The Official Forum - Oklahoma State Vs. Iowa State Video

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)

- Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)

- - Oklahoma State Vs. Iowa State Video (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/101008-oklahoma-state-vs-iowa-state-video.html)

Just a note on this...

Since this is a missed violation call this would not fall under the CE for erroneously cancelling a score.

Correct?

Quote:

Originally Posted by BryanV21 (Post 983013)

Just a note on this...

Since this is a missed violation call this would not fall under the CE for erroneously cancelling a score.

Correct?

No. Missed calls are not correctable errors, even if they involve scoring.

For this to be a CE, they would have had to actually call BI but fail to award the points (since it was a defensive violation)

Here is more of the video broken down.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef (Post 982987)

I say going back through the ring b/c that's what happens when a player dunks on his own head. No one pays attention otherwise. We've seen plenty of videos over the years where a player dunks and hits his own head the ball comes back up through the hoop.

Since players don't dunk with their heads, I don't think the exception applies. The exception is to allow a player to put his hand(s) in and contact the basket when he dunks.

I guess I'm having a hard time figuring out why this would be an automatic call only if the ball bounced back up through. If you don't consider this one of the dunking exceptions, then I can think of 3 scenarios:

1) The player's head touches the ball or any part of the basket (including the net) while the ball is on or within either basket, and then the ball eventually passes through the basket

2) The player's head touches the ball or any part of the basket (including the net) while the ball is on or within either basket, and then the ball eventually bounces back up and out.

3) After the ball passes through the basket, the ball hits the player's head and bounces up through the basket.

It seems to me that you are saying that 1 and 3 would be offensive BI but 2 would be a good goal. Without any case play to say otherwise, the rule to me (assuming you don't consider this a dunking exception) is that both 1 and 2 would be offensive BI and 3 would be a good goal.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HokiePaul (Post 983054)

I gave an example of a play that should be ruled offensive BI but ends up being a play-on. All the other stuff your talking about never entered my head. "Automatic" and "only" were not even in my posts. Not sure what your point is based on my original post as it pertains to the video that was posted.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 982936)

Not my video but I will but this is so we can all see this on the site.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/un5baS36lTk" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Peace

Quote:

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef (Post 982981)

Which means it should also be basket interference when a player dunks and the ball hits off his own head and goes back up through the ring.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef (Post 983055)

Thanks for clarifying. The video is clearly defensive BI that was missed.

I was just trying to understand your statement that if them ball hit the offensive players head and went back through, it was offensive BI. It didn't seem that simple to me since what the ball does after contacting a player doesn't have anything to do with the BI call (the ball is dead upon contact). But I understand your point that if the ball goes through the basket, it's not going to be called BI even if it technically is.

With replay being used more now though (and I have no idea what triggers replays), I was curious to understand the rule and if there were case plays on this.