Does this NIT timer know the rule?

[Nevadaref]

Iowa/SLU with 58 seconds to go SLU scored a basket to make the score 67-65 in Iowa's favor. While Iowa was inbounding, the clock continued to run. Probably 3 or 4 seconds were lost. The officials did not notice this or maybe they ignored it. Iowa then brought the ball into the front court and called time-out with 47 seconds left. However, the clock contined to run until 40.8 seconds. The officials noticed this and went to the monitor, then put the clock back to 47. However, during this dead ball, they also could have corrected the timing error that occurred with 58 seconds to go. In other words they could have put the game clock back to say 51 seconds.
That wasn't the end of though. Iowa turned the ball over and SLU scored to tie the game at 67. Iowa then scored with 5 seconds remaining to take a two point lead. The clock again did not stop on the made basket and ran down to 0.8 seconds while SLU was attempting to execute the throw-in. The officials stopped the game and after looking at the monitor again, they put 5.0 seconds back on the clock. SLU then won the game with a buzzer beater three.
I would be hopping made with the timer, if I were on that crew.

I also think Iowa got tough break by the officials passing on a charging foul on the passer on this last shot. He clearly runs over #2 from Iowa just after kicking the ball out to the corner.

[ref18]

Isn't precision timing used at this level, so wouldn't it be the officials responsibility to stop the clock, not the timers?

But then the timer should've noticed the officials missed it and stoped the clock from where he was.

Just out of curiosity is there anything besides determining whether a try was for 2 or 3 points or to fix a timers mistake, that could warrant using the video replay??

[Snake~eyes]

I believe finding out who was fouled for the 1/1 is another.

[TriggerMN]

1. Precision timing wasn't used in the game tonight.

2. It was the first NCAA game played on that court all year. That said, they still should have found somebody knowledgeable enough to stop the clock on dead balls with less than one minute to go in the game.

3. I thought the same thing about the last-second "charge." I think it was Jeff Horner that got run over. I realize and understand completely why no foul was called in this situation, but this one was about as close as you can get to calling a foul, IMHO.

4. Another situation in which NCAA officials can go to the video replay is to decide punishment(s) after a fight has occurred. Were punches thrown, did players leave the bench, etc.

[Nevadaref]

Chris Sloan #33 was the St. Louis player who dribble the ball up court and crashed into #2 of Iowa in the lane while making the pass to his teammate in the corner.

[Camron Rust]

Originally posted by ref18
Isn't precision timing used at this level, so wouldn't it be the officials responsibility to stop the clock, not the timers?

No. If I understand it correctly, the precision time is triggered only by a whistle. As a backup, the clock is also stopped by the timer anytime they hear a whistle. The stoppages on a made basket and the restart on the ensuing throwin are solely the job of the timer.

The officials start the clock only after administered throwins with the timer backing up the official.

I could be wrong, but this is how I understand it.

Originally posted by ref18
But then the timer should've noticed the officials missed it and stoped the clock from where he was.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally posted by TriggerMN


3. I thought the same thing about the last-second "charge." I think it was Jeff Horner that got run over. I realize and understand completely why no foul was called in this situation, but this one was about as close as you can get to calling a foul, IMHO.

I do not understand why the charge was not called. It was such an easy one to call.

MTD, Sr.

[donj]

Originally posted by TriggerMN

3. I thought the same thing about the last-second "charge." I think it was Jeff Horner that got run over. I realize and understand completely why no foul was called in this situation, but this one was about as close as you can get to calling a foul, IMHO.
-----------------------------------------------------------
I do not understand why the charge was not called. It was such an easy one to call.

MTD, Sr.
-----------------------------------------------------------

You always almost always hear that the officials like to have the players decide the game inside the last minute and seconds, but not making this obvious charge call is mind boggling. Iowa should have won, but squandering an 18 point lead and making untimely turnovers, maybe not.

[devdog69]

I agree with Nevadaref , the timer was horrid. It was a tough no-call on the charge at the end. I don't think the first time the clock failed to stop after the made basket (at 58 seconds) was ever noticed by the officials or they would have corrected it when they had the chance. SLU's coach got a technical about 3 minutes into this game, not sure what he said to get it but I was thinking that if it was me, I would probably be getting one too.

[DJ]

Ah yes another no call at the end of a game because officials are afraid to enforce the rules because they might have an affect on the end of the game. I see more no calls that affect the outcome of the game than calls!

[Bart Tyson]

Originally posted by DJ
Ah yes another no call at the end of a game because officials are afraid to enforce the rules because they might have an affect on the end of the game. I see more no calls that affect the outcome of the game than calls!

OK, I'll address this. 1) its funny how some will argue its ok for a screener to get knocked to the 3rd row with a no call, and yet when a player runs into an opponent at the end of the game they want a foul. ( DJ, I'm not suggesting you favor this view about the screener). 2) the Offensive player made contact well after the pass and never went through the Defender. 3) the officials were not calling this type of PUSH a foul earlier in the game, so they shouldn't call this a foul in the last min. of the game. I will admit the Defender did a great job of trying to sell the PUSH foul.

[Hawks Coach]

Bart
It is really simple, like night and day or apples and oranges. The rules make allowances for screens outside the visual field of a defender, at least twice in fact (and using the exact same terminology). The rules clearly state that contact in this case is incidental if the defender stops upon making contact. This is because the defender is forced to play the ball and respond to ball movement and may not be able to see the screen - the dribbler and the screener create the situation that causes the defender to hit the screener and should expect it to occur.

The rules do not allow a player exercising free movement with the ball to crash into a stationary player. The ball handler is supposed to control where he goes. How you find two completely unrelated situations to be in common shows that you choose to read the intricacies of these rules, you want all contact treated the same regardless of what the rules say with respect to certain specified contact being incidental.

[Bart Tyson]

Originally posted by Hawks Coach
Bart
It is really simple, like night and day or apples and oranges. The rules make allowances for screens outside the visual field of a defender, at least twice in fact (and using the exact same terminology). The rules clearly state that contact in this case is incidental if the defender stops upon making contact. This is because the defender is forced to play the ball and respond to ball movement and may not be able to see the screen - the dribbler and the screener create the situation that causes the defender to hit the screener and should expect it to occur.

The rules do not allow a player exercising free movement with the ball to crash into a stationary player. The ball handler is supposed to control where he goes. How you find two completely unrelated situations to be in common shows that you choose to read the intricacies of these rules, you want all contact treated the same regardless of what the rules say with respect to certain specified contact being incidental.

Rough play is also in the rule. But, for the sake of not rehashing the screen play, just address the 1) contact, but not through the opponent. 2) same called game throuhout the game. whats not called early, is not called late.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Bart Tyson

OK, I'll address this. 1) its funny how some will argue its ok for a screener to get knocked to the 3rd row with a no call, and yet when a player runs into an opponent at the end of the game they want a foul. ( DJ, I'm not suggesting you favor this view about the screener). 2) the Offensive player made contact well after the pass and never went through the Defender. 3) the officials were not calling this type of PUSH a foul earlier in the game, so they shouldn't call this a foul in the last min. of the game. I will admit the Defender did a great job of trying to sell the PUSH foul.

Bart, you left out door #4, which was DJ's point, I think.
-4)the officials were calling this type of PUSH a foul earlier in the game, but they were NOT consistent in calling the same play the same way at the end of the game.

I hate to say it, but I'm starting to wonder too why everybody seems to be putting their whistles away at the end of the games. I was always taught that consistancy was better.

[Mark Dexter]

Just remember, folks, the table crew at NIT games is the home school's table crew - not a neutral crew like the NCAA provides.

Heck - my first time on shot clock was a WNIT game 2 years ago. Talk about trial by fire.