2011 Tournament Discussion Redux

APG

fiasco wrote
So I turned the TV off not long after the Arizona game, but I have a friend who was telling me later that John Adams came back on the show and referenced the "4-second" timeout rule in defending the referee, esssentially saying the rule IS in the book. Did anyone else see this or was my buddy mistaken??

First I've heard...it's not in the rule book nor case book.

Pantherdreams

Whether we believe the Texas player would be savy enough to count the chops or not, there is supposed to be visible signals of the 5 seconds. Kid sees 4 and asks for time out then gets a 5 second call because the chops do not match the count.

All evidence points towards an official error, but as a baketball fan that was not the difference in the game.

JugglingReferee

Just saw the clip on my SportsCentre.

I timed the play as did the sports report. They had 3.9s and I have 4.02s. That's not even close to being a violation.

Horrible call.

JugglingReferee

hoopguy

The backcourt call was wrong. The play was a sideline thowin. The player jumped in the air and caught the ball near midcourt. He landed on one foot in the front court and his secondfoot landed on the division line. He then picked up his first/pivot foot and stepped in the front and turned his second foot into the front court. There was no backcourt because the player caught the ball in the air and landed with his first foot in the front court and his second foot in the backcourt which he is allowed to do. The violation should have been for travel when he lifted his pivot foot and then put that foot back on to the court.

JugglingReferee

Jurassic Referee

BadNewsRef wrote
The rule is no different in college. IMO, it should not have been a BC violation. However I think he may have travelled. I need to see the replay again.

You are wise beyond your years. I had the same thought in real time. After looking at the replay in the other thread, there was no OOB violation by rule but he did travel after the play. The first foot down( the one on the center line) was established as the pivot foot when the second foot landed after that. He then picked up his pivot foot and put it back down in the front court. He got the proper result on the play....violation... but for the wrong reason.

grunewar

Ya gotta admit, with all the "controversies" going on in March Madness, the tournament was made for:

1) Fans,
2) Arm Chair Officials,
3) Critics,
4) TV,
5) Instant Replay,
6) Uniformed Announcers,
7) The internet (Forums, Chat Rooms, YouTube)
plus many more......

Great stuff!

And now, back to our regularly scheduled banter. Carry on!

Jurassic Referee

JugglingReferee wrote
Just saw the clip on my SportsCentre.

I timed the play as did the sports report. They had 3.9s and I have 4.02s. That's not even close to being a violation.

Horrible call.

How horrible will be decided if we don't see that official's name on a game report next weekend.

Supposedly, this is one of the criteria the NCAA uses to sort out who advances.

biz

Jurassic Referee wrote
You are wise beyond your years. I had the same thought in real time. After looking at the replay in the other thread, there was no OOB violation by rule but he did travel after the play. The first foot down( the one on the center line) was established as the pivot foot when the second foot landed after that. He then picked up his pivot foot and put it back down in the front court. He got the proper result on the play....violation... but for the wrong reason.

Very true that it appears that he traveled, but in real time it's tough to say when he controls the ball. He appears to fumble the ball slightly with the one hand catch. While it is clear, when the video is slowed down, that he traveled it was far less clear at full speed.

It doesn't change the fact that this was not a backcourt violation which was the call. That is a tough miss in the closing seconds of a NCAA tournament game, and furthermore it is not a "judgement" call it was an improper application of the rules. I would love to hear what Mr. Adams has to say about this call, but unfortunately I don't think we'll hear from him on this because very few people realize that it was the improper call.

Adam

just another ref wrote
how can anybody say this is a bad call? Assuming the 4.8 stated above is accurate, what do we expect? If the arm count doesn't match, it is a flaw, sure. But did that have any impact on this particular play? Was the thrower counting the swings out of the corner of his eye thinking "i still have time." i doubt it.

Jurassic Referee

Snaqwells wrote
+1

The accepted time so far as per different sources seems to be around 4.3 to 4.4 seconds.

Just saying....

JugglingReferee

Jurassic Referee wrote
The accepted time so far as per different sources seems to be around 4.3 to 4.4 seconds.

Just saying....

What sources? I gave you two that were much less than that.

The only accepted time would be from the NCAA, and they're not going to say anything because it would acknowledge that the official screwed up and had an unacceptable effect on the game.

Jurassic Referee

JugglingReferee wrote
What sources?

The only accepted time would be from the NCAA, and they're not going to say anything because it would acknowledge that the official screwed up and had an unacceptable effect on the game.

Yahoo sports and one of the big NY papers....

And as I already said, if you don't see Cartmell's name in a box score next weekend, you'll know what the NCAA thought of the call.

Eastshire

Jurassic Referee wrote
Yahoo sports and one of the big NY papers....

And as I already said, if you don't see Cartmell's name in a box score next weekend, you'll know what the NCAA thought of the call.

No, actually we won't. If we do see his name, we will know they were okay with it, but not seeing his name doesn't mean this one call is why he didn't move on. It may be but it may not.

JugglingReferee

Jurassic Referee wrote
Yahoo sports and one of the big NY papers....

And as I already said, if you don't see Cartmell's name in a box score next weekend, you'll know what the NCAA thought of the call.

Disagree.

If that was his only bad call, then he would grade better than other officials, and then would move on by virtue of sucking less.

You're usually known for fact seeking. The best way to know what the NCAA thinks of that call is to hear directly from Adams about that call - and by that I mean either a "correct" or an "incorrect". Anything other than that is supposition.

Raymond

JugglingReferee wrote

He aborted his 5th stroke to blow his whistle and looked like, to me at least, that he thought about granting the time-out and then decided to call the 5-second violation.

Me personally, I'm granting the time-out in that situation.

Raymond

I didn't see any of the FSU/ND game. What caused all the T's to be called?

Jburt

Did Texas have any TO remaining?

Adam

Jburt wrote
Did Texas have any TO remaining?

Not relevant to the discussion at hand, really. If they didn't, the proper call would have been to grant the TO and charge the TF (assuming it was requested in time) rather than ignore it and charge the 5 second violation.

« Previous Page Next Page »