Gonzaga-Tech Vid. Req.

[tjones1]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Nope, fouled the thrower. This should be an intentional personal foul, not a technical.
Or F1 by NCAA rules.

Agree - thought it should of been an F1.

They said they called it a T which is why anyone was allowed to shoot the free throws.

I don't agree with the ruling.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Fuelrider

I'll tell you how it happens. If you watch closely trail and lead are both ball watching. Elite 8 this stuff just can't happen. I don't know the Perkins even touched him. 11.5 seconds to go Zach Norvell put back. TT defender in the RA No foul?

Touched whom? On the throw-in? Obvious hit to the left forearm.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[tjones1]

Originally Posted by IUgrad92

So are you saying this was a tough call?

Maybe my expectations of a FF ref are too high...

Mistakes happen. Higgins is one of the top officials in the game.

I thought it looked like he was blocked out by another player.

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by tjones1

Agree - thought it should of been an F1.

They said they called it a T which is why anyone was allowed to shoot the free throws.

I don't agree with the ruling.

I couldn’t watch the game and haven’t seen the play, but if they ruled it a technical for touching the ball, it’s a Class B which is only one FT.

[grunewar]

Originally Posted by IUgrad92

So are you saying this was a tough call?

Maybe my expectations of a FF ref are too high...

No, I'm not saying it was a tough call. I'm saying, as it happened on the TV at the time, I said to my son that he was out of bounds. The camera angle from my living room was excellent! The call should have been made. It wasn't.

[tjones1]

Originally Posted by SC Official

I couldn’t watch the game and haven’t seen the play, but if they ruled it a technical for touching the ball, it’s a Class B which is only one FT.

That wasn't the ruling - TT shot two free throws.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by tjones1

Mistakes happen. Higgins is one of the top officials in the game.

I thought it looked like he was blocked out by another player.

That is exactly what I was thinking and very possible.

Look we need to act like mistakes cannot happen. They happen but on this stage, these are more pronounced.

Peace

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by tjones1

Mistakes happen. Higgins is one of the top officials in the game.

I thought it looked like he was blocked out by another player.

Agree. The original shooter is probably blocking his view.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by tjones1

Agree - thought it should of been an F1.

They said they called it a T which is why anyone was allowed to shoot the free throws.

I don't agree with the ruling.

Originally Posted by SC Official

I couldn’t watch the game and haven’t seen the play, but if they ruled it a technical for touching the ball, it’s a Class B which is only one FT.

They reviewed it and said that it was an F1. However, they then either forgot that the inbounder has to attempt the FTs or had the wrong player as the thrower.

Note: this would be the second time in the tourney that a wrong FT shooter gets Higgins. He was the alternate a couple of years ago when the crew put the wrong shooter at the line. They all failed to advance.

[Bad Zebra]

Originally Posted by tjones1

Agree - thought it should of been an F1.

They said they called it a T which is why anyone was allowed to shoot the free throws.

I don't agree with the ruling.

Do we definitively what it was called? F1 or T?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Bad Zebra

Do we definitively what it was called? F1 or T?

A technical was actually called. It was said so by on the broadcast after the game and apparently, that came from JD Collins according to Steretore.

Peace

[Bad Zebra]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

A technical was actually called. It was said so by on the broadcast after the game and apparently, that came from JD Collins according to Steretore.

Peace

That’s what I thought...then why was it inbounded at the spot of the foul? Is that the NCAA rule or did they err at the inbound spot? That confused me.

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by Bad Zebra

That’s what I thought...then why was it inbounded at the spot of the foul? Is that the NCAA rule or did they err at the inbound spot? That confused me.

The spot of the foul and the POI are the exact same in this situation. Only dead ball contact and flagrant 2 T’s go to the division line.

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

A technical was actually called. It was said so by on the broadcast after the game and apparently, that came from JD Collins according to Steretore.

Peace

Then they erred in giving two FTs.

They either erred giving two shots for a Class B or a Flagrant 1 with the wrong shooter. I didn’t see any of the refs come over to the table and explain — does anyone know if they did?