Gonzaga-Tech Vid. Req.
 

4:44 left in the first half. Traveling called on Gonzaga player. It was a spin move that is normally not called.

55 secs to go. Blocked shot.....out of bounds save.......ouch. Great, athletic play though.....

Last minute of play. About 58 seconds left.
Texas Tech player looks to have jumped from out of bounds on his save after blocking a 3pt shot.

How does that happen? His entire foot was pretty much out.....

Too much ball watching by T.

11 secs to go. Knocking the ball away from the IB passer. T!

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

Wrong shooter?
Would be under NFHS rules. Is the NCAA the same?

Don't know college rules but why doesn't the thrower have to shoot those free throws?

Ya think he got him?

If he were ball watching he would have seen the violation.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Yes, NCAS-Mens F1 rules are the same as NFHS intentional foul rules.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

I had a good view......from my living room. :rolleyes:

If he wasn't watching the ball, then how does that get missed? If he wasn't ball watching, then are you saying he was handling his line? If he wasn't handling his line, then what was he doing?

The shot was tipped, the ball stayed high in the air, defender jumped to deflect the ball back in play. All that action was above shoulder height. If eyes are on all of that activity, you likely do not see the defender jump from OOB. As in this case.

Higgins head was definitely tilted more up than down, and the head follows the eyes. If you have a screen shot showing anything different, would love to see it...

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?

So are you saying this was a tough call? :confused::confused:

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

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.

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

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

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

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

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.

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.

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

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

Agree. The original shooter is probably blocking his view.

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.

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

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.

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?

They did, and you could hear the explanation to the broadcast team straight from the horse's mouth. Audio clear as day on TV. A flagrant 1 for contact with the thrower.

And then the thrower did not attempt the FTs :confused:

If he was blocked out lead should be over there to help with how much was going on.


According to the ESPN play by play it was ruled a Technical. Either way they administered it incorrect.

He may be one of the top officials. But by the looks of his head he's ball watching. But you should know where to look and what to look for. Goes back to the GU vs UNC Championship game when his hand was OOB. This stuff should be a huge point of emphasis in training so they quit missing the biggest calls of the game.

I don’t understand why people are saying that the T was ballwatching on this play. It was outside the 3pt line. It was his play. He was looking up at a blocked shot by two tall players. That is exactly what he was supposed to be doing.

I believe that when the shot-blocker continued past the shooter in the corner, but towards the end line side, that put the shooter’s body between this player attempting to save the ball and the Trail. He may not have been able to see his foot step out.

Another possibility is that the follow up action of the save came so quickly after the blocked shot that the Trail was still focused on looking up high for contact and concerned with landing the shooter that he couldn’t shift his viewpoint to where the defender placed a foot upon coming down and quickly jumping again. This quick 1-2 sequence simply resulted in him not being able to observe all of the necessary factors and he missed the call.

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

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

In the end the trail has responsibility to see the whole play. Or this needs to become reviewable. This possession like in the championship 2 years ago hurt Gonzaga. They seem to be on the blunt end of missed calls in big games. Trail needs to step back and get a better angle. If the shot is blocked then you act just like lead you step back to see more after the shot. Example Virgina Purdue. Lead official watched the line the entire way and made a great call down the stretch. In the GU game you can see where his head is which means field of vision. Lead and C can see the contact if there's a push he saw the blocked shot then needs to back out and see the play to be able to see it all. As a trail I'm looking for everything as a lead I'm rotating out to help trail because there's a fluster click going over there. But you can clearly see his entire foot is OOB, it's not like his toe was on the line. He jumped from OOB, there was enough delay to see where he was so and would've just taken a quick glance to make sure I see where he was. In a game like this it's huge to miss something like this and hurts teams.

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.

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.

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

Yes, w/o a citation. it is AR 82 in casebook. W/o that there is some potential for confusion as a Class A tech includes 'unecessary contact' during a dead ball, and that penalty is 2 shots by anyone.

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.

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.

yes that's right now that you mention it. I think that was changed a few years ago from dead to live ball. Thanks,

No, it wasn't changed. This has been a live ball situation for decades (perhaps since the times of Naismith).

It has been a widely held myth that live ball means in bounds. Perhaps you were one of those believe the myth for a long time.

what I'm thinking of is whether a foul on court before ball is thrown in is considered team control or not. Didn't used to be, now is I believe.

There has never been confusion for me, especially since a throw-in is not a dead ball. You do realize some of us you are speaking to actually officiate games with NCAA rules right?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

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." :rolleyes:

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

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.

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!

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.

Back to the OOB. If you are the L and for whatever reason you see this. Do you come and get it?

Heck yes. Call it a 'crew call' or whatever you want, just get it right! To be the L and not get it would not allow me to sleep that night, especially in this particular situation where it absolutely was a possession consequence.

Personally, I don't see how getting a call correct, no matter who comes in to get it, makes the crew look bad or less knowledgeable. Every pre-game I have, I tell my partners that my feelings/ego will not be hurt if you come in to get something in front of me or come in to reverse a call I've made. As long as it's the CORRECT call.

Try telling that to the Lead official in the MHSAA State Final game involving Iron Mountain.;)

Apples and oranges. That high school game was one official replacing his judgment for that of the official closest to the play on a play that may or may not have been a travel.

An out-of-bounds this obvious is for anyone to come get if they see it.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

This is the idea of communication with your partners, rather than taking a call. On an OOB play that is that obvious I prefer to see an official come in and the officials talk about the call to make sure they get the correct call. With the Iron Mountain play I think it would have looked better if the officials had gotten together to make a call given the importance of that moment in the game.

I don't like when it appears that one official is taking over a game, even if the calls are ultimately correct (which it wasn't in the IM game).

Play #1:

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Zejq9JKl2lo" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Peace

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/lpnEBpPRhl8" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Peace

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/hFwH5GGfawM" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Peace

I believe Roger Ayers says at 0:57 of the clip, "Class B Technical Foul, one shot...:confused:(?inaudible?)...the deadball on the throw in."

Also, I am trying to not show as much audio because CBS seems to get upset when I show too much audio and the conversation with Gene Steretore as well.

Peace

As I have stated a few times during these discussions, when the spin move is that slow, I call the travel because it's so easy to see.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk