The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 19, 2005, 07:33am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Glendale, AZ
Posts: 1,023
I didn't even realize there was a controversy about this until they were talking about it last night on the Purdue/Michigan State game and I happened to read the closed captioning while I was at a restaurant:

Hoosiers almost lost on officiating error.

Quote:

After reviewing the courtside television monitors, the three-man officiating crew of Gene Monje, Tom O'Neill and Glenn Mayborg determined that Landry's shot came after the clock expired, but the foul came before. The officials gave Landry continuation on the layup, which tied the score at 63. They then gave Landry a foul shot with no time remaining, which he missed.

A Big Ten statement Tuesday said in part:

"While the foul was correctly called before time expired, the Conference office's weekly review process showed the ball was still in the hand of the Purdue shooter at the expiration of the game clock. According to the 2005 NCAA Basketball Rules and Interpretations (Rule 2-5.2.b, Rule 5-7.2.b, Rule 6-6.2), the Purdue player should have been granted two free throws with no time on the clock and the field goal should not have counted."
On the Purdue/Michigan State game, Brent Musburger said he'd never heard of continuation in a college game. You college guys, you tell me?
__________________
"And I'm not just some fan, I've refereed football and basketball in addition to all the baseball I've umpired. I've never made a call that horrible in my life in any sport."---Greatest. Official. Ever.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 19, 2005, 09:11am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 4,801
No "continuation," but NCAA has the continuous motion rule which is the same as the NFHS rule.

This play seems to be the exact one we've discussed several times (including just in the past week) regarding foul, whistle, horn, shot.
__________________
"To win the game is great. To play the game is greater. But to love the game is the greatest of all."
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 19, 2005, 09:25am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,158
i am thinking they felt bad about the call right before that in the scramble at the other end. Figured to even it up.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 19, 2005, 09:41am
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
Quote:
Originally posted by Chess Ref
i am thinking they felt bad about the call right before that in the scramble at the other end. Figured to even it up.
Where's the smiley? You're joking, right?
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 19, 2005, 09:55am
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hell
Posts: 20,211
Quote:
Originally posted by Snaqwells
Quote:
Originally posted by Chess Ref
i am thinking they felt bad about the call right before that in the scramble at the other end. Figured to even it up.
Where's the smiley? You're joking, right?
Lah me, I would certainly hope so!

You are joking, aren't you, Chess Ref?
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 19, 2005, 10:08am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 14,616
Thumbs down

Quote:
Originally posted by Chess Ref
i am thinking they felt bad about the call right before that in the scramble at the other end. Figured to even it up.
Better go back to reffing chess.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 19, 2005, 10:19am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 14,616
Quote:
Originally posted by OverAndBack

After reviewing the courtside television monitors, the three-man officiating crew of Gene Monje, Tom O'Neill and Glenn Mayborg determined that Landry's shot came after the clock expired, but the foul came before. The officials gave Landry continuation on the layup, which tied the score at 63. They then gave Landry a foul shot with no time remaining, which he missed.
Officials are not allowed to review the monitor to determine if a foul occurred prior to the horn. I hope they were only looking at the shot.



Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 19, 2005, 10:42am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 18,126
From the Big-Ten website:




Big Ten Statement Regarding Officiating During Indiana-Purdue Men's Basketball Game
The Big Ten Conference office acknowledged an officiating error which occurred during the Indiana at Purdue contest

Jan. 18, 2005

The Big Ten Conference office acknowledged today an officiating error which occurred during the Indiana at Purdue men's basketball game on January 15.

At the conclusion of the first overtime and during the process of reviewing the play at the courtside television monitor, the officials incorrectly interpreted playing rules regarding a made basket at or near the expiration of the game clock. While the foul was correctly called before time expired, the Conference office's weekly review process showed that the ball was still in the hand of the Purdue shooter at the expiration of the game clock. According to the 2005 NCAA Basketball Rules and Interpretations (Rule 2-5.2.b, Rule 5-7.2.b, Rule 6-6.2), the Purdue player should have been granted two free throws with no time on the clock and the field goal should not have counted. Indiana won the game in double overtime, 75-73.

When errors of judgment or rules application impact a game, the Conference office believes public acknowledgment of the error is appropriate. The Big Ten considers this matter concluded and will have no further comment.


Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 19, 2005, 10:46am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 1,772
That makes a lot more sense

Quote:
Originally posted by bob jenkins
From the Big-Ten website:




Big Ten Statement Regarding Officiating During Indiana-Purdue Men's Basketball Game
The Big Ten Conference office acknowledged an officiating error which occurred during the Indiana at Purdue contest

Jan. 18, 2005

The Big Ten Conference office acknowledged today an officiating error which occurred during the Indiana at Purdue men's basketball game on January 15.

At the conclusion of the first overtime and during the process of reviewing the play at the courtside television monitor, the officials incorrectly interpreted playing rules regarding a made basket at or near the expiration of the game clock. While the foul was correctly called before time expired, the Conference office's weekly review process showed that the ball was still in the hand of the Purdue shooter at the expiration of the game clock. According to the 2005 NCAA Basketball Rules and Interpretations (Rule 2-5.2.b, Rule 5-7.2.b, Rule 6-6.2), the Purdue player should have been granted two free throws with no time on the clock and the field goal should not have counted. Indiana won the game in double overtime, 75-73.

When errors of judgment or rules application impact a game, the Conference office believes public acknowledgment of the error is appropriate. The Big Ten considers this matter concluded and will have no further comment.


Thanks Bob. That makes a lot of sense.

I was trying to interpret what ESPN was saying last night and they had it all confused and tied in with continuation etc.,

Bottom line is he had his hands on the ball when time expired so don't count the basket.

Thanks
David
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 19, 2005, 11:09am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Cheyenne, wyoming
Posts: 1,493
Quote:
Originally posted by BktBallRef
Quote:
Originally posted by OverAndBack

After reviewing the courtside television monitors, the three-man officiating crew of Gene Monje, Tom O'Neill and Glenn Mayborg determined that Landry's shot came after the clock expired, but the foul came before. The officials gave Landry continuation on the layup, which tied the score at 63. They then gave Landry a foul shot with no time remaining, which he missed.
Officials are not allowed to review the monitor to determine if a foul occurred prior to the horn. I hope they were only looking at the shot.



BBR, I happen to catch this as it was happening. The C clearly came in with the foul before the horn...and from what I could tell that portion was never in question. What I originally heard from ESPN (I know that this isn't the best source of information) was that the foul prohibited the shooter from releasing the ball before the horn...I know that that is an incorrect application, but that is what they said as far as why the counted the basket...but the foul portion of the play really never seemed to be an issue...just whether or not to count the hoop..
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 19, 2005, 11:35am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,988
The way that statement is worded, it sounds like the NCAA uses "lag-time" with regards to timing. I thought they didn't.

So just for the sake of argument wouldn't it be better to count the basket, and put time on the clock, because by rule the clock was to have stopped when the foul was called, meaning there should still be time left in the game?? Or is there an expection somewhere that allows this to happen??

Now I don't officiate using NCAA rules, so I'm just going by what I've picked up on this forum in the past, but it seems like they've used the timer's lag-time in this interpretation.

For those of you who do use NCAA rules, please correct me if I'm wrong.
__________________
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 19, 2005, 11:35am
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
cmatthews:
Interestingly, the announcers made the foul an issue at the time. When the officials broke away from the monitor, the announcers seemed utterly surprised that there was a foul call. They agreed it was the correct call, but seemed to indicate the foul was called from the monitor. They even went to a replay that showed the L not making a foul call; yet they completely ignored the C coming in very strong with the call.
I'm guessing they figured it out and didn't issue a correction on the air, though, as that would have made them look foolish.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 19, 2005, 11:43am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Cheyenne, wyoming
Posts: 1,493
Snaqwells, yep I agree...to me the C coming in hard was obvious...however I did notice his arm wasn't necessarily straight up, more of an angle LOL ohhhh those college mechanics LOL
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 19, 2005, 11:50am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 14,616
Quote:
Originally posted by ref18
The way that statement is worded, it sounds like the NCAA uses "lag-time" with regards to timing. I thought they didn't.
Lag time exists in NCAA games when Precision Time is not used. They just don't call it lag time.

Quote:
So just for the sake of argument wouldn't it be better to count the basket, and put time on the clock, because by rule the clock was to have stopped when the foul was called, meaning there should still be time left in the game?? Or is there an expection somewhere that allows this to happen??

Perhaps but neither the NCAA or NFHS operates that way.
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 19, 2005, 11:52am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Greater Indianapolis Area
Posts: 436
Send a message via Yahoo to Indy_Ref
Quote:
Originally posted by ref18
The way that statement is worded, it sounds like the NCAA uses "lag-time" with regards to timing. I thought they didn't.

So just for the sake of argument wouldn't it be better to count the basket, and put time on the clock, because by rule the clock was to have stopped when the foul was called, meaning there should still be time left in the game?? Or is there an expection somewhere that allows this to happen??

Now I don't officiate using NCAA rules, so I'm just going by what I've picked up on this forum in the past, but it seems like they've used the timer's lag-time in this interpretation.

For those of you who do use NCAA rules, please correct me if I'm wrong.
The latest NCAA bulletin highlighted the fact that putting .1 or .2 seconds back on the clock is OVERKILL! The defined expectation is that a slight amount of time "lag" is expected and acceptable.

[Edited by Indy_Ref on Jan 19th, 2005 at 12:03 PM]
__________________
"Be 100% correct in your primary area!"
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:38am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1