UCF/Duke

[SC Official]

At 11:02 in the second half is a great example of the backcourt exception on throw-ins. Officiated correctly and a straightforward play if you know the rules, but something plenty of people would grumble about.

There are probably other plays as well but I haven't watched much.

[SC Official]

7:38 second half. Foul or good block?

[JRutledge]

Wow that review for the shot clock is almost impossible.

Peace

[SC Official]

I did not realize you were allowed to review whether the ball hit the rim or not. I knew you could review whether the shooter got it off in time.

[SC Official]

14 seconds left, foul on Fall. What did he do wrong?

Full disclosure, I am a Duke hater.

[griblets]

UCF alum in need of unbiased opinion!

On the play where Fall fouls out, did Taylor draw a PC that should have been called? Then, was Fall vertical?

On the rebound and put back of the missed free throw that put Duke up by 1, did the rebounder displace Dawkins, who went flying thru the lane abnormally?

Appreciate the non-biased review.

[cmb]

Originally Posted by SC Official

14 seconds left, foul on Fall. What did he do wrong?

Full disclosure, I am a Duke hater.

He was grounded in the restricted area when the contact with Zion occurred. This is an automatic blocking foul. He needs to either jump or get out of the RA.

[cmb]

Originally Posted by SC Official

I did not realize you were allowed to review whether the ball hit the rim or not. I knew you could review whether the shooter got it off in time.

You’re not, which is why I’m confused and trying to figure out what, exactly, they were reviewing. Also disappointed (but not surprised) that Steratore did not raise this point. He acted as if the judgment call of whether it the rim was a reviewable play.

[Fuelrider]

Originally Posted by cmb

You’re not, which is why I’m confused and trying to figure out what, exactly, they were reviewing. Also disappointed (but not surprised) that Steratore did not raise this point. He acted as if the judgment call of whether it the rim was a reviewable play.

REALLY not allowed to review if shot hit the rim?

[griblets]

Originally Posted by cmb

Also disappointed (but not surprised) that Steratore did not raise this point. He acted as if the judgment call of whether it the rim was a reviewable play.

He said they were checking to see if it was a shot clock operator error for resetting the shot clock incorrectly.

[dahoopref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Wow that review for the shot clock is almost impossible.

Peace

Any video of this review?

[MechanicGuy]

Originally Posted by SC Official

7:38 second half. Foul or good block?

Foul.

But the officials turned it into a 1-and-1 during the break somehow. Missed the front end and play went on

That's the kind of mistake that will likely cost them S16 assignments.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by MechanicGuy

Foul.

But the officials turned it into a 1-and-1 during the break somehow. Missed the front end and play went on

That's the kind of mistake that will likely cost them S16 assignments.

Except it's quite possible the block was clean and the foul was during the subsequent loose ball period.

[johnny d]

Jeff, play 3 and 4 are the same play.

[cmb]

Originally Posted by Rich

Except it's quite possible the block was clean and the foul was during the subsequent loose ball period.

The lead clearly points at the basket as he is making his foul call, signaling he has the foul occurring on a shot attempt.

To your point, the video shows there is virtually no contact after the shot attempt ends.

Between the actual play and the lead’s mechanics while calling the foul, I’m unsure how this ended up as a 1-and-1 and not 2 shots.