IRONTON 71 VS Waverly 70 - FINAL - 1 OT

JohnKnight
Varsity
Posts: 670
Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2005 2:24 pm

Re: IRONTON 71 VS Waverly 70 - FINAL - 1 OT

Post by JohnKnight »

Most officials would go deaf and blind in that situation. It is what it is though. Not saying the ref made the wrong call but really put that kid in a bad place.


smurray
SEOPS HO
Posts: 9902
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2006 1:52 pm

Re: IRONTON 71 VS Waverly 70 - FINAL - 1 OT

Post by smurray »

The more I hear about it, the way it went down, the timeout (if indeed called) should not have been whistled as there was no "possession". And, I agree with JohnKnight - most would have go deaf and blind in that situation but I'd say they were form that area.


caglewis
SEOP
Posts: 3813
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 8:39 am

Re: IRONTON 71 VS Waverly 70 - FINAL - 1 OT

Post by caglewis »

As reported on air by Jason Philyaw who was apparently close enough to hear - the refs were indeed trying to be deaf and blind - in their discussion with both coaches after whistling the T they said "He [the player] said it [Time Out] twice and we couldn't ignore it the second time."
The Waverly player also immediately admitted to doing it.


smurray
SEOPS HO
Posts: 9902
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2006 1:52 pm

Re: IRONTON 71 VS Waverly 70 - FINAL - 1 OT

Post by smurray »

Maybe he said it and maybe even twice but you can't have a timeout with no possession. Which is it? Did Waverly have possession or was it a loose ball?


lebasketball22
Waterboy
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2010 4:48 pm

Re: IRONTON 71 VS Waverly 70 - FINAL - 1 OT

Post by lebasketball22 »

The game was very poorly officiated the entire way. With that said the timeout was a legit call. Kretzer was on the floor in the fetal position with full control of the ball. Yes he was probably fouled to get into that position but he had full control of the ball. A Waverly player requested the timeout more than once and it was granted.

Travis reminded the team when they had one timeout remaining and again that they had no timeouts that could be called following the final taken with 12 seconds remaining. Waverly battled the whole way and played one of their better games of the season. They had several calls not go their way and the ball didn't bounce their way all night. It was a great effort to be in the game at all and the players should be commended for that.

Other people have asked what is wrong with Waverly why is their record so bad? IMO the only person that has been able to stop Harrison Martin this season is the guys wearing Waverly apparel. They seem to completely go away from going inside to him in the fourth quarter when the games on the line. They did a little better at Ironton getting him the ball late in the game and should have won because of it.


User avatar
Charley Hustle
SEOP
Posts: 4383
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 5:03 am

Re: IRONTON 71 VS Waverly 70 - FINAL - 1 OT

Post by Charley Hustle »

smurray wrote:The more I hear about it, the way it went down, the timeout (if indeed called) should not have been whistled as there was no "possession". And, I agree with JohnKnight - most would have go deaf and blind in that situation but I'd say they were form that area.
and the comment "Form", I am assuming you mean From that area means the ol Home Cookin action....that is funny especially from someone who wasnt there.......


ballrmom
Freshman Team
Posts: 171
Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2008 6:23 pm

Re: IRONTON 71 VS Waverly 70 - FINAL - 1 OT

Post by ballrmom »

Congrats Ironton


bucki4life
Freshman Team
Posts: 249
Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2008 11:05 am

Re: IRONTON 71 VS Waverly 70 - FINAL - 1 OT

Post by bucki4life »

Smurray, let me clear one thing up for you- there was no question about possession, Jake had the ball and that was clear. From where I was sitting it was obvious that Ironton was trying to tie him up or at least foul him. Jake did a great job getting the rebound and covering up because he went down on the floor as soon as he got the rebound. I think it is normal for any kid and most coaches to want to call timeout when they are trying to save a possession and any of the five Waverly kids on the floor could have done it even if they were told in the huddle that they had none left.

As far as John Knights comment that most refs let that go- well i think they let the play go but you cant blame the refs if the player or players were yelling timeout multiple times- if Ironton was calling time with none left we would all be on here screaming that we got ripped off.

I also want to say our kids did a great job of "overcoming" Saturday night. We didnt get too many calls our way and we just battled and battled until the very end. It was obvious Waverly wasnt getting any calls and that they wasnt going to get any calls but the coaches did a good job of not making big issues of it and i think the kids fed off of it. Now us fans we cried all night about the calls and thats ok we are suppose to.

As far as whats wrong with Waverly? Let me tell you whats wrong - we need to quit beating ourselves up over two and three point losses and just focus on what we got left, because I really seen the team doing this Saturday. We were down by 11 or so after a quarter and we got no calls and had Kretzer out with two fouls and instead of feeling sorry for poor old Waverly we just fought and fought until they were back in it. The multiple changes on defense were very good and slowed Ironton down.

Waverly did a great job handling Ironton pressure (I really thought they would press more but when they did we had no problem with it- they did pressure the ball pretty hard all night but thats normal)and we battled against thier bigs inside all night. Kretzer carried us for a while but even late in the overtime he delivered an unselfish great pass to Martin for a big hoop. Waverly players get along well and no one is blaming each other for the close losses and so far the only luck Waverly has had is bad but you can see them getting better and better and isnt that what we want in the long run?


smurray
SEOPS HO
Posts: 9902
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2006 1:52 pm

Re: IRONTON 71 VS Waverly 70 - FINAL - 1 OT

Post by smurray »

Thanks lebasketball22 and bucki4life, I was not there and could only go by what had previosuly been posted on this site and what I was told about the ball being loose. The first report I got was that Kretzer got the rebound and was being "hacked" but the officials did not call anything. At any rate the game is over and kike you said, we didn't get the calls all night and were down 11 with Kretzer on the bench but battled back and were in position to win.

Everyone keeps asking what's wrong with Waverly. The only thing wrong with Da Tigers is not being able to win these close games and people look at their record and think they're terrible. A play here, a foul shot there, one less turnover in that one, etc. etc. and Waverly is sitting here with 2 losses and everyone is talking about how great the Tigers are. These guys have improved tremendously since the opening game and like bucki4life said, need to focus on the remainder of the season and get even better as we begin tournament trail. I have seen huge improvements in everyone of these guys.

No time to hang heads and sulk over another close loss, Da Tigers have to get ready to travel to West tomorrow night. That starts a great run of victories that takes Da Tigers - of Waverly deep into the tournament.


bballin
JV Team
Posts: 275
Joined: Sat Dec 12, 2009 1:07 pm

Re: IRONTON 71 VS Waverly 70 - FINAL - 1 OT

Post by bballin »

Tough loss for Waverly.. Just the kind of luck Waverly has had this year.. I wouldnt want to play Waverly in the tourny, they are a good ball club despite there record.


JohnKnight
Varsity
Posts: 670
Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2005 2:24 pm

Re: IRONTON 71 VS Waverly 70 - FINAL - 1 OT

Post by JohnKnight »

I don't think I BLAMED anyone. I just said most refs don't see or hear timeout in that situation. Pretty much not going to do that unless the coach yells timeout in that situation. They know who has timeouts to call.

That would have been a good no call and pretty bush to complain about them not calling it had the shoe been on the other foot.


User avatar
TigerTownKid
Varsity
Posts: 421
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 4:47 pm

Re: IRONTON 71 VS Waverly 70 - FINAL - 1 OT

Post by TigerTownKid »

SOCFAN1430 wrote:They werent trying to foul,the ball was loose and they were battling for it,the another player called timeout.
A needed win for the Fighting Tigers.
How can a player call a timeout without possession[/quote]

That's a very good question that I wish I knew the answer to. Because I have seen it happen at least one other time this year in a VERY big game.


User avatar
TigerTownKid
Varsity
Posts: 421
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 4:47 pm

Re: IRONTON 71 VS Waverly 70 - FINAL - 1 OT

Post by TigerTownKid »

smurray wrote:The more I hear about it, the way it went down, the timeout (if indeed called) should not have been whistled as there was no "possession". And, I agree with JohnKnight - most would have go deaf and blind in that situation but I'd say they were form that area.
Actually they were a crew from Columbus, more of your area :122245


User avatar
PHS75
SEOPS HOF
Posts: 10632
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 9:58 am

Re: IRONTON 71 VS Waverly 70 - FINAL - 1 OT

Post by PHS75 »

Congrats to Leatherwood on his 2. Only 998 to go. :lol:
Last edited by PHS75 on Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.


soccerfix
Varsity
Posts: 684
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 9:19 pm

Re: IRONTON 71 VS Waverly 70 - FINAL - 1 OT

Post by soccerfix »

TigerTownKid wrote:
smurray wrote:The more I hear about it, the way it went down, the timeout (if indeed called) should not have been whistled as there was no "possession". And, I agree with JohnKnight - most would have go deaf and blind in that situation but I'd say they were form that area.
Actually they were a crew from Columbus, more of your area :122245
They sure did know a lot the Ironton fans for being from the Columbus area.


soccerfix
Varsity
Posts: 684
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 9:19 pm

Re: IRONTON 71 VS Waverly 70 - FINAL - 1 OT

Post by soccerfix »

PHS75 wrote:Congrats to Leatherwood on his 2. Only 988 to go. :lol:
Not doubting the math from PHS, but shouldn't it be 998?


User avatar
oak_a_holic
Freshman Team
Posts: 195
Joined: Mon Sep 25, 2006 9:19 pm

Re: IRONTON 71 VS Waverly 70 - FINAL - 1 OT

Post by oak_a_holic »

So wait, how did this game end?


User avatar
PHS75
SEOPS HOF
Posts: 10632
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 9:58 am

Re: IRONTON 71 VS Waverly 70 - FINAL - 1 OT

Post by PHS75 »

You are correct soccerfix I am glad you caught that. I was just testing everyone. :lol: Thank you


Trooper
Freshman Team
Posts: 223
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2007 12:24 pm

Re: IRONTON 71 VS Waverly 70 - FINAL - 1 OT

Post by Trooper »

oak_a_holic wrote:So wait, how did this game end?
Waverly got a rebound and another Waverly player requested a timeout (0 remaining). Waverly was granted the timeout and also a technical because they didn't have any left. Ironton made the 2 technical foul shots with 1 second left on the clock to win by 1 point.


Post Reply

Return to “Boys Basketball”