Michigan State-Duke

[ODog]

8.4 seconds left, ball knocked OOB by MSU in frontcourt, endline corner. Duke calls timeout.

Before play is resumed, official comes over to broadcast team and informs them that because Duke called TO, they will be allowed to inbound the ball from the endline hashmark (something to that effect).

As throw-in is about to be administered, Tom Izzo has a wtf moment when he sees what the throw-in spot has become (he clearly hadn't been informed). Officials awkwardly/messily/halfheartedly try to calm him down/wave him off. Seemed like a total blowoff ... but then they moved the throw-in back to the original spot!

Duke assistants try to pop off, but Coach K gives them the shush gesture and basically indicates "whatever, it's fine."

I don't know NCAAM rules: What was that all about? Can you seriously move the throw-in spot in certain circumstances if you call a timeout, a la the NBA?!

If so, why was it quickly undone just by Izzo protesting?

Bizarre sequence to end the game.

[chapmaja]

I don't know about that rule, but what I did find interesting and mention this to my father who I watching the game with, was the foul situation. I commented about the 5 minute mark that Duke might be in some trouble. At that time they had 1 team foul in the second half. Sure enough, the lack of team fouls prevented them from sending MSU to the line to extend the game. The officials desire to swallow the whistles can impact the end of a game. There were a lot of things that could have been called, and with other crews likely would have been called. This crew, on this night, let them play.

It makes sense, but last night with Texas Tech-Gonzaga and tonight with Michigan State-Duke both crews had a call on the floor, went to the monitor, and then forgot or incorrectly adjudicated part of a rule.

Here's what happened tonight. Doug Sirmons called OOB on the endline, initially pointed MSU ball then overruled himself and pointed Duke ball. Perhaps he pointed the wrong way initially but I personally think he knew they were gonna go to the monitor to review the OOB and felt it was "smarter" to have the call on the floor be Duke ball (who was losing) in case the monitor view was inconclusive.

After they finished at the monitor they granted Duke a timeout. When timeouts are called during a live ball in the frontcourt the ensuing inbounds spot is one of the 4 spots specified in the rule book. However if an out of bounds violation occurs and then a timeout is called it does NOT change the inbounds spot.

Didn't look the crew got together and discussed the inbound spot, seems like Doug had a bit of a brain fart and his partners didn't notice. But Izzo noticed and threw a fit and it Gaffney was telling him to get back in his box when Doug realized his mistake and ran over saying he was gonna correct it. So they were about to screw it up but ultimately the ball was inbounded at the correct spot.

The ball went OOB around the 3-point line and Doug was lined up to take it at the 3' mark outside the lane -- 11 feet 8 inches closer to the basket. Potentially a big difference if Duke had a lob going to the basket. Plus it is much more difficult to inbound from the corner in general.

Ultimately they got it right, so I doubt they get sent home for this rules hiccup.

[frezer11]

Originally Posted by AremRed

Didn't look the crew got together and discussed the inbound spot, seems like Doug had a bit of a brain fart and his partners didn't notice. But Izzo noticed and threw a fit and it Gaffney was telling him to get back in his box when Doug realized his mistake and ran over saying he was gonna correct it. So they were about to screw it up but ultimately the ball was inbounded at the correct spot.

The ball went OOB around the 3-point line and Doug was lined up to take it at the 3' mark outside the lane -- 11 feet 8 inches closer to the basket. Potentially a big difference if Duke had a lob going to the basket. Plus it is much more difficult to inbound from the corner in general.

Ultimately they got it right, so I doubt they get sent home for this rules hiccup.

They got it right based on the rules, but that might not advance them. Based on the Duke assistant coaches' reaction, it looks like they had inquired about where the ball would be put in play, and drew their play based on the assumption the ball would be inbounded at the 3 foot spot. To change that back (correctly, based on the rules) to the corner certainly put Duke at a disadvantage if they were planning on a different location, and of course thats not something they can fix and just say, "oh we screwed up, here's another full timeout."

I would be curious to know if they had informed the bench of the inbound spot or not, because otherwise, I thought this was one of the better officiated games in the tourney.

[bucky]

This brings up another point.

This could have been the type of situation whereby I feel a team should get another timeout. After they have called TO, coaches ask all the time, especially near intermissions or end of the game, where the ball will be inbounded. They then draw a play based on that location. If the officials then change the location of the inbound, the coach should be allowed to get another TO. This is a situation where the officials provided erroneous information and coaches/players should not be penalized.

[ODog]

Originally Posted by frezer11

They got it right based on the rules, but that might not advance them. Based on the Duke assistant coaches' reaction, it looks like they had inquired about where the ball would be put in play, and drew their play based on the assumption the ball would be inbounded at the 3 foot spot. To change that back (correctly, based on the rules) to the corner certainly put Duke at a disadvantage ...

First of all, thank you for the explanation AremRed. That made sense of everything for me -- much appreciated.

Frezer, I'm with you. Duke was absolutely told the inbounds spot would be from endline hashmark, as was the broadcast team. The only people in America who did not appear to have been told (besides the fans in the arena) were the MSU bench. Izzo's reaction made that plain enough.

They have Izzo alone to thank for (ultimately) getting it right.

[JRutledge]

If they had not told the broadcast team anything, we would not have known anything on this issue. Because they put the ball at the spot of the violation.

Peace