Quote:
Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
I originally posted the following in the other discussion board and a later posting answered my question.
"I think that the better way to look at this play is for the officials to be looking for a time-out request from Billy Donovan as soon as Creighton scored so the Florida can set up an inbounds play. Correct me if I am wrong, but did not Florida request and was granted a time-out?"
The answer I received was that Florida had indeed requested and granted a time-out after Creighton scored.
Now, everybody knows what a stickler I am about the rules, but I think that the officials handled this situation correctly.
|
Mark, I'm not saying that they were right or wrong for not whistling a T. I simply stated, "You definitely won't see a T when somebody's going home. We saw that in the Creighton-Florida game." In such a situation, most D-1 tournament officials, are not going to call T that sends a team home. Right or wrong, they'll let the play on the floor decide the game.
With regards to the play, Hank Nichols said a T should not have been called because the subs that ran onto the floor did not interfere with the play. He did not say a T should not have been called because a TO was requested. Now, which reason would make more sense? "They didn't interfere with the play," is very weak. Your argument that a TO was requested makes more sense. So, if that's the case, why didn't Hank use it? Also, I'm not sure when FL requested TO. With Creighton running onto the floor, the FL players appeared to think the game was over. Donovan was arguing for the T with the trail. No timeout was signalled prior to the "running of the Creightons." So, did someone who saw the game know when the request was actually made and granted? Or does that matter?