Rescinded T

[Nevadaref]

Wow, Bobby McRoy just called a T on a player and then rescinded it! 2nd half of UCLA/Cal. It's been quite a while since I've seen anything like that at that level.

[Junker]

I've never seen that in an NCAA game. Did he get it right?

[Nevadaref]

I don't think that it is a question of right or wrong. It was just a strange sitch.
During the dead ball between FTs for UCLA there were subs entering and a UCLA player and a Cal player crossed and bumped in front of the table as they were heading to their benches. The players exchanged words and the Cal player can clearly be seen yapping at the opponent. McRoy is standing nearby and seems to catch the tail end of the exchange. I doubt that he observed the contact. He whistles and T's only the Cal player.
Then there is a quick discussion with a partner and the T is rescinded.

That's what it looked like from the TV. I can't tell you anything else.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I don't think that it is a question of right or wrong. It was just a strange sitch.
During the dead ball between FTs for UCLA there were subs entering and a UCLA player and a Cal player crossed and bumped in front of the table as they were heading to their benches. The players exchanged words and the Cal player can clearly be seen yapping at the opponent. McRoy is standing nearby and seems to catch the tail end of the exchange. I doubt that he observed the contact. He whistles and T's only the Cal player.
Then there is a quick discussion with a partner and the T is rescinded.

That's what it looked like from the TV. I can't tell you anything else.

Perhaps the partner filled him in on the words or actions that preceeded what McRoy saw/heard....and having the complete picture can change everything.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Perhaps the partner filled him in on the words or actions that preceeded what McRoy saw/heard....and having the complete picture can change everything.

Of course, that is probably what happened, and I obviously understood that, but I have to wonder how words or actions that are deemed unsporting a few seconds before by an official suddenly become no longer unsporting because of some other info from a partner.

[TRef21]

as long as they get the play right, that's all that matters. We will see...

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Of course, that is probably what happened, and I obviously understood that, but I have to wonder how words or actions that are deemed unsporting a few seconds before by an official suddenly become no longer unsporting because of some other info from a partner.

Imagine this:

R sees A1 and B1 near each other and hears A1 say "(mumble, mumble) You're a G#$ D@#! M@##@! F#@^!&# Idiot. (mumble, muble)" Whack.

U1 comes in and tells the R the entire conversation...."Hey, Joe, that wasn't cool last week when Bob said You're a G#$ D@#! M@##@! F#@^!&# Idiot. You're a great guy and it was uncalled for."

While some people might still call a T for profanity, it is certainly not the same. I'm sure I could come up with a profanity free example but I think it adequately draws the picture.

[Red_Killian]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Perhaps the partner filled him in on the words or actions that preceeded what McRoy saw/heard....and having the complete picture can change everything.

Perhaps it can change.....but I would think towards calling a T on both players rather than taking one back. If the official called the original T based on what he heard/observed and did not catch preceding actions, does that really change anything on the T he called? Of course we won't know the full details since none of us were involved but I find this situation based on what is presented in this thread to be very strange. Maybe he thought he heard a particular word or phrase and was mistaken based on his partner's input but if he wasn't sure why call the T in the first place?

[truerookie]

Originally Posted by Red_Killian

Perhaps it can change.....but I would think towards calling a T on both players rather than taking one back. If the official called the original T based on what he heard/observed and did not catch preceding actions, does that really change anything on the T he called? Of course we won't know the full details since none of us were involved but I find this situation based on what is presented in this thread to be very strange. Maybe he thought he heard a particular word or phrase and was mistaken based on his partner's input but if he wasn't sure why call the T in the first place?

Agreed with what you just said. If the partner came in with additional information he should have had a whistle too OR we will go with a double T personally, I will not recind a Technical.

[pizanno]

Once the crew conferred, i surmise they had two options:

1) T both players
2) T nobody (recind the T)

Since the context (incidental bump that both/one player took exception to) wasn't entirely unsporting, I'm sure that's why they opted for the do over.

The commentators praised the crew (not that their opinion matters!), and I'm sure neither coach would have cared for a double T at that point of the game (not that what they "want" matters either).

"admitting a mistake, can be a sign of strength, not weakness"

...just don't be "stong" too many times!

[rockyroad]

At first, I thought they had called the double T - which would result in no shots, play resuming from the POI and clueless announcers saying things like "the ref took back the T"...but checking the box score shows there were no T's called, so he did take it back - which is really weird (in a bad way)...

[tomegun]

The official called a double T
The other official (the R even though it doesn't matter) came in and questioned the call
The calling official waived off the double T

Personally, I don't think the other official should have said anything, but sometimes it is a matter of survival at this level and that is why the call was changed.

The overtime game yesterday also included an inadvertant whistle. The official granted a timeout when the opposite team had the ball. Lesson learned: always make sure the calling team has the ball or the ball is loose after a made basket.


Also, the intentional technical foul was indeed kicked the day before yesterday. Let's just say the situation was rushed (the calling official has championship experience(s)). When we talk about getting together after a technical foul to make sure we all know what we got, it is very beneficial.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by tomegun

The official called a double T
The other official (the R even though it doesn't matter) came in and questioned the call
The calling official waived off the double T

Personally, I don't think the other official should have said anything, but sometimes it is a matter of survival at this level and that is why the call was changed.

The overtime game yesterday also included an inadvertant whistle. The official granted a timeout when the opposite team had the ball. Lesson learned: always make sure the calling team has the ball or the ball is loose after a made basket.


Also, the intentional technical foul was indeed kicked the day before yesterday. Let's just say the situation was rushed (the calling official has championship experience(s)). When we talk about getting together after a technical foul to make sure we all know what we got, it is very beneficial.

tomegun,
Thanks for the details. Evidently, I was incorrect about only the Cal player initially being charged with a T, but as I said this is what it looked like on TV because he only pointed at the Cal player after giving the T sign just once.

It is awesome to get the facts of what happened from those guys. I think it is very big of them and very cool to share and admit their mistakes. In my opinion, it shows real character and class that they don't consider themselves above being questioned. I truly enjoy learning from their experiences. Please pass along my thanks for their openness.