2007 Nit

[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.

[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.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

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.

That's a big "if". What IF the first to touch the ball on the inbound pass was the defense and the offense didn't gain control for 1-2 more seconds?

My question. On a throw-in after change of possession does the shot clock start when a) the throw-in ends or b) when an offensive player touches the ball inbounds? On a backcourt throw-in after change of possession when does the 10-second count start when a) the throw-in ends or when b) an offensive player touches the ball inbounds?

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

That's a big "if". What IF the first to touch the ball on the inbound pass was the defense and the offense didn't gain control for 1-2 more seconds?

See post directly above yours

My question. On a throw-in after change of possession does the shot clock start . . . ?

On any throw-in, the shot clock starts when the ball is legally touched inbounds.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

See post directly above yours

On any throw-in, the shot clock starts when the ball is legally touched inbounds.

So my line of thinking is that maybe the defense made the initial touch which would start the shot clock but not the 10-second count.

Even if the defense didn't touch the ball this is a play the Trail has to live and die with. If the shot clock is sitting at 22-23 seconds then Trail will have to do some explaining, but as a Slot I'm not going to come in and make a 10-second call.