Patrick and Elmore

[Classof06]

This is more of a comedic thread but I've noticed a lot of you guys taking shots at Len Elmore the past few weeks and I just can't understand it. I know I'm in the minority here but I think Len Elmore is the best ESPN college basketball commentator. Furthermore, DBR is probably the only place I've ever been where Duke fans don't like him; many of the Duke fans I've met over the years actually like him a lot.

He never gets caught up with extra-curricular stuff and gives straight-forward, concise analysis. His personality doesn't exactly have to most flavor but I can honestly say that I learn more about basketball listening to Lenny call games; you can't say that about many. I'm happy he does several Duke games a year.

I will admit that he should have criticized Deron Washington more during the Duke-VT game, but that's the only negative example I can remember.

Thoughts?

[Devil in the Blue Dress]

This is more of a comedic thread but I've noticed a lot of you guys taking shots at Len Elmore the past few weeks and I just can't understand it. I know I'm in the minority here but I think Len Elmore is the best ESPN college basketball commentator. Furthermore, DBR is probably the only place I've ever been where Duke fans don't like him; many of the Duke fans I've met over the years actually like him a lot.

He never gets caught up with extra-curricular stuff and gives straight-forward, concise analysis. His personality doesn't exactly have to most flavor but I can honestly say that I learn more about basketball listening to Lenny call games; you can't say that about many. I'm happy he does several Duke games a year.

I will admit that he should have criticized Deron Washington more during the Duke-VT game, but that's the only negative example I can remember.

Thoughts?
Your comments are refreshing.

[TNTDevil]

This is more of a comedic thread but I've noticed a lot of you guys taking shots at Len Elmore the past few weeks and I just can't understand it. I know I'm in the minority here but I think Len Elmore is the best ESPN college basketball commentator. Furthermore, DBR is probably the only place I've ever been where Duke fans don't like him; many of the Duke fans I've met over the years actually like him a lot.

He never gets caught up with extra-curricular stuff and gives straight-forward, concise analysis. His personality doesn't exactly have to most flavor but I can honestly say that I learn more about basketball listening to Lenny call games; you can't say that about many. I'm happy he does several Duke games a year.

I will admit that he should have criticized Deron Washington more during the Duke-VT game, but that's the only negative example I can remember.

Thoughts?I don't find him offensive and think, out of all the ESPN "analysts" he provides some of the best (I'm uncertain how much of a compliment that represents).

However, he is one of the main media culprits in the "Duke gets all the calls" controversy. He doesn't even attempt to temper his remarks with actual game analysis by stating "... the more aggressive teams usually get the calls".

If he's sitting in a studio and makes that comment, I would more readily let it go but, he's said it before while sitting on the sideline commenting on a game in which Duke is playing.

[SMO]

I don't find him offensive and think, out of all the ESPN "analyists" he provides some of the best (I'm uncertain how much of a compliment that represents).

However, he is one of the main media culprits in the "Duke gets all the calls" controversy. He doesn't even attempt to temper his remarks with actual game analysis by stating "... the more aggressive teams usually get the calls".

If he's sitting in a studio and makes that comment, I would more readily let it go but, he's said it before while sitting on the sideline commenting on a game in which Duke is playing.

I think it was 2006 when Elmore suggested not only that Duke gets calls, but gets them at opportunistic points in the game. This after JJ was clearly being held by a VT player who fell to the floor when JJ threw up his hands. Elmore went on a rant about JJ pushing off, calls and their timing apparently without viewing the replay that clearly showed there was no push-off. He then appeared the next night on ESPN to pseudo-apologize/explain himself.

Don't get me wrong - I think he usually does a nice job but he gets carried away sometimes. Must be the Terp in him.

[MulletMan]

My favorite Elmore story...

A few years back when I was coChair of the grad ticket committee, we gave out T-shirts from the campout weekend to all of the "distinguished" guests that we could (we had an ordering error and ended up with waaaaaaaaaay too many shirts). Anyway, most of the folks that we gave them to loved them, from broadcasters to coaches (John Cheney put his in his office!).

In any case, Elmore showed up around 10AM to call a 12:00 game against GT, I believe, and we'd been outside drinking since about 5AM. He's sitting on the visitors bench in Cameron with Patrick and J-Will, who was doing some color for ESPN at the time. We go over, just reaking of whiskey and give a T-shirt to each of them. Well, needless to say that Elmore roles his eyes and looks at us kind of with a bit of disdain... J-Will just start laughing hysterically, and Patrick says, "You know guys... he went to Maryland!" To which my buddy replies, "Yeah, but we're so drunk we figured this would be funny!" At which point Elmore finally cracks a smile and thanks us for the shirt.

I'm sure he threw it away before the game started! Good times! :D

[The1Bluedevil]

I really enjoy Jimmy Dykes. Very knowledgable and doesn't chat away through the game. Katz, Bilas and Dykes are the only ESPN commentators/writers that I care to hear speak.

[Faison1]

I think it was 2006 when Elmore suggested not only that Duke gets calls, but gets them at opportunistic points in the game. This after JJ was clearly being held by a VT player who fell to the floor when JJ threw up his hands. Elmore went on a rant about JJ pushing off, calls and their timing apparently without viewing the replay that clearly showed there was no push-off. He then appeared the next night on ESPN to pseudo-apologize/explain himself.

Don't get me wrong - I think he usually does a nice job but he gets carried away sometimes. Must be the Terp in him.

I was just about to say that in year 2006, IIRC right after the Away BC game, where there was a huge disparity in fouls called, there seemed to be a crescendo of "Duke gets all the calls" criticism (Duke won the game)....Len did the game right afterwards, and during his critique, he definitely sided with the Duke Bashers, and even used the word "conspiracy".

I have respect for Len, as he seems to be a pretty good guy, but I definitely rank him up there as one of the more jaded anti-Duke announcers.....then again, I firmly believe he feeds right into the great ratings machine for ESPN....people love to watch Duke lose, and Len seems to fuel the fire.

[ChrisP]

I used to like Jimmy D. when I first heard him calling women's games. And I guess I don't "dislike" him now, but he really showed himself to be a buffoon (I think) after the GT-UNC game earlier this year when GT took them to the wire before losing by 1. He and whomever he worked the game with were on ESPN for some "wrap up" comments and Dykes started going on about how since UNC had beaten Clemson and now GT on the road, that there really wasn't anyone out there to challenge them except for maybe Duke at Duke. I was like "What?!?" The heels just squeaked out 2 wins - one in overtime - and that makes them a lock to stroll through the conference season?

Then, after the Duke-UNC game, Dykes was in the studio with Jay B. and some other guys and he went off about how Duke only won by 11 and that Ty Lawson was good for at least 11 points. That may well be true but...we beat them at THEIR place and we missed enough FT's to have won by 15 points or more, so whatever, Dykes. I guess overall, I like the guy, but I just don't think he's all that knowledgeable.

On a side note, and in an attempt at keeping this thread somewhat on track. I think Len Elmore is a twerp and echo the sentiments of others here that while he's knowledgeable and does provide some good analysis, he's also kind of petty and delights in giving Duke and K these back-handed compliments during games and that's why I dislike him.

[Classof06]

Very informative comments. Maybe I haven't caught onto Elmore's back-handed remarks as much you guys but I always thought he was right down the middle; complimentary when necessary and critical when appropriate. To me, he comes across as a "no frills" kind of guy who treats Duke like any other college team. The latter is why I like him so much.

I'll also agree with the sentiment on Jimmy Dykes. I loved him towards the beginning of the year until about a month ago. He had great things to say about Duke's recruiting class during the McDonald's AA game last spring; he really singled out Duke's class, Singler especially. But this year, he lists his "Power 5" teams and even though the list has changed throughout the course of the year, Duke has never once been on it. Simply put, I can't get with that.

[dukegirlinsc]

This is more of a comedic thread

boy, is that correct or what?

lol...just kidding.

ol lenny isn't my favorite person to listen to...but to be totally honest with you, i'm not a HUGE fan of any analyst. (except for herbie, of course...and that's only if i can look at him. :D ) i get ill when anyone says anything negative about duke, or anything positive about whoever's playing duke. (kidding...obviously.)

[Indoor66]

i get ill when anyone says anything negative about duke, or anything positive about whoever's playing duke. (kidding...obviously.)

Is that ill as in sick or ill as in ill?

[weezie]

Great. A Len Elmore as "swell guy" thread. What next, an ode to Billy Packer?

[GDT]

I'm happy he does several Duke games a year.
Thoughts?

This is comedic!

I have only heard Gminski do a few games this year, but it seems that, at least in the games that I've heard, he reports that a foul has been called and leaves it at that. Elmore, like a lot of announcers, considers it his duty to give his opinion just about every call, even though he was never an official. Even though it doesn't matter what he thinks. I mention Gminski, not because he's a former DU player, but because it was so refreshing to have an announcer focus on the players not the official. Irrespective of whether Elmore has a bias, his pompous pronouncements on the accuracy of calls, despite not being trained and rarely being in proper position are just annoying.

[BlueDevilJay]

Sorry, guess I'm still a dissenter in that I cannot stand Elmore. Now my FAVORITE commentator I've ever heard work a Duke game was none other than Brad D (I can't remember the spelling, forgive me). I LOVED hearing him do commentary because he was complimentary to BOTH teams, called the game like he saw it, and that was what you got with him.

[TwoDukeTattoos]

A little off the subject, I personally used to love Brad Daugherty. Too bad he went to Nascar.

[weezie]

Seriously? Nascar? Wow. Since when?

[BlueDevilBaby]

I find Mr. Elmore more tolerable in my old age. G-man is excellent - very neutral even when doing Duke games and, of course, very knowledgeable. I think Dan Bonner is pretty good as well. I liked Dykes at the beginning of the season, but the more I hear him, the more he is getting on my nerves.

[allenmurray]

A little off the subject, I personally used to love Brad Daugherty. Too bad he went to Nascar.

Brad was great. Good analyst, great sense of humor, knew when to talk and when not to talk. And, that great NC Mountain accent in his voice.

[TwoDukeTattoos]

Seriously? Nascar? Wow. Since when?

For a couple of years now. As a matter of fact, he was covering the Daytona 500. Can't recall which network. Evidently, he has a lifelong passion for Nascar. As a matter of fact, his jersey number, 43, was after Richard Petty.

[TwoDukeTattoos]

Brad was great. Good analyst, great sense of humor, knew when to talk and when not to talk. And, that great NC Mountain accent in his voice.

Yes, that's what I loved was his great mountain accent! And his sense of humor. He really got excited by the game and was a purist in announcing. Didn't throw in a bunch of garbage that didn't need to be heard.

[calltheobvious]

Yes, that's what I loved was his great mountain accent! And his sense of humor. He really got excited by the game and was a purist in announcing. Didn't throw in a bunch of garbage that didn't need to be heard.

I always loved his excitement when he would give rhetorical advice to a "YOUNG MAN!"

[BlueDevilBaby]

Ha, ha! I can hear Brad saying it right now. Let's see if he says it on a NASCAR broadcast.

[bradjenk]

The thing I notice about Elmore is that he tends to call our games from the perspective of our opponent. Sometimes he seems to be coaching the other team. "You gotta take Duke off the bounce" comes up quite a bit. One of my friends and I joke that if they would open the locker room door at halftime, Elmore would race in to help our opponent with halftime adjustments. Maybe he does this will the underdog team all the time and I haven't noticed. Anyone else notice this too?

[Faison1]

I, too, saw Brad D at the NASCAR event while flipping channels over the weekend, and was wondering why he was announcing there. So, are we sure it was out of choice, or was he forcibly moved? I also liked him in college hoops.

G-man is probably one of my favorites as well.

[TwoDukeTattoos]

I, too, saw Brad D at the NASCAR event while flipping channels over the weekend, and was wondering why he was announcing there. So, are we sure it was out of choice, or was he forcibly moved? I also liked him in college hoops.

According to press, it was choice.

[Classof06]

The thing I notice about Elmore is that he tends to call our games from the perspective of our opponent. Sometimes he seems to be coaching the other team. "You gotta take Duke off the bounce" comes up quite a bit. One of my friends and I joke that if they would open the locker room door at halftime, Elmore would race in to help our opponent with halftime adjustments. Maybe he does this will the underdog team all the time and I haven't noticed. Anyone else notice this too?

This is the first critique of Elmore that I myself have noticed. Not that you other guys are making stuff up but I do notice that sometimes Elmore commentates from an opponent's perspective. I've definitely heard the "take Duke off the bounce" comment before

That's annoying but isn't that a subtle sign of respect? When you're calling a game in Cameron, where Duke loses so rarely, it's almost natural to talk about what a team has to do to pull off an upset in Cameron. By the time the NFL playoffs came around, commentators for New England's games were doing the same thing.

[_Gary]

The thing I notice about Elmore is that he tends to call our games from the perspective of our opponent. Sometimes he seems to be coaching the other team. "You gotta take Duke off the bounce" comes up quite a bit. One of my friends and I joke that if they would open the locker room door at halftime, Elmore would race in to help our opponent with halftime adjustments. Maybe he does this will the underdog team all the time and I haven't noticed. Anyone else notice this too?

Yes, he's really bad about that. But he's not the only one that commentates that way. He's just one of the worst when it comes to Duke games.

I also love Brad and wish he'd do more basketball games.


Gary

[barjwr]

I wish we could convince Bill Raftery to do some ACC games--the weather's gotta be better than up in Big East country.

[mpj96]

Elmore does as well commenting as you could expect a died-in-the-wool Terp to do.

Agree with the general sentiment about Dykes. Every time I have seen or heard him on TV his sentiments have been pretty much indistinguishable from those of any other UNC fan that I know.

[dukegirlinsc]

Is that ill as in sick or ill as in ill?

both!

[HK Dukie]

I just wish we could get one game where we don't have to hear about "bad calls". Just analyze the game and leave the rest to the viewer please.

[365Duke]

I wish we could convince Bill Raftery to do some ACC games


I just got sick:eek:

[jimmymax]

Another vote for Brad Daugherty despite his roots - though I love the Black Mountain area. Len Elmore does nothing for me. Sometimes I wish they'd rotate in some Big-10+ or Pac-10 announcers, like they do refs, to get some fresh and hopefully unprejudiced perspective...

[jimmymax]

Oh yeah, and god forbid any former Duke play exhibit the same alma mater homerism as Kenny Smith...

[ugadevil]

Has Len Elmore's obnoxious attitude and clearly biased behavior become a little bit more noticeable? He talks about how he doesn't want to call out the officials and then proceeds to criticize them for the entire 2nd half. He shows no comprehension of what the rules are and refused to acknowledge himself as being wrong. I'm sorry but the man is an idiot.

[91_92_01_10_15]

I just wish we could get one game where we don't have to hear about "bad calls". Just analyze the game and leave the rest to the viewer please.

IMO, Dan Bonner is actually very good about this, sometimes maddeningly so.

[Richard Berg]

I wish we could convince Bill Raftery to do some ACC games--the weather's gotta be better than up in Big East country.
Ick. He was on one or two of the Raycom feeds this season when ESPN was blacked out and...no, just no.

Heartily agreed about Daughtery though.

As for Elmore, I pretty much agree with the OP. He simply announces well. He probably has a bias like everyone else, but it's never grated on me.

[Uncle Drew]

Years ago my favorite in game announcer was Al McGuire. It seemed he always seemed unbiased and his stories always added to the game instead of detracting from it. More recently Brad Daugherty had been growing on me despite the fact he is a UNC alum. Billy Packer, Dick Vitale, Brent Musburger et. al. seem to all have annoying traits and habits. If I had a radio station that picked up the Duke broadcasts without sounding like it was coming through two paper cups and a string I'd listen to that.

While I totally agree about a few posters saying Elmore shows bias and inserts his personal opinion into every game he broadcasts, isn't that what's expected these days? I honestly don't know what is being taught in journalism classes in college these days. But every writer, announcer, commentator these days seems to have thrown the term "unbiased" out the window. It's not just sports and certainly not the anti-Duke tsunami we all see from time to time. It's the news, stock report, sports report etc. The one thing we could all agree on years ago was the weather, now I half way expect the local weather person to chime in with their opinion on global warming before I get to hear the forecast.

I don't care what your political views are, we all know one network / station attempts to view and skew the news one way. While another network / station seeking viewership from the other side tries to slant it's broadcast the other way. Is there such thing as unbiased media anymore? When Dan Rather gets busted for running with unsubstantiated facts, when Billy Packer points out the majority of the crowd in a championship game is pulling against Duke, when Fox news tries to give it's viewers the hope the Republicans aren't running a race for second right now........is being unbiased a thing of the past? As much as it irritates me, why thinly veil bias if a network, announcer, writer is biased? Let them say what they TRULY think either way. Because attempting to call what we hear on TV and read in the news papers every day as "fair and ballanced" is like calling Rosie O'Donnel "thin and sexy".

[dukie8]

it was classic last night when stacey dales had to interupt dumb and dumber after 5 minutes of them bickering over a backcourt violation. i had never seen a sideline reporter have to step in and put out a fire like that before.

[BlueDevilJay]

A little off the subject, I personally used to love Brad Daugherty. Too bad he went to Nascar.

Thats pretty funny, I said the same thing in the post directly above yours, but I guess no one noticed because I couldn't spell his last name :D Im in total agreement, I loved when he called our games. Unbilased (trademark BlueDevilJay Inc) and insightful commentary, and is a hell of a nice guy to meet in person as well. Hated he went to NASCAR as well and couldn't for the life of me figure out what he was doing there when I saw him.

[bjornolf]

Brad Daugherty is a HUGE NASCAR fan. He does some NASCAR analysis for ESPN, and he was one of the hosts of that show last year about athletes from other sports driving NASCAR cars. He and Tim Cowlishaw kind of carry the NASCAR torch on ESPN. I guess that's the disadvantage of that sweet mountain accent. He grew up watching racing. He probably would have rather been a driver, but just couldn't fit in those tight cockpits.

As for Elmore, while I agree that he pounded Duke and the free throws a little much, he DID point out, at least three times that I heard, that GT had been out-FTd (boy that's awkward, but I'm not sure how to say it better!) by 66 in their four losses before that. Duke shot 19 more, which is not that far out of line from that number. And he did say at about 10:20 in the 2nd half that there was too much contact on shots during the game ON BOTH SIDES that the refs should have been calling.

And we did get one bad no-call that Elmore didn't point out. When Henderson saved that long pass from Singler and threw it to Nelson, it was a beautiful play, but in the slo-mo replay, his foot CLEARLY touches the press table before the ball leaves his hand, HECK, before it even starts to go forward. Elmore, watching the replay, didn't say anything.

[dukegirlinsc]

it was classic last night when stacey dales had to interupt dumb and dumber after 5 minutes of them bickering over a backcourt violation. i had never seen a sideline reporter have to step in and put out a fire like that before.

That was honestly one of the most ridiculous discussions/arguments I've ever heard. I think they're both slowly becoming senile. :eek:

[jdc75]

I think Elmore definitely has an axe to grind with Duke when comes to how their games are officiated. I recall in '06, during J.J. and Sheldon's senior seasons, he was announcing a Duke game (I'm pretty sure it was at Boston College but I'm not positive) when he questioned a call in favor of Duke. This is not a direct quote but he said very close to "See,this is why people claim that there's a conspiracy for Duke getting all the calls". To me that was one of the most shockingly biased and unprofessional comments I've ever heard a sports announcer say. He essentially legitimized the lunatic fringe and fueled the paranoid Duke hatred that was peaking around that time.

This trend of annoucers constantly questioning officiating with all the advantages of hindsight and slow motion replay serves no purpose. Elmore and Patrick are two of the worst along with Packer. I wish announcers would just call the game!

[alteran]

The thing I notice about Elmore is that he tends to call our games from the perspective of our opponent. Sometimes he seems to be coaching the other team. "You gotta take Duke off the bounce" comes up quite a bit. One of my friends and I joke that if they would open the locker room door at halftime, Elmore would race in to help our opponent with halftime adjustments. Maybe he does this will the underdog team all the time and I haven't noticed. Anyone else notice this too?

Yes. Excellent comment.

People mention his critiquing of any call which can possibly argued to have "favored" Duke (and many that can't), and his general refusal to do this the other way, but people don't mention this.

It's a "Mr. Elmore, your slip is showing" thing he does which shows his bias.

All this said, when Elmore isn't feeding the conspiracy theory stuff he's not bad, it's just feeding the Duke conspiracy is hard for some of us Dukies to tune out.

[bjornolf]

At about the 9:00 mark in the 2nd half, Elmore and Patrick were talking about Matt Causey. Patrick said that when Causey's eyes were fluttering, he would have answered the question "how many fingers am I holding up?" with "Thursday".

My wife likes According to Jim, and we watched it last night on TiVo before going to sleep. Andy and Jim fall through the roof of a charity thrift store. Andy is shaken up. Jim holds up three fingers and asks how many fingers he's holding up. Andy's answer? "Thursday." Now, if he didn't watch According to Jim, what are the chances he'd pick that EXACT answer the night after it aired? Of the MILLIONS of goofy answers he could have picked to that question, what are the chances? :eek:

Yes, I know I deserve a :eek: for admitting to watching that show.

[Johnboy]

That was honestly one of the most ridiculous discussions/arguments I've ever heard. I think they're both slowly becoming senile. :eek:

By the way , Patrick was right, and Elmore was wrong - the ball and the player must cross the midcourt line before a backcourt violation can occur. Elmore, who is a smart enough guy (Harvard Law) and long time announcer, really should know the basic rules of the game, and this is one of them. It drove me nuts that they had a great opportunity to clear up this misapprehension of the rules and failed to do it.

[alteran]

IMO, Dan Bonner is actually very good about this, sometimes maddeningly so.

:D.

Yes, I remember complaining about this back in the day. "How come he doesn't point out how ridiculous that was?"

Now I know. Beware what you wish for, I guess.

[blueprofessor]

I think Elmore definitely has an axe to grind with Duke when comes to how their games are officiated. I recall in '06, during J.J. and Sheldon's senior seasons, he was announcing a Duke game (I'm pretty sure it was at Boston College but I'm not positive) when he questioned a call in favor of Duke. This is not a direct quote but he said very close to "See,this is why people claim that there's a conspiracy for Duke getting all the calls". To me that was one of the most shockingly biased and unprofessional comments I've ever heard a sports announcer say. He essentially legitimized the lunatic fringe and fueled the paranoid Duke hatred that was peaking around that time.

This trend of announcers constantly questioning officiating with all the advantages of hindsight and slow motion replay serves no purpose. Elmore and Patrick are two of the worst along with Packer. I wish announcers would just call the game!




...re questionable calls or non-calls or otherwise problematic comments at 13 to 3 against Duke.That was with about 9 minutes to play. I admit that I had a predisposition that Len is not impartial regarding Duke and that I would try once to quantify that perceived prejudice.Certainly,my prior assumption had some effect on the tally.
Best regards.:)

[bjornolf]

Now here's something I don't understand. According to Elmore's reading of the rule at the 1:45 mark, it WAS a back-court violation. He said "when NEITHER the player NOR the ball is in CONTACT with the backcourt, the ball is in the frontcourt." Now, by that reading, if the player's feet are in the frontcourt and he's dribbling the ball in the backcourt, that's a backcourt violation, because while the ball hasn't crossed the line technically, it's NOT in CONTACT with the backcourt when it's not touching the floor. It's not worded well, and I think they need to fix that, but by a strict reading of that statement, a player standing in the frontcourt dribbling in the backcourt is committing a backcourt violation.

[arbee]

Now here's something I don't understand. According to Elmore's reading of the rule at the 1:45 mark, it WAS a back-court violation. He said "when NEITHER the player NOR the ball is in CONTACT with the backcourt, the ball is in the frontcourt." Now, by that reading, if the player's feet are in the frontcourt and he's dribbling the ball in the backcourt, that's a backcourt violation, because while the ball hasn't crossed the line technically, it's NOT in CONTACT with the backcourt when it's not touching the floor. It's not worded well, and I think they need to fix that, but by a strict reading of that statement, a player standing in the frontcourt dribbling in the backcourt is committing a backcourt violation.

Elmore didn't read the entire rule. There is a separate clause (article 3, part c) which deals with dribbling while moving from the back court to the front court. At the following link, go to Rule 4, Section 28 (page BR-89):

http://www.ncaa.org/library/rules/2007/2007_m_w_basketball_rules.pdf

The play in question last night, though may deal with whether Paulus picked up the dribble, before stepping back into the backcourt and then passing. If so, then by my reading, it is a backcourt violation, as becomes clear by reading the example A.R. 90 on that same page of the rule book.

Did Paulus pick up the dribble, with one foot placed in the front court, and then step back into the back court? If so, it is a backcourt violation. If he did not pick up the dribble, it is *not* a backcourt violation.

[bjornolf]

well, his pivot foot appeared to be in the front court, or at least on the line, when he was holding the ball. It then slid back, although part of that seemed to be thanks to a little pushing. I don't know what counts as "in the frontcourt." Yes, GP was holding the ball with both feet in the frontcourt at one point. However, he was clearly holding the ball with his arms extended into the backcourt, so the ball never PHYSICALLY crossed the midcourt line. Not sure how that works.

[vango]

I like Patrick OK - I tolerate Elmore.

My favorite part of the telecast was when Elmore insulted his undergrad alma mater, Maryland, by basically saying he couldn't figure it out b/c he went to Maryland. That was awesome. He back peddled pretty quick on that one by saying he was joking and for Maryland fans not to start sending him letters....

[dw0827]

For a variety of reasons, I'm not one to participate in the bashing of announcers . . . but I have read this thread and it prompted me to read some of the linked Basketball Rules. And I found something that surprised me . . . and relates to something that Elmore said (or I think he said because I didn't pay much attention to it at the time).

It was about when Kyle got pushed under the basket and Markie got nailed on the layup. They were talking about excessive contact and whether or not it constituted an intentional foul. I thought Elmore said something about how difficult it was for the ref to judge the intent of the player . . . "getting into his head" . . . I think he said.

On page BR-19 of the rules, it states

"Airborne Player/Excessive or Severe Contact. When a player is airborne
attempting a lay-up, any excessive contact by an opponent shall be an
intentional personal foul, even when the opponent is legitimately attempting
to play either the ball or the player. When the contact is severe, a flagrant
personal foul shall be assessed.
The airborne player is in a position of vulnerability and any contact that
is excessive or severe shall be penalized."

I wasn't really aware of this. It seems to say that it doesn't matter what the player's intent was and it doesn't matter if he was making a play on the opponent or the ball. Excessive contact itself is sufficient cause for an intentional foul being called.

News to me . . . and I don't think I see refs interpreting it this way. Am I wrong?

[dw0827]

Sure, sure . . . blame it on your wife.

I do that too.

[bjornolf]

For a variety of reasons, I'm not one to participate in the bashing of announcers . . . but I have read this thread and it prompted me to read some of the linked Basketball Rules. And I found something that surprised me . . . and relates to something that Elmore said (or I think he said because I didn't pay much attention to it at the time).

It was about when Kyle got pushed under the basket and Markie got nailed on the layup. They were talking about excessive contact and whether or not it constituted an intentional foul. I thought Elmore said something about how difficult it was for the ref to judge the intent of the player . . . "getting into his head" . . . I think he said.

On page BR-19 of the rules, it states

"Airborne Player/Excessive or Severe Contact. When a player is airborne
attempting a lay-up, any excessive contact by an opponent shall be an
intentional personal foul, even when the opponent is legitimately attempting
to play either the ball or the player. When the contact is severe, a flagrant
personal foul shall be assessed.
The airborne player is in a position of vulnerability and any contact that
is excessive or severe shall be penalized."

I wasn't really aware of this. It seems to say that it doesn't matter what the player's intent was and it doesn't matter if he was making a play on the opponent or the ball. Excessive contact itself is sufficient cause for an intentional foul being called.

News to me . . . and I don't think I see refs interpreting it this way. Am I wrong?

that IS news to me. I'll have to remember that. But by that definition, it seems like there are AT LEAST 5 or 6 intentional fouls in every ACC game this year. :eek:

[IStillHateJimBain]

I've always thought perceived bias on the part of TV announcers had more to do with one's position on the spectrum of fanhood than anything else. If someone's in the middle and you're to one side, then of course you will think he's off to the left or right. I really don't pay that much attention to what these guys say any more. Mike Patrick (or whatever his real name is) has really regressed as a play-by-play man. If he says "Are you kidding me?" one more time for a routine play, it will be the 1,000,000th time. I've never liked Elmore that much but more because I just don't think he has a great voice for the medium. Did he do the Laettner Miracle game of 1992 against Kentucky? When Sean Woods made the driving shot to put Kentucky ahead, I seem to remember Elmore saying something like, 'Yeah, but it was a terrible shot, OK,' kind of with a disdain that at the time made me think he was pulling for Duke in that one.

[Cameron]

I used to watch According to Jim, and I saw no shame in it. It was funny. According to Jim watching might be one of the worst ways to waste your time--which is what I finally decided--but it's still a funny show.

I find the Mike Patrick thing quite funny, though. Nothing like a good ole pilfer.

[killerleft]

I feel sad whenever I hear Elmore and bias in the same sentence. It makes me think of Len Bias and what might have been.

[aro24]

You beat me to it Johnboy......the easiest way to remember the rule....both feet and the ball have to cross the midcourt line before a backcourt can be called.....can't believe they argued over this for 5 mins and never got it right.

ARo24

[bluedev_92]

My biggest problem with Elmore is that he tends to glorify extremely rough play that is clearly worthy of a called foul. I don't have the quotes with me, but just go back to some of the shots that Singler has taken in several games called by Elmore & you will basically hear comments that insinuate approval of such actions...

[Flyers52]

Did anyone else hear during last nights broadcast, how Patrick and Elmore were talking about GT's Jeremis Smith? At one point they were talking about how Smith has the body of a football player- although never having played. They told of a story Smith had said of the GT AD approaching him and asking him to play TE or DE for the football team. Smith also had said that if a career in the NBA doesn't work out, he'd definitely try an NFL combine- ala Antonio Gates.
That's nothing, it happens...but what the two knuckleheads then said I found completely ridiculous.

Patrick or Elmore, i do not recall which one, said that going for a pass over the middle in football, is similar to boxing out in a basketball game. My friends and I could not keep a straight face while hearing that. There is no correlation between boxing out, and catching a floater over the middle and being blind sided by a safety of LB. Completely ridiculous assertion IMHO.

[BlueDevilBaby]

So I can straddle the line and dribble the ball in the frontcourt, and then dribble the ball back into the backcourt without a backcourt violation because I never put the other foot into the frontcourt? Makes no sense to me. I would think that is a backcourt violation.:confused:

[bjornolf]

I admit it. I enjoy the show. But it's one of those shows that I wouldn't watch if the wife didn't like it. I also kind of like Ugly Betty, but again, I wouldn't watch it without the wife.

Has anyone else noticed that cheryl has been only seen on computer the first part of the season, and when she IS there in person, she's either wearing a big coat or lying in bed under the covers? And now they're saying she's pregnant on the show. Makes me wonder if the actress got preggers in the off-season. I see a lot of references to her first kid, but not much about a current pregnancy.

[bjornolf]

So I can straddle the line and dribble the ball in the frontcourt, and then dribble the ball back into the backcourt without a backcourt violation because I never put the other foot into the frontcourt? Makes no sense to me. I would think that is a backcourt violation.:confused:
We've seen some interesting thoughts about how picking up the dribble changes the call, but no, as long as you keep your dribble and keep SOMETHING in the backcourt at all times, you can dance right along that line moving the ball over it several times. You might get called if the ref isn't paying attention, but it's technically NOT a violation.

[BlueDevilBaby]

When he said that, I thought out loud, "What?" I have no idea what he was talking about. Perhaps shielding the defender with your backside? What a dipsy doodle.

[bjornolf]

Did anyone else hear during last nights broadcast, how Patrick and Elmore were talking about GT's Jeremis Smith? At one point they were talking about how Smith has the body of a football player- although never having played. They told of a story Smith had said of the GT AD approaching him and asking him to play TE or DE for the football team. Smith also had said that if a career in the NBA doesn't work out, he'd definitely try an NFL combine- ala Antonio Gates.
That's nothing, it happens...but what the two knuckleheads then said I found completely ridiculous.

Patrick or Elmore, i do not recall which one, said that going for a pass over the middle in football, is similar to boxing out in a basketball game. My friends and I could not keep a straight face while hearing that. There is no correlation between boxing out, and catching a floater over the middle and being blind sided by a safety of LB. Completely ridiculous assertion IMHO.

I heard that comment too. As a former linebacker and tight end, at first I agreed that it was ridiculous, but after thinking back to the play in the lane this year in the ACC, I'm not so sure. ;)

[aro24]

So I can straddle the line and dribble the ball in the frontcourt, and then dribble the ball back into the backcourt without a backcourt violation because I never put the other foot into the frontcourt? Makes no sense to me. I would think that is a backcourt violation.:confused:

This is how I understand it.....actually had college coach perform the exact situation you are speaking of and declared that was not a backcourt violation.

ARo24

[Flyers52]

The only thing I could MAYBE compare it to, is perhaps taking a charge in traffic. Other then that, the comment seemed really loopy to us who were watching the game.

[allenmurray]

I had always remained nuetral on Elmore as an announcer. The fact that he was one of my favorite college players when I was a kid probably helped. Until last night. That had to be one of the most poorly announced games I have ever heard.

[arbee]

We've seen some interesting thoughts about how picking up the dribble changes the call, but no, as long as you keep your dribble and keep SOMETHING in the backcourt at all times, you can dance right along that line moving the ball over it several times. You might get called if the ref isn't paying attention, but it's technically NOT a violation.

Your description, related to dribbling is correct. Think of it another way: while dribbling you have 3 points of contact with the floor, your left foot, your right foot, and the dribbling ball. Once all three in succession hit the floor in the front court, you are then considered in the front court. But if all three (in succession) don't hit in the front court, you are still considered in the backcourt. So you can straddle the line with any of the three in the backcourt, and you haven't crossed the line yet.

But picking up the dribble, with my reading of the rules, DOES change things. Read the following from the rule book:

"A.R. 90. As Team A advances the ball from its back court toward its front court, A1 passes the ball to A2. A2 catches the ball while both feet are on the playing court with one foot on either side of the division line. In this situation, either foot may be the pivot foot. (a) A2 lifts the foot that is in the back court and then puts it back on the floor in the back court; or (b) A2 lifts the foot that is in the front court, pivots and puts it on the floor in the back court. RULING: In (a), back-court violation. When A2, while holding the ball, lifts the foot that was in the back court, the ball is in the front court. When A2’s foot touches in the back court, it shall be a violation. In (b), when A2 lifts the foot that is in the front court and places it down in the back court, the location of the ball has not changed. The ball is still in the back court and no violation has occurred. (See Rule 4-28.2.)"

In the situation described above, person A2 is not dribbling, and just picking up the foot in the backcourt (even without placing it down in the front court) establishes him in the front court, and the foot placed back in the back court constitutes a backcourt violation.

[Chitowndevil]

I don't have anything against Len Elmore, but that broadcast last night was brutal. They spent five minutes arguing over the backcourt rule without a resolution (as I understand it, the American rule is all "three points", i.e. both feet and the ball, must pass over halfcourt). It's pretty bad when your sideline reporter interjects with "are you guys still talking about this??". Their discussion of the push on Kyle Singler under the basket also made it completely clear that neither really understood the definition of "intentional foul" (the foul on Singler was clearly intentional as it was in no way related to a play on the ball).

When it comes to color guys, I'll take Raftery, Vitale, Bilas, Fraschilla, and even Lavin over Elmore. Patrick I think is pretty good when paired with a strong color man, but the minute he starts talking about anything other than the play-by-play things get terrible very quickly.

[Ggallagher]

Although I do feel a little guilty about piling on, I do have to ask if anyone else picked up on Mike Patrick's comment last night while he and Elmore were discussing the wisdom of Causey still being in the game in the second half.

One of the times they discussed it, Patrick was commenting on the desire of a player to be on the floor in a game like this one, and he made a statement to the effect of, "Well we've never (?????), but we have had a concussion".

I've forgotten what Patrick referred to in the first half of that sentence - mainly because I was so dumbfounded by his, "We have had a concussion" statement. I am pretty positive that he said "we", not "I" - so I was especially puzzled.

There was a moment of silence after Patrick made the statement, and I was waiting for Elmore to say, "Well that explains a lot", but they moved on, and there was no reference to Patrick's concussion - but that does explain a lot!

[DukeDude]

Patrick I think is pretty good when paired with a strong color man, but the minute he starts talking about anything other than the play-by-play things get terrible very quickly.

Patrick is a lump of clay who is molded by his color partner. If he is with Vitale, he loves everything about Duke. If he is with Elmore, then whoever is playing Duke is getting jobbed by the refs.

Another problem is that his eyesight is bad. He needs to wear glasses to read his notes, but can't really make out the action on the court while wearing them. As a result, he often has no idea who stole the ball or committed a foul. Sometimes Elmore had to chime in with what just happened on the court.

Elmore's problem is merely a life long hatred of Duke. It is also possible that he cheers for the underdog in all of his games, but I don't really see much of them.

[dukegirlinsc]

By the way , Patrick was right, and Elmore was wrong - the ball and the player must cross the midcourt line before a backcourt violation can occur. Elmore, who is a smart enough guy (Harvard Law) and long time announcer, really should know the basic rules of the game, and this is one of them. It drove me nuts that they had a great opportunity to clear up this misapprehension of the rules and failed to do it.

I KNOW! That's why it was so ridiculous!

[calltheobvious]

One of the most interesting (i.e. maddening) comments from last night was in his analysis in the second half of the foul disparity and the free throw gap.
He argued that Hewitt had a legitimate gripe based on the "physical nature of the game." The problem was that Elmore had seldom had a problem with individual calls. You don't get to agree (at least tacitly) with most of the calls and then complain about the math. Sometimes the numbers just get skewed. Doesn't mean there's anything necessarily being missed by the officials.

A bizzarro-world thing was that one of those times, he followed up by saying that this was happening to GT in their last several games. And yet he wasn't able to make that very plausible inferential leap that maybe Tech just wasn't in the position to draw as many fouls as Duke was.

As good as Duke's defense was, as the DBR write-up points out, there were still a lot of easy buckets in the paint for Tech. But they were post-entry situations for the most part, which are generally less likely to result in fouls than driving strong all the way to the bucket a la GH or DN.

I couldn't get upset at Elmore for anti-Duke bias because he was making such a complete a** out of himself in his condescension to Patrick. Recall the exchange they had in Blacksburg over the goal-tending. Elmore basically talked down to Patrick that entire conversation (and was clearly wrong); same thing last night on the back-court rule.

Ramble coming to a close: how pathetic is it that we have a thirty-year play-by-play guy, a former All-ACC player/20+ year announcer, and a former All-American (Dales) on the crew, and not a single one could confidently and accurately state the third-most commonly invoked violation rule in the game (1. traveling, 2. out of bounds)? It should be an absolute embarassment to ESPN, but it's not.

[freedevil]

Was anyone else offended by the following comment:

"It's hard to imagine the baseline referee didn't see that" - Len Elmore referring to an alleged push off on a rebound by a Duke player.

The only way I possibly understand this comment was to mean that Len Elmore thinks the referee (1) absolutely saw this foul and (2) chose not to call it, presumably in Elmore's opinion, because it was a Duke player.

My mind was BLOWN.

[dball]

You beat me to it Johnboy......the easiest way to remember the rule....both feet and the ball have to cross the midcourt line before a backcourt can be called.....can't believe they argued over this for 5 mins and never got it right.

ARo24

Technically right, though if you stop astride the halfcourt line, halting your dribble and pivot with your frontcourt foot, you would be in violation if your backcourt foot didn't come completely into the frontcourt. So physically all 3 points may not touch the front court (in this case the ball and your back foot wouldn't), but technically the ball and back foot would be deemed to have been in the front court in the above scenario.

I suspect the 'argument' went on for as long as it did so that Elmore wouldn't have to admit he was incorrect. Similar to why there wasn't a goal tend called earlier this year (he indicated the ball had no chance of going in which the replay didn't really support).

[Mike Corey]

If you'd like to share the correction of Elmore's assertions regarding the back-court violation, or share any other comments about his words and behavior, you can do so by contacting ESPN via this e-mail address:

AskESPNTV@espn.com

[crimsonandblue]

Was anyone else offended by the following comment:

"It's hard to imagine the baseline referee didn't see that" - Len Elmore referring to an alleged push off on a rebound by a Duke player.

The only way I possibly understand this comment was to mean that Len Elmore thinks the referee (1) absolutely saw this foul and (2) chose not to call it, presumably in Elmore's opinion, because it was a Duke player.

My mind was BLOWN.

I think he was stupidly saying he couldn't believe the guy missed it. He says a lot of stupid things.

He was right on the foul discrepancy thing, it just deserved two mentions instead of 82. That was pretty poor officiating at times. Albeit not at the times Elmore griped about it (other than the Lawal-Nelson rebound foul, which Elmore at least accurately noticed as a foul).

[Sandman]

Why do foul discrepancies between teams seem to ALWAYS call for comments by announcers implying bias by officials? They rarely point out that a combination of style of play, talent, and game situations can easily lead to foul discrepancies between teams. I have yet to see a rule requiring team fouls to be approximately equal.

[alteran]

Why do foul discrepancies between teams seem to ALWAYS call for comments by announcers implying bias by officials?

They don't. The commentators didn't complain about the foul discrepancy when all five of our starters fouled out at Tech.

Funny, that.

My attitude is, if commentators want to bring it up, fine. Just bring it up for everyone.

[Indoor66]

Another thing about second guessing from the announcer's position at games is that they are not in position to see the fouls. That is true at any arena. They are seated at mid-court, either at court level or above. Their sight angles are not that terrific for calls in the basket area. I think the on air guys are way out of line harping on officials calls.

[FerryFor50]

I think he was stupidly saying he couldn't believe the guy missed it. He says a lot of stupid things.

He was right on the foul discrepancy thing, it just deserved two mentions instead of 82. That was pretty poor officiating at times. Albeit not at the times Elmore griped about it (other than the Lawal-Nelson rebound foul, which Elmore at least accurately noticed as a foul).

Actually on the Lawal-Nelson rebound, Lawal had a hold of Nelson, too. A non-call was right, IMO.

[feldspar]

"It's hard to imagine the baseline referee didn't see that" - Len Elmore referring to an alleged push off on a rebound by a Duke player.

What was so hilarious about that comment was that 15 seconds later, they went to the baseline camera replay, and Len's comment was "well, that angle didn't really show us much."

:eek:

[alteran]

What was so hilarious about that comment was that 15 seconds later, they went to the baseline camera replay, and Len's comment was "well, that angle didn't really show us much."

:eek:

Oh, and when Patrick was arguing fairly well that the shove on Singler was an intentional, Len Elmore's comeback was, "well, maybe-- but the official was right there."

Of course, when the official was "right there" and things allegedly go in Duke's way, the official being "right there" doesn't count for making it accurate anymore. In fact, it makes it really bad.

What a maroon.