Three officials who aren't advancing

bucky

bob jenkins wrote
Does it make a difference?

When the conditions were met.

(Similar to a violation happening "at the same time" as a foul, the officials must decide which happened first.)

Yes, it does. When were the conditions met?

With all due respect Bob, don't be like that. Don't be like so many others that do not provide actual answers.

side note: I wonder how officials would have reacted if there was no whistle for the foul. I also wonder what the clock operator would have done if there was less than a minute in the game and there was no whistle. (presuming, like NCAAM, clock stops under a min for NCCAW)

dahoopref

Doug Shows, Kelly Self, and Dwayne Gladden was the crew.
March Madness 2018: Auburn put wrong player on free-throw line to seal win vs. Charleston | NCAA Basketball | Sporting News

Had any of the officials been aware of this, or had anyone alerted the officiating crew to the fact that the wrong player was at the foul line, the officials would have been able to review the play and determine [Okeke] should have been the shooter,” NCAA coordinator of officiating J.D. Collins said in a statement.

Raymond

bucky wrote
Yes, it does. When were the conditions met?

With all due respect Bob, don't be like that. Don't be like so many others that do not provide actual answers.

side note: I wonder how officials would have reacted if there was no whistle for the foul. I also wonder what the clock operator would have done if there was less than a minute in the game and there was no whistle. (presuming, like NCAAM, clock stops under a min for NCCAW)

If there was a technical foul called why would it matter if the ball was dead or live?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

bob jenkins

bucky wrote
Y
With all due respect Bob, don't be like that. Don't be like so many others that do not provide actual answers.

I gave an actual answer -- and, the correct one.

And, it should be "who." Another actual answer.

bucky

bob jenkins wrote
I gave an actual answer -- and, the correct one.

And, it should be "who." Another actual answer.

Thanks for the grammar correction. I do appreciate that although when you indicated "Does it make a difference?", I consider that to be a question, not an answer. Perhaps you were thinking that your question was providing an answer but if we are sticking to strict grammar rules.. suddenly, then it did not. Furthermore, "When the conditions were met" is not even a complete sentence and does not answer the question but rather repeats it in a different form.

Coach: Why was my player given a technical foul?
You: The conditions were met

I am not confident that you would answer that way.

The bigger picture is exactly what you described by saying "When the conditions are met." Give rule book citations that apply to when the ball is stuck in the net as to its status and those conditions please.

bob jenkins

bucky wrote
Thanks for the grammar correction. I do appreciate that although when you indicated "Does it make a difference?", I consider that to be a question, not an answer. Perhaps you were thinking that your question was providing an answer but if we are sticking to strict grammar rules.. suddenly, then it did not. Furthermore, "When the conditions were met" is not even a complete sentence and does not answer the question but rather repeats it in a different form.

Coach: Why was my player given a technical foul?
You: The conditions were met

I am not confident that you would answer that way.

The bigger picture is exactly what you described by saying "When the conditions are met." Give rule book citations that apply to when the ball is stuck in the net as to its status and those conditions please.

okay --

Yes, it would have been a dead ball T or a live ball T. 😉 I am still not sure it makes a difference to any subsequent administration -- that's why I asked a serious question.

And, the parenthetical part of my initial response is (or implies to any intelligent reader) the answer to your second question -- the ball becomes dead when the official decides the ball is stuck in the net.

LRZ

Bucky, I think bob is trying to teach you to fish.

asdf

LRZ wrote
Bucky, I think bob is trying to teach you to fish.

You can lead a horse to water...........

BillyMac

... you can protect your children with an insurance policy from Mutual of Omaha.

LRZ wrote
... fish.

asdf wrote
... horse ...

When did the Forum become Mutual of Omaha's Wild Kingdom? Will Marlin Perkins and Jim Fowler start posting from that big jungle in the sky?

Blindolbat

dahoopref wrote
Doug Shows, Kelly Self, and Dwayne Gladden was the crew.
March Madness 2018: Auburn put wrong player on free-throw line to seal win vs. Charleston | NCAA Basketball | Sporting News

Would this also be a technical foul in NCAA-M?
If nothing else this just goes to show that stuff like this can happen to the best of us.
Saw teams try this a few times this year in HS. One team got away with it. Luckily I was not on that crew but just observing. I had a team try this on me early in the season but I caught them before anyone lined up for shots and made sure to let everyone know who the correct shooter should be.

Multiple Sports

Yes..... by rule it could be a T, but you would be chastised for not managing that situation. Had a game where the wrong kid went to the line and he knew it. Walked up to him and said ( with a smile ), " I know you don't belong here and you know it as well. Now Im going to back away away and bounce the ball, if you catch the ball, Im going to T you up Now walk away and get the right person at the line." He smiled and walked away...he was now my de facto captain the rest of the year whenever a player on his team got mouthy...

BillyMac

Blindolbat wrote
Saw teams try this a few times this year in HS. I had a team try this on me early in the season but I caught them before anyone lined up for shots and made sure to let everyone know who the correct shooter should be.

It's common practice here in my little corner of Connecticut for officials to tell each other, "Twenty-three shoots", before granting a timeout before a free throw situation.

In every free throw situation, it's the responsibility of the noncalling official to remember the shooter. If not obvious, it's the responsibility of the calling official to identify the shooter, by pointing, or verbally, "Twenty-three shoots", or both.

Wasn't it Confucius who said, "When the ball is dead, we must be alive."?

asdf

BillyMac wrote
When did the Forum become Mutual of Omaha's Wild Kingdom?

Shortly after it became open mic night for some......

BillyMac

asdf wrote
Shortly after it became open mic night for some......

Well played asdf.

Not too shabby for a Forum member with only 746 posts.

Some day, you too, will become an Esteemed Forum Member, and it will probably happen sooner rather than later.

Again, well played grasshopper.

[deleted]

Doug Shows did advance to the round of 32, currently refereeing the West Virginia-Marshall game. We will see if he goes further.

SC Official

AremRed wrote
Doug Shows did advance to the round of 32, currently refereeing the West Virginia-Marshall game. We will see if he goes further.

I’m pretty sure Round of 32 games are assigned before the first round.

Camron Rust

Which official called the foul?

It would be hard to hold the other two responsible if they were off ball and the calling official says #99 is my shooter.

crosscountry55

SC Official wrote
I’m pretty sure Round of 32 games are assigned before the first round.

We have this discussion every year. I think you’re right, but within the pool of officials that JD assigns to a specific opening weekend site (12), I believe he has the discretion to unassign a second round official for cause if he sees fit.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[deleted]

crosscountry55 wrote
We have this discussion every year. I think you’re right, but within the pool of officials that JD assigns to a specific opening weekend site (12), I believe he has the discretion to unassign a second round official for cause if he sees fit.

Yup. Officials are always assigned to a site and officials that work round of 32 come from the 12 guys that worked the round of 64 there. I'm sure JD takes his top 48 guys and divides them up by site and then fills in the other 48. So he knows who he wants working the round of 32 beforehand, but of course he would be able to pulls Shows if he felt the error was his. Maybe JD didn't think Shows was culpable for the error or maybe didn't care. I think JD cares so I would wager Shows was found not guilty.

asdf

BillyMac wrote
Well played asdf.

Not too shabby for a Forum member with only 746 posts.

Some day, you too, will become an Esteemed Forum Member, and it will probably happen sooner rather than later.

Again, well played grasshopper.

I've been following this forum since it's inception. One doesn't need 15,000 posts to understand who posts silliness and who posts reliable information on here.