Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dan_ref
It's not clear to me what they based either of their 2 decisions on. I'm not even sure she beat the clock or the LED.
|
Yeah, on the video at the link, you can't really see it. That's the video from the home team's scout camera.
The game was televised, so there were several other angles available. On the local news, they replayed it over and over. (Unfortunately, I can't find any of those videos available on the web.) It looked to me like the ball was pretty clearly still in her hand at the 0.0, but it was out of her hand by the time of the light. It was certainly a very close play. I'm not sure they got it wrong, but I was just wondering:
Based on the rule quoted by GoodwillRef above, they should have used the clock, not the light (assuming the clock was visible on the monitor). right?
It also seemed a little weird to change the call, but certainly it's better to get the call right, even if you have to change it. It also seemed a little weird to allow one coach to sit with you at the monitor and argue his point of view. I haven't seen something like that before. Again, if they got the call right, then maybe it doesn't matter, but it seemed unusual.
Morningstar called it the closest play he'd ever seen. I think I have to agree.
Mon Jan 15, 2007, 11:15am
Similar Threads
Threaded Mode
