Duke/Kansas OOB in Last Minute

[JRutledge]

Does anyone have the time of this play?

Peace

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Does anyone have the time of this play?

Peace

I'll see if I can find the time later today. I also have 4 other plays that would be good for posting.

There are 2 plays in which Kansas players went OOB on contact from Duke players and each time no foul was called. To me, those plays looked bad because the foul count skewed in favor of Duke and those 2 plays were low hanging fruit in which foul calls would not have been second guessed.

The other 2 are comparison plays where Kansas was called for a travel in the paint (legitimate call) but then Grayson Allen similarly travels in the paint, with no call, and leads to him getting a shooting foul.

[ChuckS]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Does anyone have the time of this play?

Peace

My best recollection is about 50 seconds remaining in 2nd Half.

[#olderthanilook]

IIR the play correctly, I thought there was a PC foul before the ball was dribbled on the line.

Either way, Duke ball.

I'm more interested in the block/charge that went block against Duke - I think in the waning mins of reg.

[so cal lurker]

I'd really like to see a time limit on the video review. If they can't find that there was an error in 60 seconds (I'd prefer 30), then just go with the call and play the game. Perfection has become the enemy of the good.

I'm curious what folks on here though of the blocking call that fouled out Carter (about 2:30 left in OT, I believe).

Originally Posted by so cal lurker

I'd really like to see a time limit on the video review. If they can't find that there was an error in 60 seconds (I'd prefer 30), then just go with the call and play the game. Perfection has become the enemy of the good.

Yeah but then you get a situation like in the Wisconsin-Kentucky a few years ago where they missed a critical possession off of Wisconsin late in the game where they didn't take enough time to review. By the time they got the one angle that had the call, the officials had moved on.

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by AremRed

Yeah but then you get a situation like in the Wisconsin-Kentucky a few years ago where they missed a critical possession off of Wisconsin late in the game where they didn't take enough time to review. By the time they got the one angle that had the call, the officials had moved on.

That was Wisconsin/Duke in the title game. But thank you for unwittingly defending the other post I just made.

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

That was Wisconsin/Duke in the title game. But thank you for unwittingly defending the other post I just made.

I knew it was Wisconsin, thought it was the semi-final!

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

On a side note, in real time, I'd make the call the L did 100 times out of 100. When there's a poke, and the ball goes OOB, it is virtually impossible to do anything other than assume the poker was the last to touch. Glances off of fingertips 0.02 seconds later are nearly impossible for the human eye to discern.

Yeah I don't care much for this trend. I would argue that 90% of the time when the ball is hit out of a players hands, that player likely touched it last. But we don't call it that way. I saw another review this year involving Gene Steretore on a Michigan game where he came to the broadcast guys and said "we saw two frames that had it off the player holding the ball"....really?!? Do we really want to be so precise that we forget review is there to correct OBVIOUS errors in judgement. Las tonight was not an obvious error in judgement and thus should have have been overturned.

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by AremRed

Yeah I don't care much for this trend. I would argue that 90% of the time when the ball is hit out of a players hands, that player likely touched it last. But we don't call it that way. I saw another review this year involving Gene Steretore on a Michigan game where he came to the broadcast guys and said "we saw two frames that had it off the player holding the ball"....really?!? Do we really want to be so precise that we forget review is there to correct OBVIOUS errors in judgement. Las tonight was not an obvious error in judgement and thus should have have been overturned.

This is a valid point. Replay has forced us into the position where we make this type of call one way for 38 minutes and a different way for the other 2.

It might be worth refining the OOB violation verbiage in some way so as to state, “when a player dislodges the ball from a BH and the ball subsequently goes directly OOB, the player who dislodged the ball is deemed to have caused it to go out.” Then write a couple of case plays to illustrate rulings. Problem solved!




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by ChuckS

My best recollection is about 50 seconds remaining in 2nd Half.

It was in overtime.

I will try to clip this up quickly and not show all the other stuff.

Peace

[ChuckS]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

It was in overtime.


Peace

Wow...sorry!

[crosscountry55]

All this whining about reply time annoys me. We debate it as though this is a major problem, but we tend to forget that it is March and so it might take a little longer to be sure when there's a team that's going home. I'm ok with that. I think improvement can be made in the availability and utility of video feeds provided to the officials. But to put a time limit on situations like these is absurd. The OP play was very, very close, and indeed it turned out there was only one definitive angle out of the many provided. And it probably would not have been definitive if not for its high resolution. In the end, they got the call right. So tell me why we're arguing about this?

On a side note, in real time, I'd make the call the L did 100 times out of 100. When there's a poke, and the ball goes OOB, it is virtually impossible to do anything other than assume the poker was the last to touch. Glances off of fingertips 0.02 seconds later are nearly impossible for the human eye to discern.

Since it was brought up, regarding the contentious block/charge that went block against Duke, I thought it was a great call.

[#olderthanilook]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

Since it was brought up, regarding the contentious block/charge that went block against Duke, I thought it was a great call.

Not being antagonistic here...just want to know why.

What did the defense do wrong on that play?

(I have no dog in this fight, either.)

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by #olderthanilook

Not being antagonistic here...just want to know why.



What did the defense do wrong on that play?



(I have no dog in this fight, either.)

Was sliding left and slightly toward (i.e. not maintaining LGP) at the point of contact.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[#olderthanilook]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

Was sliding left and slightly toward (i.e. not maintaining LGP) at the point of contact.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ok, I also saw the defender obtain LGP then move left, but couldn't tell if that movement was forward into the shooter.

Difficult, big time call.