|
Sun Mar 06, 2005, 12:50am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Yeah, I think Bigwes describes it about right. Piecing together what I saw on TV and what was said in the papers, it seems like:
Bama makes shot. One ref signals a three, another signals a two; scorer sees the three. LSU inbounds the ball immediately -- before the refs even realize that there's a problem -- and runs the floor. Not until after regulation do they realize that two of them made a different call. So then they have to go to the monitor and review it. The question is: assuming that's what happened, do the rules allow them to put the 5 seconds back on the clock and re-do the play at that point? If not, what should they have done? |
|
Sun Mar 06, 2005, 02:14am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
Sun Mar 06, 2005, 09:35am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Bigwes,
The viewers at home never saw an angle clear enough that would have had "overturned" a call, but if the officials had conflicting signals, then I guess you are not overturning. At that point, it seems like you would be trying to "decide". Wish we had the officials story. I have a friend that is officiating in the tournament. When you posted that you were courtside (he had your game), I thought that you might be him (same first name). Anyway, i'm thinking about calling him to get the officials' version. Mulk
__________________
Mulk |
|
Sun Mar 06, 2005, 11:45am
|
|||
|
|||
|
LSU / ALA women's game
From the NCAA rule book :
Rule 2 Section 5 Art. 5. Officials shall be permitted to consult a courtside monitor to determine if a try for goal is a two- or three-point attempt, regardless of whether the try is successful. The crew erronously counted a score. As a result of the error, Alabama did not foul LSU. Because the officials had definite knowledge of the time when the error occured, they could re-set the clock back to 5.1 seconds. Just goes to show that mistakes can happen even at the highest level with "veteran" officials. |
|
Sun Mar 06, 2005, 12:23pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Quotes from Brian Enterline, Crew Chief, on the instant replay decision: (from Ed McGrahan, The Greenville (S.C.) News) Ed: Can you walk me through those last few seconds of the game? Enterline: We had a shot that was either a two or a three to either tie or win the game. So what we did, we went back and looked at replays and the first angle we had wasn't a clear angle so I requested another angle and that angle clearly showed her right foot on the line. So, we determined it was two point and put 5 seconds back on the clock because that's when it went through last. Ed: Was it the crew's initiative to look at the video at that point? Enterline: Part of our ruling when it's tying a game we can go to the monitor to make sure there isn't a timing or scoring error. Ed: Was there a discussion before you decided to go to the tape? Enterline: What we end up discussing is what all the officials had and then we request to have a certain pinpoint brought up on the replay. That pinpoint was brought because it was clearly in the time frame (for a correctable error) and we wanted to take a look at it and see. Not only a correctable error but we were at live play so we were at five seconds so we want to make sure because that's a huge thing. If her foot is on the line it is a two pointer and that's something we have to be 110% sure of - there's two lines out there, the top of the arc and then the three point line and her foot was clearly on the three point line and so she made a two point shot. Ed: When you say clearly, this much - that much... Enterline: The front part of the foot was clearly on the line and we have to be 110% sure or we'll go with the three. Ed: (to Bill Stokes, Coordinator of Women's Basketball Officials) ...and I take it you've looked at the tape several times and you support the decision? Stokes: Two of the angles were not clear but the last angle we looked at, her right foot was touching the line. Enterline: It's a tough play but we made a decision totally unbiased. We make sure that the decision is as professional and unbiased as possible. Ed: Given the flow of the game and all... Enterline: We can't determine that, we can look at it at that point. As officials we don't bring in the swings of the game, crowd favorites. Our job is to call the game, the best way we can and with the use of replay - if we didn't have replay then we would be going into overtime but because we have replay opportuniies if we make it a three then it's not fair to the other team. We have to be as fair and unbiased as possible. |
|
Sun Mar 06, 2005, 01:16pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: LSU / ALA women's game
Quote:
In other words -- I understand that they correctly went to the monitor at the next dead ball to fix the scoring error. That's fine under 2-5-5, as you say. But is there a rule that says, at the end of a game, if you make a correction under 2-5-5, you can also go back and re-play the time between the disputed call and the dead ball correction? |
|
Sun Mar 06, 2005, 01:53pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Hoops,
i understand going to the monitor and fixing the 2, but nobody is answering your real question. and, mine by the way. what rule did they use to replay the entire 5.1 seconds? what if either team had scored again during the first 5.1 seconds timeframe? what if either team had committed a common foul? would they have erased all action and played the 5.1 over? the replay is the question. it's not like the clock was started improperly. must be a college thing. could even be a women's college thing????? mulk
__________________
Mulk |
|
Sun Mar 06, 2005, 11:42pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
One further clarification -- in a subsequent game on TV, it was apparently explained this way:
because the review was initiated by a disagreement between the two refs, time and play could be cancelled; if, however, the review had been initiated by a coach's challenge, time and play could not be cancelled. I have no idea whether that's accurate, and I have no idea what the rules reference is for that... but that's apparently what one of the rules officials told the TV people. |
|
Mon Mar 07, 2005, 12:25pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Did one of the officials signal a two or did the official not put his/her arms up signaling the "three"? I don't know if all the members of an NCAA crew have to mirror a three since they should be watching their assigned areas. It would have been difficult for them all to have seen it. |
|
Mon Mar 07, 2005, 12:54pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
I am not totally sure about this, and unfortunately I didn't TIVO the game, but: I believe the trail official did put his arms up to signal a three (and that's what the scorer saw). I didn't see it, but it sounds like the center official (who was positioned in front of the LSU bench) signalled a two. |
|
Mon Mar 07, 2005, 01:48pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
I have heard that time should not have been put back on the clock. Also, that the R in this game, Enterline, was removed from the championship game for this rules misapplication. Might hurt his NCAA tourney schedule. I think that he has done at least a Final Four game in the past. Mulk
__________________
Mulk |
|
Mon Mar 07, 2005, 02:10pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
It seems to me that this was just one of those crazy situations for which there was no governing rule. I wouldn't be surprised if they added a provision in the future to make it clear. Seems to me like they did the best they could under the circumstances. If they had just changed the score from a three to a two (and not replayed the final seconds), that would have been even worse for 'Bama. Seems like they had to resort to a little rough justice instead. I don't know how y'all feel about this, but I actually can't fault them too much for a misapplication. The only thing that really bothered me about it was how Enterline kept saying to the press that the foot was "clearly" on the line and they were "110 percent" sure. From what I saw on the TV replays (which I think were the same that they had on their courtside monitor), it really wasn't clear at all. Their insistence on certainty made it seem like they were trying to cover something up. I wish they just would have said: "One of us called it a three, one of us called it a two. LSU inbounded before we could stop play to get it straight. The monitor wasn't totally conclusive, but it looked like she was on the line, and the center position ref had a better look, so we had to go with the two. There is no rule specifically covering this situation, but we thought that the best resolution (in fact, the only fair one) was to replay the final seconds." |
|
Mon Mar 07, 2005, 03:54pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
They do exist...
Hoops,
My rules knowledge is primarily high school and there are rules for governing this situation. Apparently, as Mr. Enterline found out, they have them for Womens' college, as well. Ideally, the review should have occurred when the ball went in. I believe one of the officials had knowledge immediately that there was a conflict, but failed to bring it up until after time had expired. Why didn't she, who knows? The angles that the viewers saw were not that conclusive, but a 3rd must have been made available to the crew. The points were corrected and the right team won, but a lot COULD have happened in the 5.1 "do over". mulk
__________________
Mulk |
 |
| Bookmarks |
|
|
Linear Mode
