Stanford/Cal RA Reversal

[SC Official]

14.2 left in the game. Lead calls a RA blocking foul and-1, then the call is reversed on replay.

[Raymond]

They got the review wrong?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[JRutledge]

Peace

[Raymond]

Looks like a proper reversal to me.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Raymond

Looks like a proper reversal to me.

I thought so too.

Peace

[Kansas Ref]

Just for perspective, I am both gratified and appreciative of how often the NF-level officials correctly adjudicate these kinds of cases without the crutch of either an RA semicircle and a reply video upon which to rely on. I don't think I have ever seen an NF-level ref change their block/charge call once it's been made--have you?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Kansas Ref

Just for perspective, I am both gratified and appreciative of how often the NF-level officials correctly adjudicate these kinds of cases without the crutch of either an RA semicircle and a reply video upon which to rely on. I don't think I have ever seen an NF-level ref change their block/charge call once it's been made--have you?

It is not a crutch, it is a rule. The NCAA does not want to have players standing under the basket or near the basket (which is why they have an RA in the first place). That was a decision by the NCAA Rules committee (coaches and administrators) to make this a rule. Also, replay was added to make sure that rule was followed in critical moments. It has nothing to do with the NF because there are no such rules or procedures in place.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Kansas Ref

I don't think I have ever seen an NF-level ref change their block/charge call once it's been made.

With a few exceptions where my partner comes in to tell me that he had a travel before my foul, or a held ball before my foul, I have never, ever, in thirty-eight years, changed a high school foul call of any type (also exception for wrong number).

(We'll once, when I had "White" player "fouling" another "White" player. Not my best call of the night.)

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Kansas Ref

Just for perspective, I am both gratified and appreciative of how often the NF-level officials correctly adjudicate these kinds of cases without the crutch of either an RA semicircle and a reply video upon which to rely on. I don't think I have ever seen an NF-level ref change their block/charge call once it's been made--have you?

I've seen plenty of HS officials kick block/charge plays. HS officials get them wrong way more than college officials do, so I'm not sure what your point is. The more you post, the more you seem to have something against college officials.

[SE Minnestoa Re]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

It is not a crutch, it is a rule. The NCAA does not want to have players standing under the basket or near the basket (which is why they have an RA in the first place). That was a decision by the NCAA Rules committee (coaches and administrators) to make this a rule. Also, replay was added to make sure that rule was followed in critical moments. It has nothing to do with the NF because there are no such rules or procedures in place.

Peace

Minnesota instituted the arc rule this year in high school. Working mostly in smaller schools, we generally have two officials. It is a tough call sometimes but we do the best we can.

[Kansas Ref]

Originally Posted by Raymond

I've seen plenty of HS officials kick block/charge plays. HS officials get them wrong way more than college officials do, so I'm not sure what your point is. The more you post, the more you seem to have something against college officials.

*Mr. Raymond,
I'm sorry if my post was percieved as I've "got something against collegiate level refs" as I certainly hold them in high esteem. But don't misconstrue my main point which was that: NF level officials must adjudicate these critical cases (i.e., late game block/charge calls) without the aid of technology (i.e., instant replay) and special allowances (i.e., RA semicircle)--and to do so correctly. From what I've heard , their preparation and requirements are far superior to the prep and qualifications of an NF level ref like me. Furthermore, from what I've observed, I think that collegiate level refs are more disposed to [perhaps appropriately] issue technical fouls for unsporting conduct when it's warranted, than what I've seen in NF level refs--who are less inclined to do so when it's warranted. I will be more aware of the tone of my posts on collegiate level officials so it's not percieved as such.

[Kansas Ref]

Originally Posted by SE Minnestoa Re

Minnesota instituted the arc rule this year in high school. Working mostly in smaller schools, we generally have two officials. It is a tough call sometimes but we do the best we can.

*really? your NF games use an RA, is that NFHS approved or something your state is doing on a trial basis?
And, has this use of the RA improved the "block/charge" call accuracy of the officiating crew?
And, has the use of the RA affected whether such calls are reversed or sustained?
Very interesting things in MN...

[ilyazhito]

Correct reversal.I would not have called a block without replay, because the Stanford player was outside the restricted area and he had LGP before the Cal player went airborne.