“Based on the hard call, the winner’s decision is unexpected.”

The semifinals of the playoffs are unfolding. It is a series of fierce competitions. Busan KCC is overwhelming Seoul SK with two wins.

On the other side, Suwon KT and Ulsan Hyundai Mobis played the first round match. Both teams performed very well. KT defeated Hyundai Mobis, 93-90, where Gage Prim (20 points, 9 rebounds) and Lee Woo-seok (18 points, 4 rebounds) fought hard, with absolute ace Parris Bath (32 points, 21 rebounds). In particular, KT thrilling basketball fans who visited KT Arena in Suwon with rookie Moon Jung-hyun’s thrilling three-point final score at the end of the fourth quarter. KT was entitled to take the first round.

Both teams put all their energy into a great playoff game.

However, there is a tee in the jade in the 1st round. This part looks too big. There is a reason.

Let’s take a closer look at the scene. Hyundai Mobis’ two-point lead 90-88, with 39.3 seconds left in the game. Huh Hoon made a breakthrough. Lee Woo-suk marked from behind. Huh Hoon came to mind, and the judges declared Lee’s defense a foul, which was following him from behind. Lee was sent off for five fouls. Lee complained to referee Kim Do-myung, “Why is this a foul?” to no avail.

It was a problematic decision in a desperate situation.

According to the KBL inquiry, the referee’s answer was, “When Huh Hoon tried to shoot after the drive-in, Lee Woo-seok was leaning against his left arm and body behind Huh Hoon’s back, and the moment Huh Hoon jumped for the shot, he was pushed and lost his balance by Lee Woo-seok’s illegal cylinder invasion, so he declared a pushing foul.”

On the surface, there seems to be no problem. However, it is necessary to look at the criteria for judging matches on the day.

It was the first game in which he was tolerant of most physical fights. It was a strong “hard call” so-called. There were some misjudgment, but the referee team (Jang Joon-hyuk, Kim Do-myung, and Park Kyung-jin) held firm judgment criteria on the day. There was no call for most physical contact. Prior to Lee Woo-seok’s dismissal of five fouls, Heo Hoon’s consecutive breakthrough also had contact, but “no call” was declared. On the other side, the same criteria were applied when Ham Ji-hoon and Prim attacked. So far, it was an excellent decision.

However, Lee Woo-seok’s exit from the 5th foul came out. If you look at this scene more accurately, Lee Woo-seok made a check behind Heo Hoon, and there was no clear scene of cylinder invasion when Heo Hoon went up. Technically, if the judgment criteria of the hard call are applied on this day, the call may be called when Lee Woo-seok’s left arm clearly violates Heo Hoon’s cylinder. In this case, it is possible to determine whether the cylinder is clearly invaded according to whether Lee Woo-seok’s left arm is folded or unfolded. Lee Woo-seok’s left arm was folded, and it was not a clear obstructive motion when Heo Hoon went up. In other words, ‘no call’ was the most appropriate in the hard call standard.

When asked, “Is this call clearly a foul in the hard call judgment criteria?” KBL only repeated its previous position. “The referee felt rattling when Heo Hoon went up, and it was also recognized in the video judgment.” When asked again, “If this situation is a foul, are all other similar scenes that were previously used as hard call judgment criteria a foul?” the KBL referee avoided a proper answer.

They asked for opinions from three professional basketball officials unrelated to KT and Hyundai Mobis. A said, “The judgment was excellent until the scene (Lee Woo-suk was fouled). When I saw Heo Hoon not blowing a foul when he broke through in the previous scene, I thought it was a good judgment. But this call was too unexpected.” B said, “When looking at the criteria for judgment overall, no call is correct. They were the referees who had brought the criteria firmly before. It is problematic that they came from a game where their concentration is at its peak. If they make this foul, they are completely denying the hard call judgment criteria that they had previously brought solidly.” C said, “When the referees explain the judgment, the head of the referee always interprets it in the advantageous way. Looking at the scene alone, it could be a foul. However, the criterion of judgment is the most important and needs to be interpreted accordingly, but the referees do not admit it.”

There were many similar situations in the regular league. The team officials who had a briefing session on referees this season said, “The top judges interpret the decisions in a way that is favorable to them by setting aside each scene and each scene. They do not admit their wrongdoings.”사설 토토사이트

Referees are people, too. They can make wrong judgments in some scenes. Club officials, media officials, and fans fully understand this part.

However, the bigger problem in this situation is that the current top judges do not “recognize” or “recognize” their problems. There is no progress in this situation.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *