The Official Forum - Kicked call by Duke-UVA crew

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)

- Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)

- - Kicked call by Duke-UVA crew (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/105943-kicked-call-duke-uva-crew.html)

Kicked call by Duke-UVA crew

You live, you learn:

https://twitter.com/BrendanRMarks/st...sES4NzMiGuS4Qg

Quote:

The Atlantic Coast Conference, upon review of the final play of regulation during the Duke at Virginia men's basketball game, has announced an incorrect adjudication of the playing rules," the ACC's statement said. "A foul was called on Virginia's Ryan Dunn during a shot attempt by Duke's Kyle Filipowski as time expired. Upon the officials' review of the play, it was determined that the foul committed occurred after the clock reached 0.0. However, the play should have resulted in two free throws for Duke.

Per Rule 5, Section 7, Article 3c of the NCAA Rule Book, while a foul occurred after expiration of play, the ball was still in flight, thus the student-athlete should have been granted two free throw attempts," the ACC statement continued.

Rule 5, Section 7, Article 3c states "when a foul occurs so near the expiration of time that the official timer cannot stop the game clock before time expires or when the foul occurs after time expires but while the ball is in flight during a try, the period shall end when the free throw(s) and all related activity have been completed.

A.R. 130, Section 2 of the NCAA Casebook notes in a scenario where "Shooter A1 releases the ball, time expires, A1 is fouled while the ball in in flight and the try is unsuccessful, since the try was released before the expiration of time and since the foul occurred after time expired but while the ball was in flight and A1 was an airborne shooter, A1 shall attempt two free throws even if the first is successful. When both free throws are unsuccessful, the game continues with an extra period(s).

Quote:

Originally Posted by fiasco (Post 1050163)

You live, you learn:

https://twitter.com/BrendanRMarks/st...sES4NzMiGuS4Qg

And the "kick" is . . . . NO GOOD!

At first I was puzzled how three D1 officials could screw up such a basic rule, and then I watched the video clip. The play is a dunk attempt and it is not clear if the player releases the ball in an attempt to score or if it slips out of his hands when the defender challenges him. In the end, I’m not certain that this is a try in flight. It may just be a loose ball. If that is the case, then the officials were correct on the court.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nevadaref (Post 1050174)

The ACC cited the airborne shooter concept. So I'm quite sure the crew recognized it as a try.

I think the issue was, was the ball released before the horn sounded. That would have made a difference. But the foul on the video clearly shows that the foul took place before the light came on (as showed by the NCAA RefQuest site). I think the crew focused on the release and not if the foul took place. They at least told the broadcasters of the radio on SirusXM, that the ball was not released then the foul took place. That was in error. But you do see the ball out before the light came on in the NCAA's showing of this video.

Officials make mistakes, even at that level. I cannot think of a time when this kind of contact or foul happens in a game where we have to even decide what happened first.

Peace

Quote:

Originally Posted by fiasco (Post 1050186)

The ACC cited the airborne shooter concept. So I'm quite sure the crew recognized it as a try.

What the crew decided on the court and what someone in the ACC office thinks may be completely different.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 1050188)

Wait. What??

If Clougherty had a foul, and they went to the monitor to determine if the ball was released prior to the light, how in the world do they walk away without awarding free throws??

Quote:

Originally Posted by fiasco (Post 1050194)

Wait. What??

If Clougherty had a foul, and they went to the monitor to determine if the ball was released prior to the light, how in the world do they walk away without awarding free throws??

During the monitor review they had determined the contact occurred after the expiration of time and incorrectly ruled no foul could be charged because of that. We know the play is still live until the airborne shooter returns to the floor. It was addressed in an NCAA bulletin put out on the Men's side yesterday.

Quote:

Airborne Shooter End of the Period – Near the expiration of time at the end of a period, A1 jumps in air and attempts a try for goal and is fouled. A1’s try for goal is released prior to the reading of 0.0 on the game clock but A1 is fouled after 0.0 on the clock but before A1 lands from the try for goal.

RULING: Rule 4-1.1 states that “…An airborne shooter retains the status of an airborne shooter until the player has returned to the floor.” Furthermore, Rule 5-7.3.c states “Each period shall end when time expires, except…when the foul occurs after time expires but while the ball is in flight during a try, the period shall end when the free throw(s) and all related activity have been completed.”

The exception in Rule 5-7.3.c is related to Rule 11-3.1.a.3 and addresses when a foul occurs near the expiration of time on the game clock when the official timer cannot stop the game clock before time expires. Additionally Rule 11-3.1.a.3 does not take into consideration when an airborne shooter has released a try for goal.

While A.R. 130 deals with a game without a courtside monitor, the explanation of Play 2 in this ruling is the appropriate way to adjudicate this play when there is a monitor available or when there is not. “Since the try was released before the expiration of time and since the foul occurred after time expired but while the ball was in flight and A1 was an airborne shooter, A1 shall attempt two free throws.”