1.9 Sec left in Playoff game TO Granted with none left leads to Coach Ejection (Video

[BlueDevilRef]

Wild indeed. Lots going on but why in the world are all those people along the end line? Why are all those people allowed to be crossing the court? Lots of security in place so why aren't they taking care of that stuff?

As far as officiating goes, I realize any official can grant the timeout but with 1.9 to go, it should not have been the new trial to have recognized it. New lead is closer and so is the slot.

[jpgc99]

Originally Posted by BlueDevilRef

Wild indeed. Lots going on but why in the world are all those people along the end line? Why are all those people allowed to be crossing the court? Lots of security in place so why aren't they taking care of that stuff?

As far as officiating goes, I realize any official can grant the timeout but with 1.9 to go, it should not have been the new trial to have recognized it. New lead is closer and so is the slot.

How do you know who requested the time out?

[jpgc99]

The best part of the longer video is that the player shooting the technical foul shots missed the first two. If the coach doesn't act like a complete fool, the game probably moves right on to OT.

[Adam]

Too many officials will try to say they should have ignored the request in the name of "game management". I don't use the word lightly, but to me that's a cowardly approach to officiating.

[Rich]

Saints earn wild win over Foothills Christian - The San Diego Union-Tribune

Article says a player called a timeout.

I guess they just decided to ignore the new rule about people being in the lane area beyond the end line.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Rich

Saints earn wild win over Foothills Christian - The San Diego Union-Tribune

Article says a player called a timeout.

I guess they just decided to ignore the new rule about people being in the lane area beyond the end line.

In the video you can clearly see the player requesting a time-out, then continuing with the signal as he walks towards his bench.

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by BlueDevilRef

Wild indeed. Lots going on but why in the world are all those people along the end line? Why are all those people allowed to be crossing the court? Lots of security in place so why aren't they taking care of that stuff?

As far as officiating goes, I realize any official can grant the timeout but with 1.9 to go, it should not have been the new trial to have recognized it. New lead is closer and so is the slot.

Way too small of a venue for a game of that magnitude. If it was a RS home game, or a playoff game in which the higher seed gets a home game, so be it, but I'm reasonably sure some fire codes were broken by the size of that crowd.

To who can see the timeout by the coach (granted, as it turns out, the coach didn't have one here, but let's say he had), the new trail usually has the best opportunity to peek down the line in this situation. T or C might be closer, but in transition, turning their head, or trying to hear TO in such a loud environment....it's not that easy.

Originally Posted by Adam

Too many officials will try to say they should have ignored the request in the name of "game management". I don't use the word lightly, but to me that's a cowardly approach to officiating.

Agree. That would be kicking a rule. You can always request a timeout. Every once in a while they happen to have a penalty attached to them, but you can always request one.

Coach didn't want to face the reality that one of his players had a Chris Webber moment. Sucks, but if he accepts that instead of making false assumptions and losing his mind, that game could very well be going to OT. That is 100%, unequivocally, on the head coach.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by BlueDevilRef

Wild indeed. Lots going on but why in the world are all those people along the end line? Why are all those people allowed to be crossing the court? Lots of security in place so why aren't they taking care of that stuff?

As far as officiating goes, I realize any official can grant the timeout but with 1.9 to go, it should not have been the new trial to have recognized it. New lead is closer and so is the slot.

The player right in front of the trail called the timeout. BNR is correct, it's obvious as can be when you watch the film and look for it. Would've been completely obvious to the trail - I sure hope there's nobody here who would ignore that request.

[so cal lurker]

Originally Posted by Rich

The player right in front of the trail called the timeout. BNR is correct, it's obvious as can be when you watch the film and look for it. Would've been completely obvious to the trail - I sure hope there's nobody here who would ignore that request.

Your eyes (or screen resolution) must be better than mine. On first watching, I thought he was clapping -- understandable as a made FT or tip in would have been a loss and the miss takes it to OT. Watching again, I can't tell if he is clapping or calling TO -- but the official is certainly in the best position to be able to tell. And I agree if he does clearly see a TO call, the error is not with the official, but the player who has to know better. Perhaps Chris Webber will send him a sympathy card.

I'd love to see it from a better angle.