Duke/Kansas OOB in Last Minute

[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.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by #olderthanilook

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.

I thought the defender was legal too....and the only reason I wanted Duke to win was because I had picked them to get to the FF in my bracket.

[Pantherdreams]

Block/Charge - Thought the player was legal felt like the final step with right leg was straightening up or narrowing their stance not still moving.

Replay - I wish replay was used to overturn calls that are incorrectly called and obvious. Ie. someone missed something. Do not believe supper slow mo and enhanced twenty times to be sure and confirmed should be the standards for officials on the floor. If on a full speed, regular size viewing of the play there is not enough to clearly overturn the call on the floor. Call should stand and we move on.

[ballgame99]

That looked like a PC all day to me. Defense had establish LGP and didn't do anything to lose it.

[Paintguru]

Originally Posted by 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?

Sorry, but replay is there to get obvious errors corrected, not to slow plays down frame by frame to judge the last millimeter that someone touched a ball. A time limit is needed, because if it can't be determined in that amount of time, it is not indisputable visual evidence, which should be the basis to overturn any call. I understand a small delay if the referees are cycling through all the replay angles, but you can see during the broadcast that the referees are playing each angle frame by frame to try and see the last microsecond that someone had a hand on the ball. That is not the intent of replay. Also, these delays weren't restricted to March...it was happening all year.

I still can't believe they overturned that call, and again, I was rooting for Kansas.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Paintguru

Sorry, but replay is there to get obvious errors corrected, not to slow plays down frame by frame to judge the last millimeter that someone touched a ball. A time limit is needed, because if it can't be determined in that amount of time, it is not indisputable visual evidence, which should be the basis to overturn any call. I understand a small delay if the referees are cycling through all the replay angles, but you can see during the broadcast that the referees are playing each angle frame by frame to try and see the last microsecond that someone had a hand on the ball. That is not the intent of replay. Also, these delays weren't restricted to March...it was happening all year.

I still can't believe they overturned that call, and again, I was rooting for Kansas.

I run plays frame-by-frame on a regular basis on my DVR. Sometimes that is what's needed to see what actually happened.

And again, there was an angle (I saw on DVR before the officials did) that shows the Duke player was the last to touch the ball with both hands.

I'd hate to be that crew that prematurely gives a ruling that then has ESPN rerunning a replay that night showing how they got it wrong in their haste to appease fans whose daily schedules have been thrown off by 2 minutes.

[ChuckS]

Originally Posted by Raymond

I run plays frame-by-frame on a regular basis on my DVR. Sometimes that is what's needed to see what actually happened.

Agreed, but at some point, the delay and search for precision goes too far.

Originally Posted by Raymond

I'd hate to be that crew that prematurely gives a ruling that then has ESPN rerunning a replay that night showing how they got it wrong in their haste to appease fans whose daily schedules have been thrown off by 2 minutes.

Not just fans, but it kills the flow of the game, and gives extended time-outs to both teams. I am sure there have been situations where an extended replay time-out benefited one team way more than the other.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by ChuckS

Agreed, but at some point, the delay and search for precision goes too far.



Not just fans, but it kills the flow of the game, and gives extended time-outs to both teams. I am sure there have been situations where an extended replay time-out benefited one team way more than the other.

As an official my only concern is getting the play right. If coaches (those who make the rules) don't think it's a problem then I'm not going to worry about flow, beer runs, dinner plans, etc. But something tells me coaches are more concerned with getting a deserved possession with 4 seconds left in the game than they are about fans and their complaints.

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by Raymond

As an official my only concern is getting the play right. If coaches (those who make the rules) don't think it's a problem then I'm not going to worry about flow, beer runs, dinner plans, etc. But something tells me coaches are more concerned with getting a deserved possession with 4 seconds left in the game than they are about fans and their complaints.

^ This.
Also, “flow” is overrated. At its core, flow is fan speak. Do I like a smooth flowing game without many whistles? Sure, who doesn’t? Do I use judgment to pass on what I can pass on, which may indirectly improve flow? Sure. But do I overtly take steps to influence flow? Absolutely not. This includes not feeling artificially rushed at the monitor when there are no rules dictating how long I have to review. If the committee wants to change that, that’s on them, not me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Pantherdreams]

Originally Posted by Raymond

As an official my only concern is getting the play right. If coaches (those who make the rules) don't think it's a problem then I'm not going to worry about flow, beer runs, dinner plans, etc. But something tells me coaches are more concerned with getting a deserved possession with 4 seconds left in the game than they are about fans and their complaints.

My 2 cents ( I'll wait for change)

I'm want to be right too. But I'm not ok wit the game delayed for minutes at a time because we want to change the standard for right.

38 minutes a game right is what we judge based on the real time evidence and help from our fellow officials.

Just my opinion, but I see the replay and the table official in the same way. Assistance from another view or vantage point in case we missed something. If I say white ball and my partner comes in and says no its off white. We talk about what we saw and come to a decision. My partner doesn't run in and say hey blue came in and smacked that ball free but I/m pretty certain the last micro touch was whites finger tips last.

I want the call right. Right needs to be consistent and relative throughout the game. If its not something that can be picked up by the naked eye and at speed (even on replay), odds are it would be passed on/missed/called or no called the other way all game long. Replay should assistant in correcting errors or ommissions made by officials in key moments of the game, not change the nature of decision making.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Pantherdreams

My 2 cents ( I'll wait for change)

I'm want to be right too. But I'm not ok wit the game delayed for minutes at a time because we want to change the standard for right.

38 minutes a game right is what we judge based on the real time evidence and help from our fellow officials.

Just my opinion, but I see the replay and the table official in the same way. Assistance from another view or vantage point in case we missed something. If I say white ball and my partner comes in and says no its off white. We talk about what we saw and come to a decision. My partner doesn't run in and say hey blue came in and smacked that ball free but I/m pretty certain the last micro touch was whites finger tips last.

I want the call right. Right needs to be consistent and relative throughout the game. If its not something that can be picked up by the naked eye and at speed (even on replay), odds are it would be passed on/missed/called or no called the other way all game long. Replay should assistant in correcting errors or ommissions made by officials in key moments of the game, not change the nature of decision making.

Coaches have decided that possessions in the last 2 minutes are crucial enough that getting it right is more important than flow. Whatever any of us THINK replay should be for, the coaches obviously have their own thoughts on it.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by ChuckS

Not just fans, but it kills the flow of the game, and gives extended time-outs to both teams. I am sure there have been situations where an extended replay time-out benefited one team way more than the other.

Not really any more than the 4 media timeouts each half. Even when they take a while, it is usually still less than a media timeout.