Univ of New Mexico @ San Diego State: Throw In Violation
 

The following violation call (by Randy McCall) was ruled incorrect by the conference:

Mountain West Statement Regarding Play At The End of Regulation in New Mexico at San Diego State Men's Basketball Contest | MW News

My fellow officials, what do you think? There have been discussions out here among our brethren about how the conference handled this.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/kmQUgw0GMxk" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

What's there to discuss, the video proves the call was incorrect. Move on.

I don't like public criticism of judgment calls.

I looks like the right foot is out of bounds and the left foot is in the air. So by rule this is legal. It seems like the official was splitting hairs.

Peace

This.

The play was so close in real time on a judgement call that a public statement from the conference was unexpected.

The other perspective could be that the call is obviously wrong and the point of the release was not so much to acknowledge that as to note the difficulty of making that call in real time.

What's wrong with public criticism. This is a black or white call. Official got it wrong and it was admitted. Nothing can be done about it and the official shouldn't get punished, but the statement is correct. The play being close in real time or not doesn't change the fact that it's either right or wrong and consensus can be gained.

It's different with block/charge or contact fouls.

I believe he is talking about the conference saying something. I tend to agree with that opinion.

Peace

I don't see anything wrong with the conference admitting an incorrect call like this one. It's obvious it was the wrong call.

It is obvious if you slow it down. It was not obvious enough IMO to call because the call it will bring scrutiny. I bet almost no one would have said anything if he passed on this call in the first place. It would have to be more obvious to call IMO in such a critical moment.

Peace

He acted like he thought this was a spot throw in. He didn't give the 'you have the endline' signal but was saying something to the inbounder when he handed him the ball.

The signal he gave indicated to me he thought the player caught the ball with IB status and carried it OOB.

Only on slow-motion.

If they're going to talk about close missed calls like that in a game, they'd have a dozen or more every game (many of them travels uncalled). I don't see the value in announcing this aside from education of what the rule itself should be, not so much that a judgement call was missed.

If this happened in the first half, or any other time except for at the end of the game, the call would have been forgotten long ago. Being that it happened that late, the conference probably felt it had to say something about the controversy.

I doubt the official that made the call is losing sleep over it. We know we're not Gods, so I'm sure he does too.

Right. If the conference had to determine the call was wrong after "careful review of slow-motion replays" it's probably not the best idea to call out the crew in public. The two other situations discussed in the Forum this year (NCAAW Big Sky - fouls reset in OT and NCAAW D3 - T at the end of regulation for team celebrating on the court) didn't require slow-motion replays. Those situations were mishandled. This is a judgment play.

What signal would you give if a team ran this play from a spot throw in? I believe you would still give the 'over and back'-type signal, would you not?

Or you could just use the stop clock mechanic and then point in the direction the other team is going. Either one would be good

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk

I can't answer for the guy in the video, but no I would not. The signal for a throw-in violation is simply to point at the spot, same as if the player just ran the endline on a spot throw in.

Then again, his signal is not what you'd use to signal an OOB violation, which is what I think he called. It was, however, descriptive of what the alleged call was.

It doesn't look from the statement that its main purpose was to criticize the officials. They made it clear slow motion was required etc. Seems more like they wanted to inform people that the rule does not require both feet down to establish position and, perhaps more, that the play, by rule, is not reviewable.

(the knucklehead announcer was saying two feet necessary..over and over)

Someone should be calling for HIM to be suspended!

That call, from behind the original thrower, is like a call at 1st base, in a baseball game, but with a poorer angle. And the foot touching down before the ball touches the second player, is exceptionally close. It seems best to leave it alone.

The very last sentence in the video, the announcer corrects and says it can't be two feet, or something like that. I bet they figured out and corrected their interpretation.

As I was reading through the thread, this is what I was thinking. At least at the HS level I've never seen players smart enough to use this tactic when a non-designated spot throw-in is administered following a timeout.

I can't imagine it happens at the college level that much, either. So maybe the official got caught off guard, or maybe he just missed the call. Whatever the case, I'm glad I watched the clip; I'll be ready for it if it happens to me.

It doesn't happen often, but it's often enough that we should be ready for it. It's a good topic for the official's huddle during the TO.

And, be sure to either watch the clock and / or instruct the timer -- they are more likely to "get it wrong" than the officials.

I've actually had coaches give us a heads up that they were planning on running this type of play.

I recall one team running this play coming out of a timeout. They didn't run it by their coach, though, because he was rolling his eyes after we called the violation.

It was a spot throw-in.