what was the rittman - lutheran east score? The mlk victory surprises me - i have never even heard of that school.

sportstalk---you stirring the pot?? nah.. that's not like you!

Hiland (or is it Highland?) is still in it, beating Strasburg (again) in the sectional. We'll have our hands full (probably with Shadyside) at the district.
Chanel (and LE) still in it as well. will they be able to get out of the district?

1486wd wrote: what was the rittman - lutheran east score? The mlk victory surprises me - i have never even heard of that school.

60-52 Lutheran East.

1486wd wrote: what was the rittman - lutheran east score? The mlk victory surprises me - i have never even heard of that school.

And I am sure Martin Luther King is saying the same thing about D ALL ton

riders1 wrote:

1486wd wrote: what was the rittman - lutheran east score? The mlk victory surprises me - i have never even heard of that school.

And I am sure Martin Luther King is saying the same thing about D ALL ton

HAHA!!! riders1 - they probably are....they probably are! Hoping they will find out soon enough!

they may be. we have just been in that district a lot of years and that is not a name i remember - a new school maybe?

Chanel coaching staff attended both New Phila Sectional Finals on Saturday night, they have always given the Inter Valley Conference more respect than sportstalk does

Should be some interesting games on tuesday. The Chanel Dalton game will be a defensive battle, With both teams playing a full court man. I think Chanels is a little more aggressive than Dalton's but I think Dalton has the advantage in the guard department in this game. Where Dalton has to win this game, is on the boards, they must keep Chanel off the glass.
My prediciton: Chanel 62 Dalton 54

As for the Lutheran East vs. MLK game, you might as well roll a ball out into a street somewhere to let them figure this one out. Had this been Rittman vs. MLK or Lutheran East vs. Cuyahoga Heights this would be different, but neither MLK or Lutheran East attempt to play any real defense as both will sit in a zone against each other and try to beat each other up and down the floor.
My Prediction: Lutheran East 68 MLK 51

"Dawgs by 3. No idea about the other game.

Looks like mooseknuckle came close. Chanel 59 Dalton 43.

Congratulations DAWGS on a great season

i felt bad for the team that a very nice season ended in a game as ugly as that. The first half, Dalton played as poorly as they have all season - I haven't seen that many airballs (on open looks no less) all season. They played with no energy at all - a little better in the second half but only slightly. Chanel was an averge team and I will be shocked if they win their next game. Disappointing finish to a fine season. Lots of jr's on this team and next year looks very bright.

1486wd wrote: i felt bad for the team that a very nice season ended in a game as ugly as that. The first half, Dalton played as poorly as they have all season - I haven't seen that many airballs (on open looks no less) all season. They played with no energy at all - a little better in the second half but only slightly. Chanel was an averge team and I will be shocked if they win their next game. Disappointing finish to a fine season. Lots of jr's on this team and next year looks very bright.

I 2nd these comments. But the officials really were bad and one of the most one sided games Ive ever seen. 1. Ive never seen a team travel so much. 2. Ive never seen a traveling call being uncalled so much. But great season Dogs! We got WCAL crown and we haven't got one of those in awhile.

Congrats on a fine season, Dalton!

Seems OHSAA should have a meeting dedicated to defining traveling. (Maybe for coaches and players also.) That might be the one issue that I have seen this season where every night it is called differently. Players look confused, coaches look bewildered, officials look biased or just ignorant. I know some rules have changed, different moves have become en vogue, but everyone should be a lot closer to the same page than what they are. JMO

442 Where you from? You are all over the Wayne County basketball threads tonight

dhs - i wasn't going to go there, but they really were incredibly inconsistent and seemed not to know that rule about standing in the lane. The bulldogs certainly got no help there. The traveling none calls (and sometimes calls) were just funny after awhile. Unfortunately, I don't think that changed the outcome as dalton simply didn't come to play against a team I think they would beat 7 or 8 times out of ten..

The officiating as a whole at this district has been bad, I have seen where some calls are made on very touchy things while other times people can get hammered and no call. On Saturday, I saw the Rittman coach asking one of the officials for an over the back call, and the official responded, "It's not their fault they can jump higher than your player coach." (There was no one in the gym for this game and it was very easy to hear everything these officials said). I don't want to go here, or seem as if I am crossing a line, but it seems the officials in this tournament have been afraid to make a call towards the "inner-city" teams. It also seems as if Coach Tarr from Chanel sure has a few officials "wrapped" around his finger.

To the Dalton fans, you guys had a nice ball club this year, and I couldn't believe the shots you guys were missing in that first half. Did you think the players looked a little scared? From my point of view and I only saw this team play a couple times, but it seemed they played a little scared at the start. I give your team credit , they rallied towards the end.

This tournament should be another exciting one next year, with most teams returning a lot of their main guys

My predicition for Thursday's matchup of Chanel vs. Lutheran East
Chanel 54 Lutheran East 48
If LE had a single guard that could handle the ball, I would give them the nod, but they are going to be pressured, and I wouldn't be suprised to see an aray of turnovers. Also, Chanel has the size and strength to match-up with LE's big men

mooseknuckle wrote: The officiating as a whole at this district has been bad, I have seen where some calls are made on very touchy things while other times people can get hammered and no call. On Saturday, I saw the Rittman coach asking one of the officials for an over the back call, and the official responded, "It's not their fault they can jump higher than your player coach." (There was no one in the gym for this game and it was very easy to hear everything these officials said). I don't want to go here, or seem as if I am crossing a line, but it seems the officials in this tournament have been afraid to make a call towards the "inner-city" teams. It also seems as if Coach Tarr from Chanel sure has a few officials "wrapped" around his finger.

To the Dalton fans, you guys had a nice ball club this year, and I couldn't believe the shots you guys were missing in that first half. Did you think the players looked a little scared? From my point of view and I only saw this team play a couple times, but it seemed they played a little scared at the start. I give your team credit , they rallied towards the end.

This tournament should be another exciting one next year, with most teams returning a lot of their main guys

My predicition for Thursday's matchup of Chanel vs. Lutheran East
Chanel 54 Lutheran East 48
If LE had a single guard that could handle the ball, I would give them the nod, but they are going to be pressured, and I wouldn't be suprised to see an aray of turnovers. Also, Chanel has the size and strength to match-up with LE's big men

actually, that ref's response was spot on. as refs (and people who know the game) will tell you, there is no such thing (illegal maneuver, that is) as "over the back". that's the advantage a tall player or very athletic player has in the game of basketball: they can reach up and over a player that's checking him out or trying to get a rebound, and as long as they aren't pushing/shoving/crawling up their back to get the ball, there's nothing wrong with that. Now, granted, most of the time they ARE pushing/shoving/crawling over the back and then rightfully it is a foul and should be called as such. But just because a player reaches over the back and gets the ball, it may not be a foul. Too often it is called (incorrectly)when there is no contact at all.
obviously I didn't see the game, and the refs indeed may have been awful: I've not been impressed by he reffing I have seen in tourney games so far, but at least that resonse is not out of line.

moosknuckle - we couldn't believe it either - they have not looked like that all year and chanel was not the best team they played by a long way. I do think the bulldogs need to play that style of team a time or two in the nonconference regular season so it is not so different when they hit the tourney. By the time they settled down and just played, it was too late. While they did not play well in the second half, they did start doing what they are good at - driving and dishing and they had success.

I have to agree with that. Scheduling up is important at tournament time. Chanel was 11-11 going into last nights game. Think they played some bigger, faster, better teams along the way? Do you think playing those teams made them prepared for a deeper run in the tournament?

Seeding is nice, but having the experiences to win the tough games is more important.

IMO

they played a lot of bigger teams and as a young team, they are peaking at the end of the season and are battle tested for the tourney. You might as well schedule teams like that nonconference, whether or not you win is meaningless.

I actually didn't see the Dalton - Chanel game, just commenting on something I've noticed to be especially off kilter this season. I'm from the Dalton School District.

Ricola--Interesting post. I totally agree with you. As a former coach, that can be frustrating, but that is the rule. The "over the back" mantra is so common, was there at one time a foul with that name? Also, if someone is in box-out position and a player jumps for the rebound, but the boxer-outer continues to box out and ends up under-cutting the jumper, is that a foul on the defender with good inside position? Not thinking of a particular situation, just hypothetically speaking.

actually, yes it is. if the player doing the boxing out continues to back into/undercut the defender making the rebound behind him, theoretically it's a foul on him. boxing out theoretically means establishing position only, not backing into the guy. Now in actual practice that's not what happens, and don't know that I've ever seen it called, because both players basically are pushing into/against each other, but it could be called.