2007 Nit

[26 Year Gap]

I will be interested to see how Vermont fares. They already went through their low when they lost to Albany by 1 on Saturday so they actually have had some time to regain their focus. Hoping for some more of that Bob Huggins post-season magic.

[dblref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I've found that what happens in the NIT is not a good indicator of what a team could have or would have done in the NCAA. Teams sometimes are disappointed or don't care when they play in the NIT.

If they don't care about playing in the NIT, then don't accept the invitation.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by dblref

If they don't care about playing in the NIT, then don't accept the invitation.

It possible that their institution requires them to go. Their hearts just may not be in it after failing to receive an NCAA bid.

[Nevadaref]

The NIT game between Air Force and Austin Peay, which I was really looking forward to watching this evening, is being put off due to the women's tennis match going to a third set on ESPN2 right now. I am missing the entire first half.

[Nevadaref]

Well the tennis is finally over and I get to see the second half of the game.

With 16:14 remaining Air Force's Nick Welch picks up a loose ball in the lane and goes in for a shot. He is fouled on the arm and the ball comes out of his hands a foot or so and while still airborne he catches it again with both hands and tosses it into the basket. The officials counted the goal.

I disagree with that decision.

[NewNCref]

Did anyone find the 10-second call in the Kansas St.-Vermont game a little strange? It looked like to me that the Trail had the count, and hadn't gotten to 10 yet, when the Center comes flying from across the court toward the table with the 10-second call. Anyone know what happened?

[Nevadaref]

Didn't get to see the game. Perhaps you've heard that I was stuck with my ESPN2 showing women's tennis.

I'll have to look for that play on SportsCenter.

[Texas Aggie]

Center comes flying from across the court toward the table with the 10-second call

Please tell me you are joking. That's something that can get someone fired.

[NewNCref]

Originally Posted by Texas Aggie

Please tell me you are joking. That's something that can get someone fired.

I wish I was joking. As I said, this is what it looked like to me. I couldn't see the Trail, as the camera angle shifted to the Center, but perhaps he had the call first and the Center just repeated it, though that seems far fetched.

The announcers and the coaches (not that they know anything about the rules) seemed fine with it, which leads me to believe that maybe I missed something. That's why I posted here, just looking to see if possibly I missed something.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Well the tennis is finally over and I get to see the second half of the game.

With 16:14 remaining Air Force's Nick Welch picks up a loose ball in the lane and goes in for a shot. He is fouled on the arm and the ball comes out of his hands a foot or so and while still airborne he catches it again with both hands and tosses it into the basket. The officials counted the goal.

I disagree with that decision.

Me too, if that's what happened.

The initial try ended when he grabbed the ball out of the air. The ball should have been dead then, by rule. He then put a dead ball in the basket-i.e. a second shot per se. Shouldn't have counted that one imo either.

[tomegun]

Originally Posted by Texas Aggie

Please tell me you are joking. That's something that can get someone fired.

Do you have any idea what the shot clock said?

Do you know why I ask and do you think it should matter?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by tomegun

Do you have any idea what the shot clock said?

Do you know why I ask and do you think it should matter?

I know why you are asking, but I don't think it should matter.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Texas Aggie

Please tell me you are joking. That's something that can get someone fired.

This is not something that will get you fired. If you know that the shot clock started when the offensive team gained control, and you know that the shot clock now reads 25, then 10 seconds have elapsed.

Why should the violation be ignored simply because the Trail has a slow count? This is actually pre-gamed by many officials in my area.

[Chess Ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

The NIT game between Air Force and Austin Peay, which I was really looking forward to watching this evening, is being put off due to the women's tennis match going to a third set on ESPN2 right now. I am missing the entire first half.

But you got to watch Daniella and her opponent. Peer is having a great year. She is moving up steadily in the rankings. Though she did brain-fart that match away. I met both those players at The Bank Of the West tournament last year.

Nevadaref, in June I am up at Incline Village and also Lakeridge tennis club for tournaments. I know lots of the tennis players from the Reno area. They are included in the Northern Cal section for USTA. Not that people care about tennis around here but I am an accomplished tennis player-for someone my age.

[NewNCref]

I'm not actually sure about the shot clock deal, but now that you mention it, that could have been it. That's why I posted here. I figured there had to be a good reason for the Center to call a ten-second violation.

As to whether or not it matters, and there's an old thread about this, that depends on how much you trust your shot clock operator to get it right. Per the rulebook, though, the official's count is the only one that matters.