Pat Adams history

[Xception]

Seth Greenberg. Coach

Jay bilas, played

I can go on and on

Jeff Goodman was used to specifically refute your notion that everyone who disagrees with you is a UK homer. And yes, I would agree that Goodman is probably a lot more knowledgeable than you are.

Greenberg is huge buddies with Cal , comes to our practices but you think he's impartial ? Really

Here's one for you Kennedy said that slamming the ball is a T , he's a coach with about as much bias as Greenburg .

Everybody knows it's a T when you slam the ball , its unbelievable that we have people claiming it isn't . They lose their processors and claim it's not specifically in the rule book . Break dancing among many other things is not listed in the rules specifically either but I bet it gets a tech .

 

[Xception]

You don't have to be a coach or official to know that slamming the ball is against the rules of conduct , common knowledge or was anyway .

 

[PhattyJ4UK]

Greenberg is huge buddies with Cal , comes to our practices but you think he's impartial ? Really

Here's one for you Kennedy said that slamming the ball is a T , he's a coach with about as much bias as Greenburg .

Everybody knows it's a T when you slam the ball , its unbelievable that we have people claiming it isn't . They lose their processors and claim it's not specifically in the rule book . Masturbating on the court is not in the rules specifically either but I bet it gets a tech .

Which is exactly why I offered goodman ..but that wasn't good enough for you.. just stop..

You call me childish, yet you're the only one who resorted to insults and name calling and 5th grade trailer jokes

You don't answer anything that would back up your opinion and you bash our players

And no, its not cut and dry a technical. You can't give one example of thst call being made ( you might say south carolina, but that is questionable what the tech was for) ..but here's an example of when it was NOT called.. THIS SAME FRICKEN GAME..atm player ripped it out of UK player hand out of frustration and slammed the ball. Where was the technical?

I'm done wasting time with you as you're either a troll or a very miserable person. If you offered up anything worth having a discussion, okay, but you dont. Enjoy your "mansion" and "Lamborghini"

 

[Xception]

Which is exactly why I offered goodman ..but that wasn't good enough for you.. just stop..

You call me childish, yet you're the only one who resorted to insults and name calling and 5th grade trailer jokes

You don't answer anything that would back up your opinion and you bash our players

And no, its not cut and dry a technical. You can't give one example of thst call being made ( you might say south carolina, but that is questionable what the tech was for) ..but here's an example of when it was NOT called.. THIS SAME FRICKEN GAME..atm player ripped it out of UK player hand out of frustration and slammed the ball. Where was the technical?

I'm done wasting time with you as you're either a troll or a very miserable person. If you offered up anything worth having a discussion, okay, but you dont. Enjoy your "mansion" and "Lamborghini"

If you are rude then you get rude , I treat others how they treat me . You're mad and frustrated , I sense that . Debating or reasonable conversation is difficult for you , too much emotion . Your posts are wild and incoherent for the most part , asking for documentation on something that is common sense . On reflection THIS MAY HAVE HELPED bridge that gap .

 

[UKBrassowTipIN]

I'm still waiting to know why being out of the coaches box wasn't called, since it's a technical and all...it's in the book even.

Or why holding isn't called on every single play in football, or if it's called away from the play why anyone would be angry...everyone knows holding is illegal.

Maybe because this thing called common sense comes into play.

 

[Xception]

I'm still waiting to know why being out of the coaches box wasn't called, since it's a technical and all...it's in the book even.

Or why holding isn't called on every single play in football, or if it's called away from the play why anyone would be angry...everyone knows holding is illegal.

Maybe because this thing called common sense comes into play.

So if everything is not called then nothing should be called , I've been waiting on your answer for that .

 

[Xception]

People are using bizarre logic over this legit call . A coach got out of the box so how could you call a tech on slamming the ball . It's not specifically stated in the rule book , show me where that's at . You're not a coach , player or ref so how do you know it's a technical . That is a sample of the reasoning , I'm going to call it out because that is all ridiculous . We had a player mess up and it got called .

 

[mj2k10]

So if everything is not called then nothing should be called , I've been waiting on your answer for that .

No. But use some common sense on this. The T was wildly arbitrary, and ended up deciding the game. That is the absolute definition of dogsh** officiating.

There is NOTHING in the rule book that says slamming the ball down is an automatic technical. In practice, doing so often results in a T, but usually when it's done in frustration (especially when it's done in frustration about a foul call- which was absolutely not the case here). But not always, as I'm willing to bet we could come up with literally thousands of cases where a player slams the ball down for one reason or another, and isn't called for a technical foul. Choosing to call that at such a key moment is asinine beyond belief.

A good equivalent of this is the famous Pine Tar game of the early 80's, when a George Brett game-winning homerun against the Yankees was ruled an out because he had too much pine tar on his bat. Was there a rule in the books that justified the call? Yes. Was it something strictly enforced? No, and hell no. Which is why MLB stepped in and overruled the umpires. Common sense applications of rules are a foundation to any sport, and if you remove the common sense aspect of it, the rule itself loses all legitimacy.

 

[Xception]

No. But use some common sense on this. The T was wildly arbitrary, and ended up deciding the game. That is the absolute definition of dogsh** officiating.

There is NOTHING in the rule book that says slamming the ball down is an automatic technical. In practice, doing so often results in a T, but usually when it's done in frustration (especially when it's done in frustration about a foul call- which was absolutely not the case here). But not always, as I'm willing to bet we could come up with literally thousands of cases where a player slams the ball down for one reason or another, and isn't called for a technical foul. Choosing to call that at such a key moment is asinine beyond belief.

A good equivalent of this is the famous Pine Tar game of the early 80's, when a George Brett game-winning homerun against the Yankees was ruled an out because he had too much pine tar on his bat. Was there a rule in the books that justified the call? Yes. Was it something strictly enforced? No, and hell no. Which is why MLB stepped in and overruled the umpires. Common sense applications of rules are a foundation to any sport, and if you remove the common sense aspect of it, the rule itself loses all legitimacy.

We don't have to like it but the ref has every right to call that a tech and when it's usually not called is when a player slams it but immediately catches it on the bounce . When it goes up in the air or in a random direction it is called most of the time . Anytime a player does that they should assume a T is possibly coming , if they get lucky then fine but they know not to do it . Hump took the risk and lost , that's his fault . You're right it's not automatic but it's common sense to not do that .

 

[PhattyJ4UK]

If you are rude then you get rude , I treat others how they treat me . You're mad and frustrated , I sense that . Debating or reasonable conversation is difficult for you , too much emotion . Your posts are wild and incoherent for the most part , asking for documentation on something that is common sense . On reflection THIS MAY HAVE HELPED bridge that gap .

Buddy...I'm going to say this for you in advance simple terms as possible because it's apparent thst reading comprehension is something you really struggle with...

..who.. agrees..with...you... is the "documentation" I asked for..and also...what. .makes..you.. the. .ultimate. .being..in regards to refereeing a basketball game and the official NCAA rulebook..

The reason for this, is because multiple people.. including former refs..have said this is a discretionary call..what the poster above is trying to say is...the refs obviously used discretion on numerous other things that CALLED FOR THEM TO DO JUST THST...like the coach being out of the box .. or how about the team am player slamming the ball after snatching it out of Kentucky player hands earlier in the game.. (which you refuse to acknowledge) or how about rushing of the court early and the players leaving the bench.. obviously, no one is arguing thst sure, with a strict interpretation of every rule..all of those instances could be called a technical, just like humphries throwing the ball.. but the referees used correct discretion and didn't call them because they didn't effect the game... just like the ball throw.. thst was overhand and not high up in the air and was retrieved within maybe 2 seconds. .which they then inserted themselves and improperly effected the game.

What is so hard about thst? Now once, don't avoid every question that makes sense and answer those. Also, show us where(since you say it is 100% a tech) does it say that throwing the ball is without a doubt a technical.

Or does it allow for the refs to interpret when it should and shouldn't be used

 

[mj2k10]

We don't have to like it but the ref has every right to call that a tech and when it's usually not called is when a player slams it but immediately catches it on the bounce . When it goes up in the air or in a random direction it is called most of the time . Anytime a player does that they should assume a T is possibly coming , if they get lucky then fine but they know not to do it . Hump took the risk and lost , that's his fault . You're right it's not automatic but it's common sense to not do that .

And any DECENT ref, in the specific Humphries situation, would give UK a delay of game warning. And if it was UK's 2nd, then fine- UK would have 0 reason to complain about a technical.

Because decent refs use their discretion in the service of common sense. Idiot refs use their discretion to make arbitrary rulings about things that have no direct impact on the game, and change the outcome of the game in doing so. Any ref worth a nickel knows that's a really horrendous way to officiate a game. It's the equivalent of the cop who watches a hundred people drive by doing 10 mph over the speed limit, then randomly stops driver 101 and issues a speeding ticket. Within the rules? Yep. A good way to handle things? No bleeping way.

 

[Xception]

Buddy...I'm going to say this for you in advance simple terms as possible because it's apparent thst reading comprehension is something you really struggle with...

..who.. agrees..with...you... is the "documentation" I asked for..and also...what. .makes..you.. the. .ultimate. .being..in regards to refereeing a basketball game and the official NCAA rulebook..

The reason for this, is because multiple people.. including former refs..have said this is a discretionary call..what the poster above is trying to say is...the refs obviously used discretion on numerous other things that CALLED FOR THEM TO DO JUST THST...like the coach being out of the box .. or how about the team am player slamming the ball after snatching it out of Kentucky player hands earlier in the game.. (which you refuse to acknowledge) or how about rushing of the court early and the players leaving the bench.. obviously, no one is arguing thst sure, with a strict interpretation of every rule..all of those instances could be called a technical, just like humphries throwing the ball.. but the referees used correct discretion and didn't call them because they didn't effect the game... just like the ball throw.. thst was overhand and not high up in the air and was retrieved within maybe 2 seconds. .which they then inserted themselves and improperly effected the game.

What is so hard about thst? Now once, don't avoid every question that makes sense and answer those. Also, show us where(since you say it is 100% a tech) does it say that throwing the ball is without a doubt a technical.

Or does it allow for the refs to interpret when it should and shouldn't be used

Reading that is sad and should also get a technical .

 

[Xception]

And any DECENT ref, in the specific Humphrey situation, would give UK a delay of game warning. And if it was UK's 2nd, then fine- UK would have 0 reason to complain about a technical.

Because decent refs use their discretion in the service of common sense. Idiot refs use their discretion to make arbitrary rulings about things that have no direct impact on the game, and change the outcome of the game in doing so. Any ref worth a nickel knows that's a really horrendous way to officiate a game. It's the equivalent of the cop who watches a hundred people drive by doing 10 mph over the speed limit, then randomly stops driver 101 and issues a speeding ticket. Within the rules? Yep. A good way to handle things? No bleeping way.

So you don't like the call , nobody is happy with it . But it's the refs discretion and Hump opened the door and discretion is not always fair but if he just drops the ball then it never happens . If I don't speed then I don't give the jerk cop an opportunity .

 

[PhattyJ4UK]

Reading that is sad and should also get a technical .

Man, you take the cake.. insulting me about not being able to hold a valid conversation yet you have yet to refute (or even reply) to any valid argument or fact that I have made...

...time for everyone to ignore this guy because he's obviously just baiting

 

[mj2k10]

So you don't like the call , nobody is happy with it . But it's the refs discretion and Hump opened the door and discretion is not always fair but if he just drops the ball then it never happens . If I don't speed then I don't give the jerk cop an opportunity .

But he's still a jerk cop who is abusing his discretion, and sucks at his job.

If you want people to admit that Humphries opened the door for the idiot ref, well, you are right about that. But that doesn't change the fact that it was an absolutely unnecessary, God-awful call, by a ref who clearly has no respect for the entire common-sense foundation of applying rules. And therefore really, really, really sucks at his job.

 

[Mike_Edwards]

So unsportsmanlike which I posted , throwing the ball is a delay of the game . They can call delay of game when holding the ball after a made basket without going to the monitor . Either way it was justified and everybody knows it , bad play right call .

We had not been issued a warning to that point for delay of game so the correct call would be delay of game warning which would have had no impact on the outcome of the game. The way it was called Pat Adams had a direct impact on the game. His control took it right out of the players hands and dictated the outcome. If you can't see the injustice in that I really don't know what to say. Slamming of the ball has been going on many years in college basketball. The times it is called are very low even in the moments kids are showning frustration. This is the only time I can remember it being called for being happy with a game winning play--Indy

 

[Bungalow Bill]

That was excessive , look at our players reaction and even Humps as soon as he did it . They all knew it was a bad decision , if the players suspected it was a probable T before the whistle then that is all the proof you need that it was a legit call . He got carried away and went too far , many players make critical plays without that kind of reaction . Why is it unreasonable to expect him to do the same , he blew it .

It was not excessive. See how that works? I gave an opinion. Doesn't make it fact just like your opinion isn't fact. The fact that I'm right and you're wrong is another matter.

 

[Wall2Boogie]

Adams/sirmons 2016

 

[WeWant9]

This is more reason for the refs to be made available for questions, post game. It's one of those calls that could easily go either way. I think refs need to give justification on why they called some fouls. Players and coaches are required to speak to the media, no reason refs shouldn't either.

 

[Bungalow Bill]

So unsportsmanlike which I posted , throwing the ball is a delay of the game . They can call delay of game when holding the ball after a made basket without going to the monitor . Either way it was justified and everybody knows it , bad play right call .

Everybody knows it? No one but you knows it. That's pretty far from everybody. Don't be so delusional.

 

[catnerd]

I can't believe no one is talking about the obvious racial motivation to his call on Humphries (drip drip). #aussielivesmatter

 

[qwesley]

I am pretty sure they could have reviewed that and saw he was bumped as he released it and made it look worse that it was and he was not taunting.

 

[Bluest Member]

So that play doesn't bother you but it's called a T all the time and it's common knowledge . It's weird to see everyone act like it's not a T .

Have you ever read the friggin rules? It's not a Technical according to the rules unless it was in anger or aimed at someone,it's a discretionary call and a whole bunch of other officials told Seth greenburg they wouldn't have called it,especially when it decided the game.
So quit blathering BS unless you have a fact that disputes the actual RULE

 

[EvilMD]

On the pregame show, Matt announced the refs to Oscar. One of them we were 5-0 in games he called. Another we also had a good record. Then he said Pat Adams. Silence. Finally, Oscar says "let's just say he is accumulating a lot of critics". Before the game this was said.

 

[Untouchables22]

The T was unnecessary and it's frustrating that Adams waited almost a full 10 seconds after it happened and still decided to call it. If he had reflexively called it I would have a lot more sympathy but he took his time and thought about it and STILL decided it was a solid call. But what REALLY GRINDS MY GEARS are the 5 travel calls down the stretch on Davis, Jones, and House that the ref's refused to call but still called the travel on Lee. That's selective enforcement at it's finest and it's bulls%$@

 

[Blue_Reality]

No, it's not delay of game. It was a dead ball. And who was he being "Unsportsmanlike" to? He wasn't taunting anyone.

So that play doesn't bother you but it's called a T all the time and it's common knowledge . It's weird to see everyone act like it's not a T .

Please show us in the rule book where it says this constitutes a technical.....you will not find it....it is at the officials discretion

 

[irishcatdaddy]

Hey Xception...

I get what you are saying. Yes there has been numerous occasions where this is called a T. This is a call that is made at the discretion of the ref viewing the situation. So I understand you using that as justification for the call. It still does not make it a good call. Imagine if refs started viewing dunking as "excessive" which they did several years ago. Well by the letter of the law they would have every right to call a T every time a player dunked. It would be justified...but it would be just plan nonsense. I believe this is the argument many are trying to have. Yes, you can call that a T...but should you in EVERY situation since EVERY situation like this when its at the discretion of the official.

Now....I notice several times you blamed Hump...a kid

You have to understand this was an 18 year old kid from Australia who just came off the bench in the 27th game of his college career and rebounded his arse off. He kept us in the game. He was stepping out of the shadows and making a name for himself and was being rewarded for his effort by his teammates and showed the type of emotion I wish Skal had 1/16th of and was about to win the game for his team, his coach, his school....what college basketball is all about right?

.....now on the other hand you have an official (A GROWN ARSE MAN) that made a severe call on a KID for showing some emotion that was not disrespectful, harmful, nor was it in any from taunting. This call had a direct impact on the outcome of the game giving a team the opportunity to simply just shoot two free throws to completely swing the momentum of the game in their favor. No effort was required......just handed to them by the official.

......yet you wonder why anyone would question the call and ask if maybe this a part of the game that should be looked at...should we force these kids to be little robots and show no emotion what-so-ever, or do we trust that that a grown man can recognize that the 18 year old kid just made a huge play and his action in no way hurt any element of the game and just let it go...I'm going side with the kid on this one....Adams knew better then to make that call and still chose to do it.

 

[WildcatFan60]

Pat Adams used bad judgement, plain and simple. NCAA rulebook does not call this out at all. So it was a judgement call. A dead ball judgement call that highly likely changed the outcome of the game. It was not a "bang bang" block/charge call. It was not a missed walk call. Adams took several seconds to make the call. I am guessing he saw it, then the crowd and T&AM bench started screaming T, and he went ahead and called it.

Jeff Goodman on ESPN this morning, said someone had talked with Pat Adams after the game. And Pat said "no comment". The irony is that T&AM did the same thing as Humprey's just a couple minutes early. Actually T&AM was worse, because the A&M guy tore the ball away from the UK player and slammed it to the floor.

 

[Xception]

It was not excessive. See how that works? I gave an opinion. Doesn't make it fact just like your opinion isn't fact. The fact that I'm right and you're wrong is another matter.

You being mad doesn't make it a wrong call , slam ball get a T . This is basic stuff that everybody is conveniently dismissing .

 

[Xception]

But he's still a jerk cop who is abusing his discretion, and sucks at his job.

If you want people to admit that Humphries opened the door for the idiot ref, well, you are right about that. But that doesn't change the fact that it was an absolutely unnecessary, God-awful call, by a ref who clearly has no respect for the entire common-sense foundation of applying rules. And therefore really, really, really sucks at his job.

I don't want people to admit anything , I laid my opinion out there like everyone else did . The difference is mine was not popular and everybody has had a hissy fit about it and replied . There is zero chance that I will back down just because they didn't agree and tried fruitlessly to back me down from it , zero . I'm not trying to change your mind , impossible , but I will stand by mine . Nobody has posted anything other than they didn't like it , the ref didn't break a rule he just applied it stringently . Which is his right to do , I don't have a problem with the call but I do the stupid play .

 

[Xception]

Everybody knows it? No one but you knows it. That's pretty far from everybody. Don't be so delusional.

You are confusing not liking it with not knowing it , you don't like the call but any basic bb fans knows it .

 

[screwduke]

You don't like my opinion then cry your phatty mouth to sleep over it , idk what you think . You have been the only childish poster in this thread and don't even deserve a reasonable response . It was a good call , dumb play .

How was it a good call? There are people who absolutely hate Cal and Kentucky that are saying the call was terrible. Even Goodman said the call was terrible for Pete sake. And Goodman couldn't be paid enough to defend UK and Cal.

 

[Xception]

Have you ever read the friggin rules? It's not a Technical according to the rules unless it was in anger or aimed at someone,it's a discretionary call and a whole bunch of other officials told Seth greenburg they wouldn't have called it,especially when it decided the game.
So quit blathering BS unless you have a fact that disputes the actual RULE

You people are interpreting the rules how you see fit , if you were the ref then you're in business but you're not . You and everybody else need to stop making the bs dumb argument that it's not a rule , why did our players react and cringe as soon as he did it ? They knew it was wrong , that's all the evidence needed about his action . Think what you want , start a Facebook drive but it was called and we lost . Maybe they'll fire Adams if there is no such rule .

 

[jarms24]

Guys jack up shots at the basket well after the whistle is blown all the time. Isn't that a delay of game? It's a ridiculous call and everyone knows it.

I agree with what you're saying. It was ridiculous. I just don't think some folks understand the delay of game call. That can only be called when it's a live ball. Each subsequent time, it's an automatic technical. When Hump spiked the ball, it was a dead ball, therefore no delay of game could be assessed. It was a judgement call, and Pat Adams is an idiot. End of story.

 

[Xception]

It should be. But even you're not dumb enough to think that's true. How many times have you watched a player drive to the basket on the last play and get mugged and it go uncalled? It happens nearly every game that comes down the the last possession. Refs can use discretion on when to call something especially if it directly changes the outcome of the game.

We were up one point and shooting free throws. I have never in my life seen a game where the ref directly changed the outcome of the game.

Unfortunately you are dumb enough to think that there's moments when we turn off the refs ability to blow the whistle . Everybody is acting like a victim when it's obvious that he slammed the ball , refs out to get us .

 

[CHAMPCAT11]

It's delay of game and unsportsmanlike , the timing of the play doesn't matter . They should call it at any point in the game , this is Humphries fault . If a UL player did the same thing against us there would be an uproar , it's terrible that many are being disingenuous about it .

It wasn't unsportsmanlike. No way shape or form.

 

[Xception]

Please show us in the rule book where it says this constitutes a technical.....you will not find it....it is at the officials discretion

You said it right there , a officials discretion and he used it .

 

[Xception]

How was it a good call? There are people who absolutely hate Cal and Kentucky that are saying the call was terrible. Even Goodman said the call was terrible for Pete sake. And Goodman couldn't be paid enough to defend UK and Cal.

With every call you will find people who did and didn't agree with it , those who disagree usually speak out more . They don't constitute every opinion in the world however . Everybody on this board has called Goodman a troll and every other deragotory name possible but he's a righteous man this time .

 

[Xception]

It wasn't unsportsmanlike. No way shape or form.

When you become a ref that will work out great for us .

 

[PhattyJ4UK]

Stop replying to the baiter.. he doesn't reply to posts that put his theory to rest... his opinion is the RIGHT one guys.. just give up