Syracuse v. Gonzaga (video request)

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

By the way, never thought about this before, but what happens when a new 10-second count begins within the same shot clock interval (e.g. what should have happened in this case)? Does the official make a note of the shot clock time when he begins the new count, or in this case does he start a visual count?

They use the clock. This cam up in the recent discussion we had on the shot clock. And, all the officials will communicate the new time to each other -- pointing at the clock, showing 10 fingers, mouting "new clock" or something.

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

If the pass was deeper into the frontcourt it's clear to everyone the ball gained FC status. The concern for me on this play is what's happening at the division line. The C had great positioning throughout the play until the moment the pass is released, then he stepped down away from the play, instead of up towards it.

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk

Sure, the FC wouldn't have been an issue, but what if there was immediate decision to make on a travel, or on contact during a trap, or a block/charge play?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

...

Sure, the FC wouldn't have been an issue, but what if there was immediate decision to make on a travel, or on contact during a trap, or a block/charge play?

The immediate concern is the division line, especially with the pressure Syracuse was putting on at the division line and the back court. There needs to be a priority and a reason for it to be a priority. Those other things might happen. The pass went to the division from a back court trap, the action areas were the division line and the back court.

I'm just not a fan of officials moving away from the action that needs to be officiated right now. At the 17 second mark of the video that pass is clearly going to the division line. There is no reason to move further into the FC at that moment. Once the pass is caught, then move down.

[BigCat]

If we r talking about the 10 second call, the T is right there looking at it. C is in good enough position also. Backcourt violations require more thought than others but T had good look. I couldn't watch the out of bounds video. The feet of the defender were clearly in FC.(on 10 second call) I think both T and C could see that. Think it was more a brain cramp on rule than positioning.

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

I'm just not a fan of officials moving away from the action that needs to be officiated right now.

This.

You hear this concept mentioned often in terms of the new L racing down the floor just to avoid getting beat. This situation is analogous. Why be so focused on being in perfect position for a play that might happen when you can stay and officiate a play that is happening?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

This.

You hear this concept mentioned often in terms of the new L racing down the floor just to avoid getting beat. This situation is analogous. Why be so focused on being in perfect position for a play that might happen when you can stay and officiate a play that is happening?

I am not so sure what the lead could have done in this situation. I think the C and T were on top of this play and kicked the play. I would think it would have been rather easy to know the ball was touched by a player in the FC and then comes back to the FC. Again, it was just a miss, not sure the lead could have known this for sure from his positioning even if he was not on the end line.

Peace

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I am not so sure what the lead could have done in this situation. I think the C and T were on top of this play and kicked the play. I would think it would have been rather easy to know the ball was touched by a player in the FC and then comes back to the FC. Again, it was just a miss, not sure the lead could have known this for sure from his positioning even if he was not on the end line.

I was illustrating the concept of not bailing out for a future event. I used a different type of play as an example. I was not advocating that the L should have been more aware in this particular situation. In this case I meant the C.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

I was illustrating the concept of not bailing out for a future event. I used a different type of play as an example. I was not advocating that the L should have been more aware in this particular situation. In this case I meant the C.

OK, I see.

Peace