Minnesota vs. Iowa video request

[TriggerMN]

12:54 1st half, game on BTN. Half court set, ball deep on C side outside the arc, does A1 travel? Does lead go too far to make a double dribble call? Perhaps a good play to discuss philosophy.

[blindzebra]

Even better discussion point is 20 seconds left in regulation, Iowa gets the rebound and old trail and center both go to the front court leaving one official in the back court. Minnesota traps and ties up the Iowa player and replays show an Iowa player calling timeout before the held ball, but since there was only one official in the backcourt the calling official did not see the timeout request.

The miss proved costly because Minnesota had the arrow and tied the game to force OT.

[JRutledge]

Play #1: Double Dribble Call



Play #2: Held Ball Situation



Peace

[bob jenkins]

1) It was traveling, not DD. L can get it if it's a "crew saving call." -- I'm not sure it was with 7 minutes gone in the game, but it was pretty obvious.

2) I do not blame the official(s) for not seeing the TO request. They should have had the OOB violation, though.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

1) It was traveling, not DD. L can get it if it's a "crew saving call." -- I'm not sure it was with 7 minutes gone in the game, but it was pretty obvious.

2) I do not blame the official(s) for not seeing the TO request. They should have had the OOB violation, though.

It is crew saving because it was so obvious. The signal was wrong, but it was clearly a violation. Crew saving meaning they do not lose their credibility the rest of the game. I have no idea what the C was watching.

I also think I can understand the miss of the foot on the line. Trap in the corner coming at him is much more understandable.

OT: As I watch this video, one of the officials used to be a clinician at several camps I would attend in a Division 2 league I was attending the camp. The other two I met on the street of Atlanta during the Final Four. One worked the title game that year and the other just must have been in town to support his friend. I did not realize this until I saw the video again.

Peace

Play 1: Travel, but not a crew saving call. Don't think their credibility goes down from missing one call.

Play 2: OOB violation. Can't be a timeout from the coach during a live ball.

[TriggerMN]

I think in the first video, it's plausible the the L was not signaling double dribble, but trying to show that both of the players feet came off the ground.

Also, it's a good reminder not to use unauthorized signals, such as pointing to the floor to signify a pivot foot remained in place. Similar to younger officials giving the tip signal on blocked shots, it just makes you look bad as an official if you are giving an unnecessary signal and then your partner calls something different.

In video two, I'm trying to read lips from all of the Iowa coaches and it certainly seems like they had no idea that the bench cannot call a time out in this situation.

[Raymond]

My biggest take-away from play #2 is that the C is nowhere to be found. How can you have an end-of-game situation where you know the defense is going to pressure the ball and not take back to help? And as soon as A1 is trapped, the off officials should be scanning the court to see if anyone is requesting a time-out.

[IAUMP]

Yes, I'm and Iowa fan, and I will grant the traveling call. However, it really looked bad for the L to come get that from across the lane all the way to by the free throw line extended.

The time out request in the 2nd video was not made from the bench. It came from an Iowa player in the lane. Had the C not bailed out of the play, perhaps he could have seen or heard the TO request. Also, the T would not have had to close in on the play so hard and might have been in a better position to see the out of bounds.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by IAUMP

The time out request in the 2nd video was not made from the bench. It came from an Iowa player in the lane. Had the C not bailed out of the play, perhaps he could have seen or heard the TO request. Also, the T would not have had to close in on the play so hard and might have been in a better position to see the out of bounds.

And I would say the same thing I would say to the coach. "What is that supposed to mean?"

The player in the lane is trying to get the attention of an official that is looking at the ball and not him. The Trail is clearly several feet away in the FC. The Center who should be there is not there and likely also looking at the ball or sideline on some level. Making a request does not mean you get the request and the request is when the held ball is taking place. If that is the beef by the coaching staff, they need to find something better to eat. That is lane and certainly lame coming from that coaching staff as their coach is often a fool by the way he acts.

Peace

[Rich]

Originally Posted by IAUMP

Yes, I'm and Iowa fan, and I will grant the traveling call. However, it really looked bad for the L to come get that from across the lane all the way to by the free throw line extended.

The time out request in the 2nd video was not made from the bench. It came from an Iowa player in the lane. Had the C not bailed out of the play, perhaps he could have seen or heard the TO request. Also, the T would not have had to close in on the play so hard and might have been in a better position to see the out of bounds.

Personally, I think it would've looked worse for the crew to miss this.

Edit -- as far as the timeout goes, isn't this a great example of why it's better to allow the coach to call a timeout?

Actually, I don't really care what the NCAA decides on this, but it just shows that eliminating the coaches from calling them doesn't eliminate issues around them.

[Dale3]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

My biggest take-away from play #2 is that the C is nowhere to be found. How can you have an end-of-game situation where you know the defense is going to pressure the ball and not take back to help? And as soon as A1 is trapped, the off officials should be scanning the court to see if anyone is requesting a time-out.

+1

Great point here. We have 8 payers in the back court and a trap with 20 seconds left and the C is no where to be found. That being said I agree with not granting a timeout, unless the Iowa state player getting trapped verbally said timeout before the held ball. By the time the Iowa player in the lane calls time out, it appears there is already a held ball.

Minnesota defenders foot on the line should have been gotten. This is something that would have been easier to get if the C didnt vacate.

Clip 1: Easy travel. Did the pivot foot leave the ground before the dribble started? Obviously. However if Im the Lead i'm going to let my partner die with that one.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Rich

Personally, I think it would've looked worse for the crew to miss this.

Edit -- as far as the timeout goes, isn't this a great example of why it's better to allow the coach to call a timeout?

Actually, I don't really care what the NCAA decides on this, but it just shows that eliminating the coaches from calling them doesn't eliminate issues around them.

I like the college rule. I love the college rule. Because the main person that could even hear such a request would be the Center and that person cannot see the ball. Even then the ball is so far away from them this would still be a hard call.

Peace

[Jesse James]

Originally Posted by AremRed

Play 1: Travel, but not a crew saving call. Don't think their credibility goes down from missing one call.

Play 2: OOB violation. Can't be a timeout from the coach during a live ball.

How can #1 NOT be a crew saver? Unless you were having to look through players to see, that is so egregious you could see that from any spot on the floor, or the 30th row.

[UNIgiantslayers]

The first time I hear "TIME OUT," is after defender gets his hand on the ball. If that's the request, this is an easy held ball call. If there's one before that that we can't hear, then I guess there's an issue.