Vid request: Wash vs OSU - 2 whistles for phantom foul?
 

With 1:35 left in OT. L and C call foul on OSU player. Foul or not?

My 2 cents - I say no foul. I can understand one official missing something but 2? Maybe I missed something.

Two plays (Video)
 

Play #1:
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/nJdCyvrZxkA" frameborder="0" allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Play #2: The play requested
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/6Iskfry2AW8" frameborder="0" allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Peace

Play 1: Yes, I was questioning that too. Foot in RA. Should have been a block and partner should have brought the info, although....there was a lot of stuff happening.

Play 2: C immediately signals block and L nods head in agreement as if it was something obvious. I saw nothiiiing.


(Thanks JRUT!!)

1) I believe that is a block on its own merits, but it is most definitely a block with the RA

2) Illegal contact by defender's right knee followed by ballhandler going down = a foul. If he stays upright and maintains his footing, then no-call.

Great observation. I admit I missed that my first few viewings but it's definitely there. I think that's enough for a block.

I get your point, and am not denying the knee is there, but it has NOTHING to do with why that defender goes to the ground. His knee didn't push the leg out giving the illusion of a slip, that player just flat out slipped.

There is no way you can say that definitively. The offensive player loses his footing immediately after the contact, no matter how slight. There is a strong case to be made the contact affected his balance.

Looks like a really tough call in real time. But on replay I think there is not only a knee but a slight body bump as well, which is a point of emphasis- at least in NFHS- this year.

Does this kind of contact, and more, happen all the time in the post at that level? Of course. But again, there is support for illegal contact by a defender resulting in a ball handler losing his balance.

That along with two officials immediately having the same thing. I'm deferring to them on this.

Not true. It was everything about why he went down. The dribbler ran into the knee and upset his balance.

Or, did he pull the foul out and forward before contact, perhaps, giving him a position outside of the RA? I couldn't tell for sure, but it seems possible.

Play 1: Block, even without foot in RA. From Lead looks like a PC though.

Play 2: It's a foul, and a slip. Defenders knee, then offensive player slips.

If he does that, then hasn't he given up LGP, so it's still a block?

Ok, I can concede that I can't say that the contact has nothing to do with the slip, but for the same reason, you can't say it has EVERYTHING to do with it. I think that player slips with a legal defender as well, the bump contributed less than 10% of why he eventually fell, which is a number I made up to help my argument.

I guess I don't mean to criticize the officials when they probably got it right, my point is that I think if this was not called, we wouldn't be talking about how it should've been called, even if that play was still clipped and presented to us here.

If that foul is not called the coach for UW is sending a clip of that play into the PAC 12 supervisor before he leaves the facility. It's a 50-50 type play where the officials have to make a decision. Score/time/foul count/previous plays all have to be taken into consideration in a moment's time.

#1 looks like a block to me with or without RA

#2 - I'm not good enough to make that call

Only if he is still moving forward at the time of contact. Moving forward along doesn't netgate LGP, it can still be maintained even when moving towards the opponent if that forward motion has ceased before contact.