![]() |
Video Request
Iowa State @ Texas Tech last night (8:00pm CST on ESPNU). Difficult backcourt violation in traffic with 1 second left in regulation of tie game. There was an official's review to put time back on the clock after the violation. I'm assuming backcourt violations are not reviewable under NCAA rules. NCAA officials please confirm.
|
Here is the play.
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/SjbMPI5qjLk" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> Peace |
Interesting play.
(1) If the foot comes back down in the front court, it's a travel. (2) If it doesn't, it's nothing -- backcourt status followed by backcourt status. Admittedly, I don't have a lot of time to look at this right now - just a first reaction. Anyone else see it this way? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Peace |
Quote:
Bang bang play. Any way you look at it, the officials were incorrect. If dribbler's foot down in FC, travel. If not, no BC violation. Interestingly, both T and C have same BC call. That indicates to me that the dribbler's foot probably did not touch FC, otherwise at least one of T or C would have a travel. Then, it is hard to believe that both T and C got the BC violation incorrect. Would have liked to hear their post game conversation regarding what each saw. |
This looks to be an anticipation call and they forgot about the passer's location.
|
Quote:
Peace |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Before Backcourt ...
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
While ball handler is in the air, White #2 has his hand on the ball and both feet in the FC. Is that enough to establish FC status? That's the only thing I can see here that would lead to a BC call.
|
Quote:
The assertion is that the ball handler, after jumping, landed in the FC before breaking contact with the ball on the pass. I believe that is correct. As such, it was a travel (or should have been) but it was certainly a backcourt violation. Ultimately, the right team got the ball. |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:52am. |