangements.  Bobby Knight - One of a kind. 
Your comment on Ron, who is viewed by many DU faithful and me too as an icon, was dead-on.  

Ghost of Walter White wrote:

I'm with Coach. Brutal call and Dambrot responded/reacted the way 90% of the coaches in the NCAA would have. Problem is the ref choked, took the game out of the players hands. Given the previous calls, score and time left the ref had no reason to T him up. What do you guys want him to do? Stand there stoically and calmly contemplate what a bullshit call it was?
Don't give me that self righteous " representing Duquesne" crap. 
The guy wants to win and his players were screwed by that call.
That being said the turnovers were ridiculous. Most of them unforced.

 
Best observation of the string.

For whatever it may be worth, I checked the NCAA Rules on when a technical may be assessed against a coach or any bench member of the team.  I specifically checked Rule 10 on when a technical may be assessed to the coach for his/her leaving the coaches box.  That Rule 10 addresses only action by a coach with reference to leaving the coaches box while the ball is LIVE.  Nothing in the Rule addresses conduct and assessment of a technical with reference to the coaches box when the ball is dead.  It may be that some ref out there can interpret the Rule better than I just did, but it seems to me the ball was not live when the foul was called against Mike Hughes.    Hence, KD would and should not have been subject to a T.  I say all this because I am in total agreement with the majority of our posters who back the actions of KD.  

applecorps wrote:

coffee wrote:

Ghost of Walter White wrote:

I'm with Coach. Brutal call and Dambrot responded/reacted the way 90% of the coaches in the NCAA would have. Problem is the ref choked, took the game out of the players hands. Given the previous calls, score and time left the ref had no reason to T him up. What do you guys want him to do? Stand there stoically and calmly contemplate what a bullshit call it was?
Don't give me that self righteous " representing Duquesne" crap. 
The guy wants to win and his players were screwed by that call.
That being said the turnovers were ridiculous. Most of them unforced.

 
Best observation of the string.

Seconded

Well said, I am in total agreement!  I also wanted to respond to that “self-righteous Representing Duquesne” nonsense posted by someone much earlier.
Thank God we finally have a coach who cares about winning and refuses to allow Duquesne to become a whipping boy for the likes of this incompetent ref!  KD has a passion for winning that I hope will translate to the entire program.  He needs our support!

Last edited by levon1975 (12/22/2018 8:17 am)

Face wrote:

WEB wrote:

It was a horrendous call to T up a coach in that situation.  I do agree there. But results matter and the fact is he took the game away from his players. It's just tough to swallow.

Results-oriented thinking is dangerous and generally flawed. I think KD was right to advocate for his team in that circumstance.

Moving the point further, how does this team react? Was this a punch to the gut or a rallying moment? We may see some evidence today...

grammudder wrote:

For whatever it may be worth, I checked the NCAA Rules on when a technical may be assessed against a coach or any bench member of the team.  I specifically checked Rule 10 on when a technical may be assessed to the coach for his/her leaving the coaches box.  That Rule 10 addresses only action by a coach with reference to leaving the coaches box while the ball is LIVE.  Nothing in the Rule addresses conduct and assessment of a technical with reference to the coaches box when the ball is dead.  It may be that some ref out there can interpret the Rule better than I just did, but it seems to me the ball was not live when the foul was called against Mike Hughes.    Hence, KD would and should not have been subject to a T.  I say all this because I am in total agreement with the majority of our posters who back the actions of KD.  

 
I referee high school and it probably is different in college. But in high school the only time a coach is permitted to leave the box, is at halftime, when the official beckons the coach to explain something to both coaches or a player is injured. Finally, when the coach wants to call a time out to correct, the score, timing error, or an incorrect possession. Are there other times when we permit it and don’t call a technical, most definitely yes. What people don’t realize is there is so much that may have transpired prior to him getting the T and it would be all speculation on my part. If you show me where you found the rule, I would be more than happy to try and interpret the rule, because some times the language can be confusing.

I will say this, there is subjectivity in officiating and therein lays the problem. I'm watching thus Steeler game and the officiating in the first half, particularly pass interference was horrible.  Officiating shouldn't decide the game.

Get real, coaches leave the box all the time. How many times have you seen a coach cross the line onto the court while the ball is in play? Do you see technical fouls called every time?

It happens all the time, just as crossing the line towards the center of the court. And it doesn't matter what happened before Dambrot's 'T',  The official(s) blew it on the offensive foul call, blew it on the non-existent blocking foul, and then called the T on KD in a tied game and with seconds on the clock.

It doesn't matter what transpired before the call, it doesn't matter what Dambrot may have said to the ref previously, the official handed the game to Penn State.