NCAA and the monitor

[IURef]

What situation are NCAA officials allowed to look at the monitor?

[cmckenna]

I believe there are only 2:

Fix a clock issue

determine if a basket was a 3 or 2

One of the NCAA guys like Chuck should know for sure

[cmckenna]

Section 5. Officials Use of Replay/Television Equipment
Art. 1. Officials may use courtside replay equipment, videotape or television
monitoring only in situations involving:
a. A determination if a fight occurred and the individuals who participated
or left the bench area;
b. A determination as to who shall attempt a free throw(s) when
there is uncertainty.
c. An assessment whether correctable errors 2-10.1.c, .d, or .e need
to be rectified;
d Preventing or rectifying a scoring or timing mistake by the scorer
or timer involving the game clock or shot clock;
e. A determination if the game clock or shot clock expired at or near
the end of a period (see Rule 2-5.2); or
f. Correcting a timing mistake in the half or extra period in which it
occurred due to a malfunctioning game clock or shot clock.

Art. 2. At the end of either half or at the end of any extra period, the officials
after making a call on the playing court shall use replay equipment,
videotape or television monitoring that is located on a designated courtside
table (i.e., within approximately 3 to 12 feet of the playing court),
when such equipment is available, to:
a. Determine whether a try for field goal at or near the expiration of
time in the first half was released before the reading of 0.00 on
the game clock (refer to 5-7.2.b);
b. Ascertain whether a try for field goal that will determine the outcome
of a game (win, lose, tie), and was attempted at or near the
expiration of the game clock, was released before the reading of
0.00 on the game clock (refer to 5-7.2.b);
c. Determine, with the reading of 0.00 on the game clock, whether
a shot-clock violation occurred at or near the expiration of time in
the first half;
d. Ascertain, with the reading of 0.00 on the game clock, whether a
shot-clock violation occurred at or near the expiration of time when
it may determine the outcome of the game (win, lose or tie).
Art. 3. A courtside television monitor may be used when, in the judgment
of an official, a timerÂ’s mistake has occurred. Such a mistake may be corrected
only during the first dead ball after the game clock should have been
started or stopped or once the ball is in play before the second live ball
when the game clock should have been running and while the ball is dead.
Art. 4. No timing mistake correction shall be carried over from one half or
extra period to another. Such a mistake shall be corrected before the start
of intermission.
Art. 5. When, in the judgment of an official, the shot-clock operator fails
to properly start, stop, set or reset the shot clock, the officials shall be permitted
to use the courtside television monitor to correct the mistake in the
shot-clock period in which it occurred.
Art. 6. Officials shall be permitted to consult a courtside monitor
when there is uncertainty as to who shall be awarded a free throw(s).
Art. 7. 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.
Art. 8. Officials shall not use a courtside monitor or courtside videotape
for judgment calls such as who fouled, basket interference, goaltending
or release of the ball before the activation of the red light or
LED lights, (or when the red light is not present, the sounding of the
game-clock horn); or the sounding of the shot-clock horn, with the
exception of the situations described in Rules 2-5.1.e, 2-5.2 and 2-5.3.
However, in accordance with Rule 2-5.1.c and 2-10.1.e,

[Edited by cmckenna on Mar 25th, 2005 at 08:33 PM]

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally posted by IURef
What situation are NCAA officials allowed to look at the monitor?

You weren't, perchance, watching the end of the first half of the Duke-Michigan State game?

The officials handled the situation correctly. For all of those officials who think that this is should have been a do over, the game officials handled the situation correctly.

MTD, Sr.

[Edited by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. on Mar 25th, 2005 at 08:57 PM]

[IURef]

yes i was watchin the end of the duke/mich st. first half....i knew they were not allowed to redo this yet i was not sure if they could go to the monitor if they did not have definate knowledge of how much time elapsed during this sequence

[TriggerMN]

However, if you're officiating in the women's SEC tournament, you can put time back on the clock and have a do-over. Sheesh!

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by TriggerMN
However, if you're officiating in the women's SEC tournament, you can put time back on the clock and have a do-over. Sheesh!

Wow, that's a long-dead horse to keep beating. When do we finally bury it?

[Nevadaref]

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

You weren't, perchance, watching the end of the first half of the Duke-Michigan State game?

The officials handled the situation correctly. For all of those officials who think that this is should have been a do over, the game officials handled the situation correctly.

MTD, Sr.

[Edited by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. on Mar 25th, 2005 at 08:57 PM]

I disagree Mark.
I know of no rule that allows for the cancelling of that goal. No official blew a whistle prior to the try and there was time on the game clock when it was released. It was a live ball that passed through the basket. Despite the timing error, I believe that the goal has to count.
I agree that if not for the timing error the try would have been too late, but then the Mich St. player may have taken different action too, ie shoot from halfcourt.
I think that the officials can definitely correct the clock (which wouldn't matter here as it is already at zero), but that they can't nullify the game action that took place.
Seems unfair, but the rules don't care.

[JRutledge]

Nevada,

You are absolutely wrong. The NCAA rules allow a review of the monitor to rectify the game clock.

In the Appendix III, Section 6 goes into some great detail as to what can be done to cancel or even award points. Number 1 under Section 6 says that this can be done anytime before final score is approved. Under number 2, there is an explanation of when officials can correct mistakes.

This entire situation falls under Section 6 and the officials followed the rule to a tee.

Peace

[Nevadaref]

Thanks, Rut. I'll go check that section again, but I don't recall anything that says they can cancel a goal under those specific circumstances.


Ok, here's the clip from the book:
APPENDIX III OFFICIATING GUIDELINES
Section 6. Use of Replay Television Equipment
Note: In order to use such equipment, it must be located on a designated courtside table.
Officials may use courtside replay equipment, videotape or television monitoring to:
1. Prevent or rectify a scoring mistake. This can be corrected anytime before the final score is approved.
2. To prevent or rectify a game-clock mistake. This includes:
a. The failure to properly start or stop the game clock. The monitor may be used when, in the judgment of the official, a mistake has occurred;
b. Problems associated with a malfunctioning game clock. A mistake may be corrected anytime in the half or extra period in which it occurred.
3. Prevent or rectify a shot-clock mistake. This includes:
a. Failure to properly start or stop the shot clock. The monitor may be used when, in the judgment of the official, a mistake has occurred;
b. Failure to set or reset the shot clock. The monitor may be used when, in the judgment of the official, a mistake has occurred;
c. Problems associated with a malfunctioning shot clock. A mistake may be corrected in the half or extra period in which it occurred.
4. Determine if a fight occurred, the individuals who participated and bench personnel who left the bench area.
5. Determine whether a try for field goal at or near the expiration of time in the first half was released before the period-ending activation of the red light or LED lights.
6. Ascertain whether a try for field goal that will determine the outcome of a game (win, lose, tie), and was attempted at or near the expiration of the game clock, was released before the activation of the period-ending red light or LED lights.
7. Determine whether a shot-clock violation occurred at or near the expiration of time in the first half.
8. Ascertain whether a shot-clock violation occurred at or near the expiration of time when it may determine the outcome of the game (win, lose or tie).
9. Ascertain which player should be awarded free throws, if there is uncertainty.
10. Determine if a try for goal was a successful two- or three-point attempt.
11. Determine if a foul committed during the act of shooting (and the try was unsuccessful) should be penalized with either two or three free throws.
12. Correct an error when a request is made from a player, coach or official. (Note: If the player or coach requests a review under correctable errors 2-10.c, .d or .e, his or her team shall be assessed a timeout if he or she is incorrect, but shall not be assessed a timeout if he or she is correct.)
a. To determine if a wrong player attempted a free throw;
b. To determine if a player attempted a free throw at the wrong basket;
c. Erroneously counting or canceling a score.
1. Determine if a try for goal is a successful two- or three-point attempt;
2. With .3 of a second or less remaining, and play is to be
resumed with a throw-in or a free throw, the official determines that a tap was a successful try for goal. The official goes to the monitor pursuant to Rule 2-5.2.a and 2-5.2.b, and realizes that the tap was a catch which allows the official to cancel the erroneously awarded score as a correctable error.
(See Rule 4-66.5, A.R. 44.)
3. With .3 of a second or less remaining and play is to be
resumed with a throw-in or a free throw and a player gains
possession of the ball (catch) and completes a try that ends
the game. If the play is challenged with a request for a correctable error on a claim that the catch was a legal tap, which was erroneously canceled, the official shall use the monitor.


I see many things that would allow the game clock to be fixed. I don't see anything that allows the basket to be cancelled. It was made with time on the clock, although due to an error, and released before the red lights. I don't believe that this play falls under erroneously counting a score either.
I'll stick with my original thoughts, Rut.
Now I also don't agree that this is just, I'm simply saying that this is the way it IS. The NCAA should change/clarify it.

[Edited by Nevadaref on Mar 26th, 2005 at 10:12 PM]

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by Nevadaref
I see many things that would allow the game clock to be fixed. I don't see anything that allows the basket to be cancelled. It was made with time on the clock, although due to an error, and released before the red lights. I don't believe that this play falls under erroneously counting a score either.
I'll stick with my original thoughts, Rut.
Now I also don't agree that this is just, I'm simply saying that this is the way it IS. The NCAA should change/clarify it.

Obviously if you know there is a mistake in this situation, not sure how you can count points. It was very obvious that more than more than 5 seconds went off the clock, the half would have ended. It seems pretty clear to me. I think you are just looking for a smoking gun and I am not sure you will ever find it.

Peace

[Nevadaref]

Originally posted by JRutledge

Obviously if you know there is a mistake in this situation, not sure how you can count points. It was very obvious that more than more than 5 seconds went off the clock, the half would have ended. It seems pretty clear to me. I think you are just looking for a smoking gun and I am not sure you will ever find it.

Peace

As I've said, I agree that time should have expired. But should have and actually did are two different things. This situation reminds me of the Memphis/Sacramento NBA game a couple of weeks ago. Again the clock failed to start when it should have and a basket was scored to win the game. The officials went to the monitor, saw the clock error and said that they couldn't do anything about it. They could only judge whether or not the shot was released before the lights.
It's a bad rule and needs to be changed, but that the way it is.

And you lost me with the smoking gun. I don't care for Duke, they lost, and the basket was taken away from Michigan State. So what are you saying? I just feel that the rule wasn't followed properly. That's all.

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by Nevadaref


As I've said, I agree that time should have expired. But should have and actually did are two different things. This situation reminds me of the Memphis/Sacramento NBA game a couple of weeks ago. Again the clock failed to start when it should have and a basket was scored to win the game. The officials went to the monitor, saw the clock error and said that they couldn't do anything about it. They could only judge whether or not the shot was released before the lights.
It's a bad rule and needs to be changed, but that the way it is.

That is the NBA. I have no idea what the NBA uses for interpretations or the directives to follow their rules. I do not watch the NBA as much anymore, so I really do not care what the NBA does in their rules or situations like this.

Originally posted by Nevadaref
And you lost me with the smoking gun. I don't care for Duke, they lost, and the basket was taken away from Michigan State. So what are you saying? I just feel that the rule wasn't followed properly. That's all.

You are not going to find a line or phrase to your satisfaction. That is what I mean by smoking gun. I have attended NCAA Rules Clinic run by Hank Nichols and Marcy Weston. When this rule was put into place, this was not only the intent of the rule, but the correct application according to all the information given. The NCAA gives a complete workbook of situations and plays and explains in much greater detail than the NF how to apply specific rules and procedures. Unfortunately they do not create a casebook like the NF for the rest of the public to thumb through many guidelines. If these officials did not apply the rule properly then I am sure we would hear about it. Maybe this play will in the future become the example for one of the applications in the future. They did exactly according to what they were supposed to do.

Peace

[Nevadaref]

Originally posted by JRutledge

The NCAA gives a complete workbook of situations and plays and explains in much greater detail than the NF how to apply specific rules and procedures.

Fantastic. Exactly what is this book called, and how do I get one?
It seems that the NCAA doesn't do a very good job of putting this information out to the public. Do they want us all to be like Billy Packer?

Originally posted by JRutledge

Maybe this play will in the future become the example for one of the applications in the future.

I too would like to see it put into the rules as an AR. I strongly suspect that because of this play something will be modified or added next season.

Thanks for your comments and insight.




[Edited by Nevadaref on Mar 27th, 2005 at 12:59 AM]

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by Nevadaref
Fantastic. Exactly what is this book called, and how do I get one?
It seems that the NCAA doesn't do a very good job of putting this information out to the public. Do they want us all to be like Billy Packer?

You get this workbook by attending and NCAA clinic in the fall. These meetings are required by most D1 conferences and all those officials get them. Usually many lower level college officials attend these meetings as well, but not necessarily required at those levels. It is not a book they sell. It covers issues discussed in the clinic and many officiating guidelines for the coming season. Look on the NCAA website and there is a listing of the dates already for this fall. They only hold about 10 meetings across the country. Fortunately they have been in Chicago the last 4 or 5 years so I do not have to travel very far.

Originally posted by Nevadaref
I too would like to see it put into the rules as an AR. I strongly suspect that because of this play something will be modified or added next season.

I would like to the NCAA make a casebook, but we know that is probably not going to happen soon.

I really think you are making a bigger deal out of this. Conferences that have TV games give their officials a lot of information about what to do in these situations. I have been working college ball for about 5 years and I have yet to have a Media game that would even allow me and my partners to even review a play of this nature. The highest I have ever worked is Division 3 and those games hardly ever have a situation where a monitor would be available.

Peace