View Single Post
  #55 (permalink)  
Old Fri Mar 23, 2007, 11:07am
BillP73 BillP73 is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 4
Quote:
Originally Posted by gazebra
The monitor rule isn't allowed for questions of judgement. The new T clearly blew the whistle and signaled the ball out of bounds. With that being the case, whether or not he blew the call is not relevant to the discussion at the monitor. The play should have been reviewed for only the time that it took to blow the whistle, and as a result only .2 or so should have come off. Not that it would have made a difference in the game, but it would allow for at least a better attempt.
That's exactly where I fall into it.

I'm not an official, nor a fan of either team, but I wanted to get others' perspective on this. It appears as if there's no agreement.

I reviewed the NCAA rulebook, and I don't feel what they did was proper. They didn't fix a timing error...they ostensibly fixed what they deemed to be an error in judgment as it pertains to where the ball went out of bounds. There are no provisions in the rulebook (Appendix III, section 6) for them to use replay equipment for that purpose. The call, as made on the court, should've stood as the benchmark for purposes of determining how much went off the clock.

There's no question that the official right near the play called the ball dead at the point it hit on the hardwood in the vicinity of the line. He motioned with his arm, and you can hear a whistle on the video. I can't believe that's being disputed by some of you. Further, the whistle wasn't "inadvertant" by any rational definition. He made a distinct call of a perceived violation.

Last edited by BillP73; Fri Mar 23, 2007 at 11:09am.
Reply With Quote