SPU / Purdue 2:40
 

How does everyone feel about the administration of this play. Did SPU have possession when he was going out of bounds and three it back in play. If so and official blew the whistle was there player control, if not is it an inadvertent whistle and the crew must go to the arrow. I thought Steratore was right and Purdue was going to get the ball. Thoughts ???

If this works the same way as NFHS, I have to disagree.
Once the officials determine that the SPU player saving the ball caught and threw it, establishing both player and team control, that team control continues until an opponent secures the ball. The inbounds Purdue player merely touches the ball, but is never able to control it before the official halts play due to the shot clock expiring.
My ruling is that this is an inadvertent whistle with SPU in team control, and therefore the ball is awarded to SPU for a throw-in under the POI rule.

I’ll also note:
If the officials were to deem that there was no player control by the SPU player attempting to save the ball from going out of bounds, then this is simply a shot clock violation and SPU gets the ball.

There is no possibility that Purdue could be awarded the ball in this scenario as it surrendered team control when shooting an air ball.

Great point. I hadn’t considered the team control aspect. In the moment, I don’t think Gene did, either, and when he said that, I stopped thinking about it.

Credit to the crew, they talked it out, took their time, and came to the correct conclusion, without concern over the “you’re affecting the game with this delay” pressure that I’m sure they were feeling.

Super important moment. Worth all the time they needed to get it right.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Go to about the 1:30 mark of this video. I can't embed from my Android.

https://youtu.be/ud-YfvftovA

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

If we are talking about the save play, then the answer is to me that is not possession. I am not giving a timeout at that time or calling a BCV if they were in their front court if he threw the ball to the backcourt. I like the call.

Peace

Holding Or Dribbling ...
 

Tough call.

Is he holding the ball? I think not.

One handed, possession? Sure, possible, but probably didn't happen in this play.

Tough call.

I’m pretty sure they called possession, TC, and POI at IW.

If it was a shot clock violation as you suggest, they would have reset the game clock to 2:41 which is where it was when the shot clock expired. They did not and left it at 2:40.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Tough Call ...
 

I believe that they did.

Like I said, tough call.

A little more control (cupping ball in hand and fingers), easy call, one hand holding, player control, and team control.

A little less control (just a few fingers tipping the ball, or flatter hand slapping the ball), easy call, no holding, no player control, and no team control.

Was he slapping, tipping, or tapping the ball back onto the court? One can slap, tip, or tap with intent and direction.

Was he ever holding the ball (player control is defined as holding or dribbling, nothing about controlling, one can control a tip, tap, or slap without holding the ball)?

As it is, no man's land, rock and a hard place, damned if you do, damned if you don't, six of one, half dozen of the other.

Judgment. It's why basketball officials get paid the big bucks.

Ancient Times ...
 

Reminds me of ancient times, before a tip, or a tap, was considered to be a try for goal. Officials had to decide how much control (holding) was involved to decide between an in the act of shooting (try) foul, or a common foul.

Player could be fouled on a tip or tap that missed and get no free throws (before the bonus, his team gets the ball), or a one and one (no double bonus back then).

If I recall correctly, if a player was fouled before the ball was in flight after tipping or tapping, the ball became dead immediately and a basket could not be scored.

Maybe the best rule change ever.

Am I right Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.?

The Plot Thickens ...
 

Devil's Advocate: "Was he starting a dribble by slapping, tipping, or tapping the ball to the floor? If so, he has player control during a dribble".

Directing Ball Toward Basket ...
 

If this player had touched an inbounds pass in this manner before "directing" it toward the basket with 0.3 seconds on the clock, followed by the ball entering the basket, would one count the basket?

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/i...chNUg&usqp=CAU

Imagine (John Lennon, 1971) ...
 

Imagine a player fouled before the ball was in flight after tipping or tapping, the ball then enters the basket, officials wipe away the basket, and because it's not the bonus, no free throws, simply the ball for inbounding to the offended team.

Try explaining that to an irate coach. We did it. We had to do it.

I got that right.

I am not so sure they called possession. They never changed change the clock as you said. The ball throw-in by St. Peters on the end line. The arrow was going towards Purdue and it never changed (well considering that St. Peters got the ball after the whistle). If they had ruled possession there and an inadvertent whistle, then they would have likely had to go to the arrow. So it seems by all accounts this was just a shot clock violation.

It never was explained in the broadcast.

Peace

I believe it was a SC violation as well. The explanation to the broadcast crew explained that the game clock had a timing error and the game clock should have stopped when the shot clock hit zero (so why didn't they correct it?). The in-venue PA system announced that it was a SC violation, although I'm also a bit confused about them announcing the SC should be set at 29 seconds for SPU.

Quite frankly I think this was a cop-out to avoid a complicated lengthier explanation after an already-long delay.

That’s because there had been possession and the IW came a second or so later.

Why would you go to the arrow for an IW when a team was in control?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Game clock doesn't stop just because the shot clock hits zero, so that doesn't make sense.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

I still think they ruled it a SC violation.

If it was ruled a possession by SPU on the end-line jump, then Purdue #2 regains possession, and the IW comes just as the SPU player stabs at the ball to knock it loose (before he secured possession).

I don't see how they make it SPU's ball unless they rule it a SC violation.

I didn't understand this part either, but it's what the officials told the media crew at 5:25 in the YouTube video, posted above. *shrug*

If it's possession by SPU and then an IW after Purdue #2 secured and was dribblng with the ball, then it should be Purdue's ball right?

If it's possession by SPU and then an IW after SPU stabbed at the ball to knock it loose, then it should be arrow, right?

If it's an SC violation by Purdue and ruled not possession, it should be SPU's ball on the violation, but I would assume SC gets reset to 30 and game clock gets reset to 2:41 when SC violation occured, right?

Did they rule possession by SPU, then possession by Purdue, then possession by SPU after stabbing the ball? Problem with this is that Purdue #2 stops pursuing the loose ball when he hears the whistle, resulting in SPU ending up with it.

Not challenging any of you, just trying to understand it myself. The net result didn't seem to make sense and I couldn't find any official explanations anywhere.

The shot clock should not be at 29 on a change of possession. The correct ruling would be to blow the whistle as soon as it is clear that Purdue will not attempt a shot before 0 (that could be with the shot clock at 0 with the ball rolling around).

If the whistle was blown, and the ruling was inadvertent whistle with no control, Purdue would get the ball on the AP arrow. However, they would lose the ball instantly due to the shot clock violation. This is the same as the team having the arrow, yet being awarded possession on a held ball with 20 seconds on the shot clock, where they are entitled to possession, but cannot legally gain possession because doing so would cause a 10-second violation.

If St. Peter's had controlled the ball, but then there was an indavertent whistle (unlikely), then, they would get the ball with whatever was on the shot clock. Since the shot clock was not reset, it would mean that in this scenario, the shot clock would go to 30.

If somehow Purdue had controlled the ball again when the inadvertent whistle had happened, they would get the shot clock reset to 30 seconds, because they possessed a live ball in the frontcourt after possession by the opponent.

However, in no scenario is the shot clock going to be at 29 to start a possession. As I see it, St. Peter's will get possession in almost any scenario with 30 seconds on the shot clock, due to the shot clock violation by Purdue.

The shot clock would be at 29 seconds if it was ruled that Saint Peter's saving the ball what's player control and therefore the start of a new possession. That would make the whistle an inadvertent whistle while St Peter's was still in team control.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

That's strange. I would have expected the officials to stop play when the shot clock hit zero and there was no player control or a shot in flight.

You need to watch the video from the 1:30 mark. There are variables to the play that you don't seem to be taking into account. You have to be ready to adjudicate unusual situations.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Words Of The Wise ...
 

Agree. 98% plus of the calls that we make during a season are "garden variety" calls, they (travel, block/charge, etc.) may be difficult, but it's usually "been there, done that".

We should, hopefully, also be able to "step up" "where the rubber meets the road" and correctly make those once in a season, once in a decade, or once in a career calls. That's why basketball officials get paid the big bucks.

I agree with that, but there is a case to be made that Purdue had some control if that is what is ruled. The Purdue player bounces the ball like 3 times before the St. Peters player touches the ball and maybe even takes it away from him. So if that is possession on the save, why not possession on the Purdue taking the ball after the save?

Peace

That's what I was getting at above, less eloquently -- can anyone argue that Purdue didn't have possession when #2 dribbled it 3 times before the whistle is heard? So if it were ruled an SPU possession over the endline, then Purdue possession on the dribble, followed by IW prior to SPU gaining control, how do we restart with a 29 second SC and ball for SPU?

The whistle came just as the SPU player stabbed at the ball to knock it loose - he certainly didn't have control, and the Purdue player gave up pursuit based on the whistle...

Ah well, it won't really change the outcome - but I really didn't understand how it could end up where it did. Maybe best to let this dead horse be processed.

Here's a question for those in the know - does NCAA replay allow for broadcast audio to be heard so that the precise timing of the whistle could be determined? Or is it visual video only? Perhaps that's the reason? They assumed that the IW came before it actually did?

If St. Peter's had possession on the throw-back, and Purdue possessed the ball afterwards, then the shot clock would have to be reset to 30 seconds and a new possession given to Purdue. I can't see how St. Peter's gets possession with 29 seconds based on the sequence in the video.
If there is no team control on the bat by St. Peter's (or the whistle was blown earlier), then St. Peter's gets possession with a 30 second shot clock due to the shot clock violation by Purdue.

By the time we see the center official he's coming in with two hands up emphatically as if his initial whistle was not heard. I believe he blew his whistle off-camera where we can't see it as Purdue was first batting the ball after the save.

Of course, we can all speculate all day long until somebody actually talks to somebody on that crew.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Giant Dumpster Fire ...
 

I don't know a lot about college basketball officiating, but it appears that from the initial split-second catch, or non-catch, and throw/tip/tap/slap back, until the conclusion and announcement of the monitor review, everything in between (dribble, shot clock, team control, etc.) was just a giant dumpster fire.

I'm not fully blaming the officials, there were a lot of tough judgment calls that occurred in a very short period of time. Nothing was easy about this situation.

Watched a friend work a state semifinal a few weeks ago. At one point he was the trail in the back corner of the frontcourt, in front of and trapped against the table, with one partner all the way down on the end line, and the other partner all the way over on the other side of the court, with their own active matchups, so no real help (except for the two head coaches standing within a few feet of him). He had several decisions to go through on a play in that corner as one offensive player was trapped in the corner by two defensive players, and then the players went to the floor after the ball got loose the floor. What initially was almost a five second call (he was counting) became either an offensive team control foul, a defensive foul, out of bounds (on either team), backcourt, or a held ball, all while he had to listen for a coach (or coaches) requesting, and he possibly granting, a timeout. All this in a few seconds.

He came out with the strongest held ball call that I've ever seen.

It's not easy being a high school, or college, basketball official.

The closest analogy is to football wherein a wide receiver's "catch" is really not a catch unless he "controls the ball".

That makes sense. I'm not sure if anyone controlled the ball after the airball, so if I were on the court, I'd blow the play dead for the shot clock violation.

Which is what the Center official did, but I don't think he should have done it. The Lead and Trail had clear looks at the save and the Center should have deferred to their judgment as to whether or not the save constituted PC/TC for St. Peter's.

I believe play should have been stopped before the save, because the ball was rolling around in nobody's control when the shot clock was at 0. I understand why C stopped the game, so I'm not sure why play was allowed to continue longer.

Control ...
 

Riddle me this.

There was an airball, and after bouncing off the floor a St. Peter's player saved it from going OOB.

It was never rolling around.

Somewhere in that sequence, there was no team control when the shot clock hit 0. That's what I was referring to when I mentioned the ball rolling around.

You need to accurately be able to describe action to coaches and supervisors. What you are describing is not what happened. And if the officials deemed St. Peter's saving the ball as Player Control, then yes, there was Team Control when the ball was "rolling around".

Words and terms matter in our business.