Purdue vs Little Rock #3

[mtn335]

Start of 2OT, is it just me, or is that violation call incorrect? The Purdue jumper touches it twice - legal - and then recovers once the ball touched a non-jumper (jump ball and restrictions now over).

...right?

[Nevadaref]

This is a fantastic game, but this crew should not advance. They have missed too many rule situations.

The officials shouldn't be judged on the quality of the game, but on how many decisions and rulings they get correct.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by mtn335

Start of 2OT, is it just me, or is that violation call incorrect? The Purdue jumper touches it twice - legal - and then recovers once the ball touched a non-jumper (jump ball and restrictions now over).

...right?

That is what I thought. I just tried to start a thread on it. Same play.

[crosscountry55]

I was just going to post on that. Assuming NCAA restrictions are the same as NFHS 6-3, the R kicked the call. The restrictions end either when one of the eight non-jumpers touches the ball, or when the ball touches the floor. In this case both of those things happened before the jumper touched it the third time.

Oops.

[thedewed]

missed an obvious foul at the end. one of the other 2 should have come in and got it due to straightline or whatever. wow I'd be pissed as purdue.

[crosscountry55]

Wow. Bad miss by the C on the travel. Didn't hustle into position, and the L was racing over to ball-side when the crew wasn't really set yet. Fortunately no possession consequence b/c LR got the rebound.

I get it, double OT, they're tired. But...

The crew chief is not exactly a spring chicken. Perhaps this will re-ignite the annual discussion about older officials who do 80 games a season being a step or two behind.

Having said this, I admit that if I were still getting hired at $3K/gm at the age of 60, I'd still be doing it, too. It's not the official's fault in that sense.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by thedewed

missed an obvious foul at the end. one of the other 2 should have come in and got it due to straightline or whatever. wow I'd be pissed as purdue.

I definitely want to see the video clip of this. It looked as if the defender had his arm caught inside the right elbow of the Purdue player. I thought that it was a foul during live action.

[Raymond]

It was a foul....IMO

[Raymond]

2OT jump ball: This does not appear to be a violation. The jump ball had ended.

[thedewed]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

It was a foul....IMO

It was an obvious enough foul that either of the other 2 guys should have come and got it. Pollard/L might have been straightlined

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

It was a foul....IMO

What was a foul?

Peace

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I definitely want to see the video clip of this. It looked as if the defender had his arm caught inside the right elbow of the Purdue player. I thought that it was a foul during live action.

They have this play on ESPN. Regular speed and slowed down. Defenders arm/forearm hits inside of offense forearm as you said. Foul.

The lead is getting there as it happens but could see it. Wasn't straight lined. The old C, new T on same side of floor had a good look also. The new C table side was long way away. One of the other two should have gotten it.

[Raymond]

I thought the play happened on the C''s side.

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by mtn335

Start of 2OT, is it just me, or is that violation call incorrect? The Purdue jumper touches it twice - legal - and then recovers once the ball touched a non-jumper (jump ball and restrictions now over).

...right?

Here is the video:


Peace