Gonzaga-Tech Vid. Req.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by AremRed

That's what I thought. Strange that even with an alternate watching the tape they got it wrong. In my mind this is a bigger miss than the foot on the line.

In case anyone is curious it was a 3 point game at the time of the F1 foul and here's difference in FT shooter:

Supposed to shoot: Matt Mooney, 76.5% on 2.3 attempts/game this season

Actually shot: Davide Moretti, 92.1% on 2.9 attempts/game this season

Yes, this miss will probably cost all of them an advancement.

First, it should have been an F1, not a T, with the thrower shooting. But even if you go with the T, thinking the ball was hit instead of the arm, it was administered incorrectly.

And I would not put this on the player. This is probably the first time in their playing careers that this has happened. They shouldn't be expected to know who is supposed to shoot on this. It is entirely possible that they thought it was a T and sent their best player to shoot what they thought was a T.

Originally Posted by AremRed

Fun but irrelevant fact: Davide Moretti was #2 in all of college basketball this season in FT%.

While acknowledging your point, that is not entirely accurate. I do see the same NCAA stats that you're probably looking at showing that, but it is incorrect. The #1 player on the list is listed at 92.4% on 73 of 79. Tyler Herro of Kentucky is at 93.5% on 87 for 93 and isn't even on the list. (Tyler Herro Stats, News, Bio | ESPN)

The NCAA list is missing some data.

[thedewed]

I saw the aftermath in the studio and the rules analyst Gene said to the rest of the panel, mostly former college/NBA players, that after the block and coming down out of bounds, that player would need to get BOTH feet back in bounds before he could again touch the ball. Everyone agreed. But that isn't the rule, right? He just needs to get one foot back in, or any part of his body for that matter (knee, elbow?), as long as no part of the rest of his body was still out of bounds.

Right??? It seems like this is a rule that MANY in the game misunderstood, that you need to get both feet back in, not just one. I just want to make sure I'm not missing anything new, thanks,

I would also agree with the person above that pointed out that Higgins would have been looking high, watching for arm then body contact, seeing the shooter to the ground, and the immediate switch to the need to see where the blocker landed is a tough transition in the mind. At the point he even realizes what the defender may be able to accomplish, that defender is airborne and it's too late. And lead may very well not be looking out there, instead watching for activity underneath. just a tough circumstance.

[ODog]

Originally Posted by thedewed

I saw the aftermath in the studio and the rules analyst Gene said to the rest of the panel, mostly former college/NBA players, that after the block and coming down out of bounds, that player would need to get BOTH feet back in bounds before he could again touch the ball. … But that isn't the rule, right?

Steratore also said the officials got the "technical" right for defender hitting the ball OOB on the throw-in -- even though replay was obvious he hit the guy's arm -- and then literally like a second later, the official came over to broadcast table and told them "Flagrant 1 for contact with the thrower" and Gene was like "Ohh yeaah, if they're saying he hit the thrower, then yes, it would be a Flagrant 1."

Gene wasn't exactly setting the world on fire with his observational skills or rules knowledge, at least for this game.

[thedewed]

And it seems to me that, at this stage in the season, with the stakes for the schools, and a 4th official sitting there, there is zero excuse for misapplication of the rules happening. Good grief.

[ODog]

JRut, any way when you clip the Flagrant 1 for contact with the inbounder, you can also separately clip like a minute later (after the table review or crew discussion … I forget which it was), just for the audio of what the official says to the broadcast crew?

All one clip would probably be too long due to the delay for the review/discussion, but would definitely be instructive. Thanks!

[ODog]

So many people perpetuating this "technical" myth:

Zags' Perkins rues 'bonehead' tech late in loss

That's not what happened, that's not what they called (other than the initial T signal, which I don't blame Higgins for … he had the whistle, which is most important), and that's not how it was administered, even if it was still done incorrectly.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

While acknowledging your point, that is not entirely accurate. I do see the same NCAA stats that you're probably looking at showing that, but it is incorrect. The #1 player on the list is listed at 92.4% on 73 of 79. Tyler Herro of Kentucky is at 93.5% on 87 for 93 and isn't even on the list. (Tyler Herro Stats, News, Bio | ESPN)

The NCAA list is missing some data.

Whatever dude I used this list: 2018-19 NCAA Division I College Basketball Player Statistics - ESPN

It does have Moretti as #2 on the season at .933, I transcribed it incorrectly in my first post.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by AremRed

Whatever dude I used this list: 2018-19 NCAA Division I College Basketball Player Statistics - ESPN

It does have Moretti as #2 on the season at .933, I transcribed it incorrectly in my first post.

That list isn't all games.

My point was that https://www.ncaa.com/stats/basketbal...individual/142, which supposedly include all games for all teams is incorrect.

[thedewed]

actually, ball was dead when thrower in was hit on the arm. so
T Tech rightfully got to select the FT shooter. I think.

[Fuelrider]

Originally Posted by thedewed

actually, ball was dead when thrower in was hit on the arm. so
T Tech rightfully got to select the FT shooter. I think.

dewed if you read any of the other posts it's not a dead ball T unless he hits the ball. He hit the arm which in NFHS is an intentional foul 2 shots and the ball at POI. In NCAA it should've been ruled a common foul for making contact with the thrower then upgraded to a Flagrant 1. Which means Mooney would've been the one shooting. But even if the deemed it to be a tech it's a class B T which is 1 shot and the ball and whomever they choose. So either way they administered this wrong.

[thedewed]

Originally Posted by Fuelrider

dewed if you read any of the other posts it's not a dead ball T unless he hits the ball. He hit the arm which in NFHS is an intentional foul 2 shots and the ball at POI. In NCAA it should've been ruled a common foul for making contact with the thrower then upgraded to a Flagrant 1. Which means Mooney would've been the one shooting. But even if the deemed it to be a tech it's a class B T which is 1 shot and the ball and whomever they choose. So either way they administered this wrong.

I don't think that's right. foul on arm in that situation, dead ball contact foul, F1, anyone can shoot. Not positive but I'm pretty sure that's right based on reading the book. That's why I'm bringing it up for a revisit. Because everyone weighing in so far may be wrong.
Actually I'm not sure. F1 personal contact foul include contact with player making the throw in, but Class A tech includes unnecessary , excessive nature. I suppose the better interpretation is the player that got fouled shoots, that is more direct language.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by thedewed

I don't think that's right. foul on arm in that situation, dead ball contact foul, F1, anyone can shoot. Not positive but I'm pretty sure that's right based on reading the book. That's why I'm bringing it up for a revisit. Because everyone weighing in so far may be wrong.

Actually I'm not sure. F1 personal contact foul include contact with player making the throw in, but Class A tech includes unnecessary , excessive nature. I suppose the better interpretation is the player that got fouled shoots, that is more direct language.

You are incorrect. Several have already typed the correct adjudication.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[bucky]

Where are you getting "dead ball"? When inbounder has the ball, it is live. Foul was on arm. Higging signaled T immediately, IMO he was thinking the ball was hit. Anyway, either way, posters are correct in that it was administered incorrectly.

Hit thrower is intentional foul (NFHS) or Flagrant 1 (NCAAM). Thrower shoots 2 and they keep the ball. Hit ball is technical foul (NFHS - 2 shots, NCAAM - 1 shot). Anyone can shoot and team retains possession.

This play and the out of bounds play being discussed, will eventually be reviewable. These are two huge calls that had a tremendous impact on the game. It is only a matter of time before things like this are added to the list of reveiwable items. The player out of bounds was so obvious that only three people did not see it, the ones wearing the stripes. It is similar to the New Orleans Saints play IMO. Everyone saw the same, obvious infraction except the officials. The magnitude is not the same however.

[dahoopref]

Originally Posted by thedewed

I don't think that's right. foul on arm in that situation, dead ball contact foul, F1, anyone can shoot. Not positive but I'm pretty sure that's right based on reading the book. That's why I'm bringing it up for a revisit. Because everyone weighing in so far may be wrong.

Texas Tech is attempting to inbound the ball making the play "live." Contact with the inbounder is F1. Contact with the ball is a Class B Tech.