Quote:
Originally Posted by All_Heart
I was coming on here to talk about the shot clock play but in regards to going to the monitor. I didn't think that they could go to the monitor on a play to determine possession. They could have gone if the shot clock operator reset by accident and they thought it should not have been reset. Basically a "mistake or malfunction" has to take place and neither did. I also didn't think they should have gone to the monitor on the fast break foul (that was close to being intentional). You can go to the monitor if you think a flagrant foul possibly took place but it is hard for me to believe that they were anywhere close to thinking that it was a flagrant. I think they went to the monitor for the sole purpose of seeing if an intentional foul should be called, which is not legal. I've seen this happen a number of times through out the tournament (and regular season) so maybe a bulletin came out that I am not aware of.
|
I thought they did the right thing in both instances. In the shot clock play, Butler was to "retain" possession, but the officials noticed the shot clock was reset. They are allowed to go to the monitor to see if an error had occured (the reset). The monitor verified that there had indeed been a change of possession (Duke player had sole possession for a moment), and that the shot clock was properly reset.
On the foul call, I believe the calling official was trailing the play, and was straight-lined from seeing the Duke defender. He properly called the foul, and because of the contact causing a player going to go hard to the floor, was then able to go to the monitor to see if a flagrant had occured. Once they review the play, they are allowed to "upgrade" the foul to an intentional or flagrant. One thing they cannot do is call a flagrant, for example, then review it and change (downgrade) it to a common foul. As much as I was rooting for Butler, I thought the officials got it right.
Good use of replay in both instances, especially in a high-profile, close game.