A&M/Memphis finish

[Kajun Ref N Texas]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Once again this is why some people will always make a mountain out of a molehill. Who says the whistle was blown early?

From my point of view people here are trying to make an issue out of something because they fell they could do better than the officials actually working the game.

Peace

First of all, the whistle was blown early, that is not in dispute.

Secondly, I in no way feel I can do better than a D1 in the Sweet 16, I just want to know what to do in a HS V game if we have an early whistle on an OB play close to the buzzer?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Once again this is why some people will always make a mountain out of a molehill. Who says the whistle was blown early?

From my point of view people here are trying to make an issue out of something because they fell they could do better than the officials actually working the game.

Amen.

I thought the guys on the game handled it properly and professionally.

But.....it's that time of the year, isn't it?)

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Amen.

I thought the guys on the game handled it properly and professionally.

But.....it's that time of the year, isn't it?)

There is, or was, some guidance given to the officials on what to do if an airborne player heading out of bounds requested a TO and the official blew the whistle.

I'd use the same type of precedent here.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Kajun Ref N Texas

First of all, the whistle was blown early, that is not in dispute.

Secondly, I in no way feel I can do better than a D1 in the Sweet 16, I just want to know what to do in a HS V game if we have an early whistle on an OB play close to the buzzer?

I am disputing it. I am disputing it because other than a few people saying it here I still have not seen how only .2 seconds would have come off the clock. Which tells me that if Bill Rafferty and his partner said .7, then people would say that only .7 would have come off the clock?

Peace

[Kajun Ref N Texas]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I am disputing it. I am disputing it because other than a few people saying it here I still have not seen how only .2 seconds would have come off the clock. Which tells me that if Bill Rafferty and his partner said .7, then people would say that only .7 would have come off the clock?

Peace

Listen, last night, after everything was said and done, the officials got it correct from the standpoint that they took the correct amount of time off of the clock from the point the ball was touched IB until it was touched OB.

My question still remains, in a HS game, if the whistle is blown early on an OB play prior to the buzzer, then the ball lands OB after the buzzer, what do we do?

[JoeTheRef]

Originally Posted by Kajun Ref N Texas

First of all, the whistle was blown early, that is not in dispute.

Secondly, I in no way feel I can do better than a D1 in the Sweet 16, I just want to know what to do in a HS V game if we have an early whistle on an OB play close to the buzzer?

Are you sure the whistle was blown early??? The play is on youtube, and I think the whistle was ok.

My question would be after the made basket under 59.9 the clock stops, when does it start again, after the touch or after the ball touches inbounds? I know when we would normally chop the clock in, is it the same after a made basket?

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Humor me anyway, ScrappyDoo.

With all due respect, no. The resumption of play is irrelevant. The question is "if the ball was only live for 0.5 seconds (the time from the legal touch of the pass inbounds to the official's whistle), what justification is there for taking more than 0.5 seconds off the clock?".

Until we answer that question -- and no one has yet -- the resumption of play doesn't interest me at all.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by Coach Jinx

I'll be at MSU @ Honigs clinic next month, I'll be the best looking guy there.

Don't get your panties all knotted up pretty boy.

Enjoy the clinic, I hope you meet lots of other good looking guys there.

Not that there's anything wrong with it.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by JoeTheRef

Are you sure the whistle was blown early??? The play is on youtube, and I think the whistle was ok.

My question would be after the made basket under 59.9 the clock stops, when does it start again, after the touch or after the ball touches inbounds? I know when we would normally chop the clock in, is it the same after a made basket?

Yes, it's the same...

[BillP73]

Originally Posted by gazebra

The monitor rule isn't allowed for questions of judgement. The new T clearly blew the whistle and signaled the ball out of bounds. With that being the case, whether or not he blew the call is not relevant to the discussion at the monitor. The play should have been reviewed for only the time that it took to blow the whistle, and as a result only .2 or so should have come off. Not that it would have made a difference in the game, but it would allow for at least a better attempt.

That's exactly where I fall into it.

I'm not an official, nor a fan of either team, but I wanted to get others' perspective on this. It appears as if there's no agreement.

I reviewed the NCAA rulebook, and I don't feel what they did was proper. They didn't fix a timing error...they ostensibly fixed what they deemed to be an error in judgment as it pertains to where the ball went out of bounds. There are no provisions in the rulebook (Appendix III, section 6) for them to use replay equipment for that purpose. The call, as made on the court, should've stood as the benchmark for purposes of determining how much went off the clock.

There's no question that the official right near the play called the ball dead at the point it hit on the hardwood in the vicinity of the line. He motioned with his arm, and you can hear a whistle on the video. I can't believe that's being disputed by some of you. Further, the whistle wasn't "inadvertant" by any rational definition. He made a distinct call of a perceived violation.

[JoeTheRef]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

With all due respect, no. The resumption of play is irrelevant. The question is "if the ball was only live for 0.5 seconds (the time from the release of the pass to the official's whistle), what justification is there for taking more than 0.5 seconds off the clock?".

Until we answer that question -- and no one has yet -- the resumption of play doesn't interest me at all.

So on the made basket, the clock starts on the release of the throw-in pass. Kind of racking my brains out trying to find it in the NCAA book.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by JoeTheRef

So on the made basket, the clock starts on the release of the throw-in pass. Kind of racking my brains out trying to find it in the NCAA book.

No, no. Clearly not. That's my bad. The time to be removed is from the legal touch inbounds to the whistle OR from the legal touch inbounds to the ball touching out of bounds.

(I went back to edit that post. sorry for the confusion).

[rockyroad]

[QUOTE=BillP73]

I reviewed the NCAA rulebook, and I don't feel what they did was proper. They didn't fix a timing error...they ostensibly fixed what they deemed to be an error in judgment as it pertains to where the ball went out of bounds. There are no provisions in the rulebook (Appendix III, section 6) for them to use replay equipment for that purpose. The call, as made on the court, should've stood as the benchmark for purposes of determining how much went off the clock.

[QUOTE]

Ahhh, but they did fix a timing error...even if the ball had hit the line right there, there would still have been a timing error - the ball was touched legally inbounds and so the clock should have started...so what you don't like about the whole situation is that - while trying to fix the timing error, they realized it was a BIG timing error that needed to be fixed...I'm not convinced that would they did was correct, but I wasn't in the pre-game meetings that were held Wed. night with the NCAA representative - so maybe they were told to handle things in a certain way??? I don't know, but I think that if this was a big screw-up we would have heard something from the NCAA about it by now...

[rainmaker]

It seems to me that instead of people in our positions questioning whether they did things correctly or not, we might take a different perspective and think, "Hm. These are the best refs in the NCAA in interpreting and administering the rules as the directors and managers want them handled. What can I learn from this? There must be an interp somewhere that allows them to disregard the whistle in fixing the clock. After all, they had time to discuss the situation, and help in remembering the various rules and interps that they've heard. They had at least as good a view of the play as we had, perhaps a better view at crucial points. I'm going to put this whole situation into the file cabinet, and pull it out again next time I need to, to see if I can learn something from it."

Just because WE don't understand or agree, doesn't mean that THEY are wrong.

[WhistlesAndStripes]

For what it's worth, late last night on ESPN Radio (approximately 2 AM Eastern Time), I Heard 2 sound bytes.

The first was from someone who was identified as something like the official in charge at the site, and I think they said he was in charge of officials in the Horizon league or southern conference or something. Anyhow, he had gone in and talked to Karl Hess after the game, and the explanation that was given was that they timed it from the time the ball was touched inbounds until the ball touched the scorers table.

The next sound byte came from A & M's coach Billy Gillispie, in which he basically said he believed that the officials got the call correct.