A&M/Memphis finish
 

Question for NCAA guys:

When considering that replay, were the officials measuring from first touch to the ball touching out of bounds (probably about a second), or from first touch to the whistle (probably less)? I don't know the rule for the replay.

Of course, the postgame show has just started, and it'll all be about the officials. (But Greg Gumbel at least noted that the ball bounced on the court. First guy to point that out.)

I don't know if I'm missing something here, but I can't seem to see what the ball hitting the floor has to do with this...The clock wouldn't start until the ball is touched, right? I only had a chance to see one replay and didn't see a way it could have been touched until the Memphis player touched it right before it went out. But like I said, I could be missing something here...

Are officials able to use replay to correct their own mistake? If the hand went up and the whistle blew early then the clock should stop right there. If the whistle didn't blow, then they were correct in waiting until the ball touched out of bounds. So, basically I don't know! I'm waiting to hear what more informed people think.

They got it right!
 

I was watching it intently wondering why it was taking so long. Immediately, I thought "take .2 or .3" off the clock - which was at 3.1 - and let's get it going. Again, when the two (I don't know their names) took a while, I began to wonder what was going on. I even saw the older official on the right (crouching on one knee) holding a stopwatch.

Anyway, Greg Gumbel called it right on the CBS postgame show. The Memphis defender deflected the ball, the ball bounced just inside the sideline, and went toward press row where a suit/tie caught it. It, literally, bounced on the floor, went high in the air, and then it was caught... then, I assume, a whistle, which would have signified a dead ball.

I liked taking 1.1 seconds off for I feel it was an appropriate estimate on the time that should have come off from when the Memphis defender touched the ball (start the clock) to the time the suit/tie caught the ball (whistle; stop the clock). How come no one brought up the fact the time didn't do his/her job!? Whew!

The rule is from the first legal touch on the court until the ball then touches something out of bounds. Same rule as high school rules.

Did anyone see the Texas A&M player grab the pass, jump in the air and then start his dribble? Happened with 1:16 left in the 2nd half. Should have been a travel.

The problem is the T blew his whistle prior to the ball touching out of bounds. So the question becomes, is the clock reset to when the whistle blew or when the ball touched OB.

And the answer is when the ball touches OOB. The whistle isn't relevant when the clock was <b>never</b> started at all.

Well, let me ask this theoretical question. What would happen if the T admitted he called the ball OB on the bounce (ie the bounce hit the line) after the legal touch IB, then the R reviewed the play and said, oh no, the ball did not go OB by hitting the line, it went OB when it touched the first media row. What should they do?

Huh? What backs up your statement - ball is dead when whistled dead... T whistled and indicated A&M ball before OOB actually happened.

We are back to your original question and no one, yet, has an answer.

Bad call
 

As soon as I saw them taking so long looking at the monitor & saw the R with a stop watch I knew they were going to do what they did, I was just hoping they didn't. It was a very bad move by the R for several reasons. I know people are going to defend him but it was a BAD call to take away the 1.1 instead of maybe .2 or 3. First the T blew the whistle & pointed at the line saying he had the ball touched & then hitting the line making it out of bounds. You can see him pointing at the ground clear as day. Next just like in football you need a angle that is looking straight down the line to say for sure the ball did or did not hit the line. I watched the game on a 61 HDTV DVR played it over & over frame by frame & would not put my life on it that the ball hit inbounds. Take .2 off & know one on either team is going to say a word about it.

Sigh....

You really need to learn some basics, jk. See NFHS fundamental #16 on p74 of the FED rule book. That holds true for NCAA games too. Again, the whistle is completely irrelevant on plays when the clock <b>NEVER</b> started and a timing adjustment needs to be made. The officials need <b>definite information</b> as to how much time should be taken off, and when the whistle blew has got nothing to do with establishing that definite information. The actual time that elapsed between a legal touch in-bounds until the ball touched OOB is definite information.

And how do you know that the T was indicating A&M ball? I though that the trail was pointing at the last-touch. The crew was doing that the whole game.

Do you really think that the people officiating at that level, including the fourth official sitting at the table, <b>don't</b> know whatintheheck they're doing?

I'll certainly defer to other officials, given my relative lack of experience, but I'm certain it has been drilled over and over on this forum that the whistle causes the ball to be dead. I'm surprised the official signaled and whistled so early, but there were clearly, imo, timer and official errors on that play. How do you ignore the official's clear signal? What rule backs up ignoring the official's whistle/signal?
My brother's an Aggie, but I love him anyway! :)

Sigh....

Another fanboy with a 61" tv sitting on his fat butt in his la-z-boy that thinks he knows more that 4 of the best officials in the country. That's four officials who have a monitor and instant replay too.

Every year......:rolleyes:

Yes, coach. The mean ol' officials screwed your team. They did it deliberately too. Happy now?

For what its worth:

Suppose a player on Memphis saves the ball between the whistle and when it was caught oob. In this case, do we wait until 3.1 has elapsed and say the game is over. I mean we have to wait until the ball touches oob. What youre saying (to igore the whistle) is rediculous. You must time from when the ball was touched until either:
(a) the ball 'hit' the line (if that is what the calling official ruled); or
(b) the whistle (if he mistakenly blew his whistle).
Waiting for it to hit the table is NOT an option.

Uh, you forgot that it was an HDTV as well.... :rolleyes:

Why is it a bad move to take the proper amount of time off the clock? How is it fair to the defense to only take off a .2 or .3?

Would you like to bet that he'll be working on Saturday or Sunday?

You heard the whistle?

Neither would I. i would make such a silly statement. But the ball definitely hit inbounds. it wasn't even close.

Is that how you make calls, based on whether someone is going to say something or not?

The clock didn't properly start. The officials must determine how much time lapsed from the time it was touched inbounds until it was touched OOB. That's what they did. The rest is just BS. I promise, Hank Nihols will back the call.

errrrr...that would be no one, right?

btw, this is the least wrong thing you've written in your post. Nice job.

1. What whistle?

2. In any event it didn't happen your way.

So, everyone who asks for clarification gets your insults?

No one said the officials were wrong,,,we just asked for the rule book citation...
You have yet to cite it.

If you didn't hear the whistle, then you could ask one of the many people who heard it.

Secondly, just because it didn't happen that way doesn't mean it's not relevant. If he blows his whistle but it bounds up in the air for 5 seconds, do we call the game over?

The whistle must cause the 'manual' timing to end. I don't see how you can time beyond that whistle.

I didnt hear a whistle nor did I see any official indicate the clock should not have started. In any event the clock did not start and the rules permit the timing error to be corrected with a monitor.

Like it or not there it is. :shrug:

"It was a bad call" is not asking for clarification. "Others may defend him but...." is not asking for clarification.

No, you moronic, once-a-year, obnoxious fanboys get my insults.

It has been cited. NCAA rule 14-11-3. Look it up.

Nice try lil guy. First I'm not a fan of either team. I love the game of basketball(played D1)but think the officiating of the games are not very good. I have my name as coach so I can argue back & fourth with clowns like you. I am a varsity baseball coach but spend July thru Dec. officiating the best game in the world with the best OFFICIALS in the world FOOTBALL. They watched that replay on a 10in. monitor without a good angle. Also you fools keep saying the clock didn't start...HOW do you know for sure it didn't start. What if it was at 3.197 & went to 3.102. You can start & stop the clock without a tength going off. Strange but possible. If anyone wants to argue anymore I'll be at MSU @ Honigs clinic next month, I'll be the best looking guy there.

Don't you understand that the angle makes NO DIFFERENCE because the officials are not allowed to rule on a violation on replay?

You take any stop watch you can, and try it, you cannot do it. You will NOT be able to start and stop it in less than .1 seconds. And I am talking about a stopwatch, in which you are trying to do it as fast as you can, not starting it without the intent of stopping it again with a thing you have to push down and then back up. The clock DID NOT START!!!!

Great. Now piss off until next month, fanboy.

You must be just one big bundle of integrity as a supposed official in another sport to publicly dump on basketball officials without ever officiating a damn basketball game in your life or having a clue what the rules say about the correction of timing errors.

"I'm a baseball coach and a football official. That makes me an expert on officiating college basketball".

Well, you're just another sorry clown whining because he thinks that his team got screwed by the mean old officials. Every year you and your ilk show up here, just like freaking locusts.

Please, don't insult those of us who also officiate football.

"Mr. Timer, did you start the clock?"

"No, I didn't."

How hard is that?

The clock didn't start. Trust me. I know.

I did a little experiment, just me and my stopwatch. I cannot start and stop it without AT LEAST .12 seconds running off. Now, I'm no NCAA clock operator, but I'm pretty sure it didn't start either.

N ice game management.

Anger management may be a remedy,

AGAIN JACK AXX I am not a fan of Texas A&M, don't have them in an office pool or want them to win or Memphis to lose. SO I'm not a fanboy(nice try).
Next I have officiated basketball & have had my license for 4 years.
Also I thought the game was well officiated just think that with the angles that were shown they should of took a couple of tentghs off & got out of the way.
Clowns like you are all over, get a clue.

He is calling you a fanboy not because you are rooting for Texas A&M. He is calling you a fanboy because you are coming from a point of view of a fan and not an official's point of view (which is the same opinion of your posts).


The fact that you have only worked basketball for 4 years says a lot. You do not have the experience in my opinion (based on your current answers as well) to know what they "should have done." I do work college basketball and I have never had a media game to use a monitor, but your opinion is very flawed. You are not going to ever have a couple of tenths come off a clock if the clock was started properly. Then again, you are just a rookie in many officials’ eyes. I will just consider the source. ;)

Peace

Far be it from me to get in the middle of a good mud-flinging catfight, but just so I'm not misunderstanding the situation, let me just recap what I think you're saying:

The situation is that a live ball was inbounded and legally touched inbounds (the clock should have started), then an official blew the whistle before the ball touched out of bounds, and then the ball was caught by a fan out of bounds. All this happened without the clock ever starting.

I think Jurassic is saying that the correct amount of time to be taken off the clock is the amount of time that elapsed from the legal touching inbounds to the ball touching out of bounds, ignoring the official's inadvertent whistle.

And the other poster is saying that the correct amount of time to be taken off the clock is the amount of time that elapsed from the legal touching inbounds to the official's inadvertent whistle.



If I have the above situation correct, then I'm not sure how Fundamental #16 helps make your case, Jurassic. That just says that the whistle "seldom" causes the ball to become dead, because it's usually already dead by the time the whistle blows due to a foul or violation. But if the ball is not already dead, then 6-7-5 says that the ball becomes dead when an official's whistle sounds (unless a try is in flight, which isn't the case here). So Fundamental #16 seems irrelevant to me in this particular situation.

Maybe I'm missing something obvious, but I just don't see what makes you say that the whistle is completely irrelevant. Obviously, you think it has something to do with the fact that the clock didn't start, but I don't (yet) see how that makes a difference.

If they can determine when the whistle blew (and maybe that's the thing that I'm missing), wouldn't that be the proper signal to stop the clock (whether it's the game clock, or the stopwatch that they're using with the monitor)?

Wouldn't the actual time between the legal touch and the whistle also be definite information, if you could determine when the whistle sounded?

Maybe Jurassic is contending that there is no clear evidence in the replay of when the whistle blew, in which case the only other obvious and definitive place to kill the play is when it was touched out of bounds?

(I didn't mean for this post to be Nevada-esque, I was just trying to clarify it in my own mind.)

Lah me. It's too bad Chuck Elias isn't around. He'd understand the concept, being asked to work the table on a Final Four and all.

There's the obvious thing that you're missing right there, Scrappy. The freaking clock was <b>NEVER</b> started! Howintheheck are you gonna <b>stop</b> something using a whistle that isn't <b>going</b> in the first place?

What next? Are you gonna tell me that if the whistle blew before the ball touched OOB, by rule you now have to go to the POI of an IW? What is the POI of an IW on a throw-in that was legally touched but not controlled under NCAA rules? An AP possession? Maybe give Memphis the ball if they had the arrow? Think about that one!

You're right. You are becoming Nevada-esque. The good news is that I just talked to Dan_ref, and being nice guys, we'll help pay for your lobotomy.

I'm not missing that. I get that. Here's what I think you're possibly missing: the ball becomes dead on the inadvertent whistle. Howintheheck can you take more time off the clock after the ball was dead? The ball was live for 0.5 seconds (just for an example), but since the clock wasn't running, we're going to take off 1.1?

I'm just asking. How can you take more time off the clock than the ball was actually live for? If there was a whistle (and again, I didn't see the play or hear a whistle), but if there was a whistle then the ball becomes dead at that point. How can you take time off the clock for a period when the ball was dead?

And I'm not even going to address your POI questions because they're completely irrelevant to the timing question.

Humor me anyway, ScrappyDoo. Using your argument above, how would <b>you</b> handle the play now under NCAA rules? You've got an IW on a live ball that was last touched in-bounds by Memphis, but there never was any player or team control established. AP?

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.

There was team control established. Team control begins when the ball is at the disposal of the thrower in NCAA. Team control doesn't end until the ball is controlled by the opposite team or released on a shot attempt.

Since the discussions seems to have shifted to this thread, here are my posts from the other thread for discussion.

I know I'm beating a dead horse (or at least a badly limping horse), but the only problem I still have with this is best explained through another hypothetical. With B face-guarding in the backcourt after a made basket, A1 passes to A2 at the middle of the FT line. B1 not seeing the ball tips it with his outstreached hand and it rolls all the way to other end of the court and goes OOB under A's basket. The C for some reason blows his whistle and raises an open hand only a moment after B1 contacts the ball.

Here is where I will put in different options to help me decipher how the original play should be handled. (A)The pass was thrown hard enough that no player from either team would have a chance at recovering the ball (I know this isn't likely given the ball has to bounce 3/4 of the court) or (B) both teams would have had a chance to play the ball but quit on the whistle or (C) A3 or B2 give chase to the ball. Given these scenarios occur in NCAA with a table-side monitor present how do we handle the timing under each of these clock situations (i) the clock does start on the contact with the ball by B1 and is stopped at the whistle, or (ii) the clock properly starts on the contact and stops when the ball goes OOB, or (iii) the clock never starts.

I know this is a bundle, there are some people already frustrated with this thread, and most will say none of these situations is equal to the original, but I'm trying to use a deductive strategy to foster some deep thought, because at the end of the day I was a philosophy major in college and as my wife tells me I like making things more difficult than needs be.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
BTW, my answers to the various scenarios go as follows:

Ai - No timing error, continue with A's ball closest to the spot the ball was at when the whistle sounded (POI).
Aii - A timing error has occured, according to NCAA Rule 5.9.1c the clock is to be stopped when the official signals a violation. The courtside monitor should be used to determine when the clock should have been stopped according to this rule. The ball should be given to A at POI.
Aiii - A timing error has occured, the courtside monitor can be used to rectify the error based on when the clock should have started and should have stopped again based on Rule 5.9.1c. (this I feel is closest to the original situation). Ball to A at the POI.

B and C - I feel that how both teams reacted to the play is not relavent to how this situation should be handled and thus defer to my above answers for B and C situations.

We can talk about ignoring the whistle all day long, but the way I saw it was the T was certainly signaling a violation (OOB). As such the clock should properly be stopped at the point of the signal according to Rule 5.9.1c. I'm pretty sure this included a whistle since hand in the air and air in the whistle are like instinctual reactions for me and go hand in hand, as I'm sure is the case with most officials. It is important to remember Rule 2.2.2 and 2.2.3 when considering how to handle the signal and whistle. We cannot just ignore the whistle and signal because to do so would be to set aside 5.9.1c and rule 2.2.2 and 2.2.3 say we can't set aside another rule or the decision of another official. It was the T's decision to signal OOB and thus we can't set that aside regardless of whether he was right or wrong.

If somebody is interpreting it that the signal wasn't made until the ball touched someone OOB then sure everything was done according to how it should have, I just saw it as the signal came as soon as the ball hit the ground.

Furthermore, I've changed my stance on the stopwatch. The rules to call for a stopwatch to be placed tableside for the use of timing TO's. Not sure it was intended for the way it was used last night, but that's where 2.3 comes in.

In the end it comes down to the question of do we get it right or do we do it by the rules. NCAA Rule 2.2.1 seems to say we do second.

How can you say that? Why only .2 seconds? Because the announcers said so? Why not .7 or .5?

The officials reviewed the amount of time they felt should have run off the clock. The clock never started. I would expect a second to come off anyway.

Peace

They made the right call imho. Did notice the older ref constantly continuing his 10 count after the A1 had established FC status. In several cases it took a second or two off of his five count.

Everyone agrees that the officials accurately accounted for the time between when the ball was touched IB v when it was touched OB.

The question is...what happens when you have an early whistle on an OB play? As Jurassic points out, by rule this would be an IW, as such we would go to POI and AP(NFHS). Obviously, no one would agree that we should do that.

So the question is still...do we get it right or follow the rule?

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

I don't think anybody has given any reason to think we could do a better job. I know I certainly couldn't, but I do think the rules suggest a different course of action.

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?

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.

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?

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?

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.

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.

Yes, it's the same...

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.

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).

[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...

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.

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.

hmmm...move the throw-in team up to the spot of the ball at the whistle, take off whatever time should have elapsed from touch to whistle & resume the game?

I don't agree the guidance you reference applies to this case.

btw, i still don't agree there was a whistle

I tried and I could do it in .09 ..... after trying a few times. ;)

It seems to me that based on that logic, there's no need for about 50% of this message board. Or at the very least, everyone should be obligated to order a copy of the most recent release of interps from the given league in question before positing any opinions.

I don't think taking the rules as published at face value, and offering an opinion that corresponds with them, is irresponsible, nor implying that the refs in question aren't "good".

One official blew/signaled the play dead well before it hit an out-of-bounds object. So no matter how you look at it, an official, at some juncture, didn't get the call exactly right here. Fine. They are not robots.

On the other hand...they are not robots. Even when they may take 6 minutes to make a decision.

Can't really have it both ways.

[QUOTE=JRutledge]He is calling you a fanboy not because you are rooting for Texas A&M. He is calling you a fanboy because you are coming from a point of view of a fan and not an official's point of view (which is the same opinion of your posts).




The fact that you have only worked basketball for 4 years says a lot. You do not have the experience in my opinion (based on your current answers as well) to know what they "should have done." I do work college basketball and I have never had a media game to use a monitor, but your opinion is very flawed. You are not going to ever have a couple of tenths come off a clock if the clock was started properly. Then again, you are just a rookie in many officials’ eyes. I will just consider the source. ;)

I have worked games with a monitor and have reviewed the guidelines(we're required to). I timed the play myself from touch to when it touched out of bounds and came up with with 1 second even off the clock. I only did it once and I saw the officials had a stopwatch. They are supposed to use it in just such an instance and detrmine how much time elapsed. I'm sure they ran it 3 times and took the average. Very nice job!!!

I don't really have a problem with people asking questions and trying to understand. I do have a problem with us assuming they got it wrong because we dont understand, which some of us are clearly doing. Perhaps not you. I don't KNOW that "One official blew/signaled the play dead". We hear a whistle, but we don't know why that whistle was blown. Perhaps it was just a premature whistle, knowing full well that the clock hadn't started and that the ball was going out of bounds. THat is, we don't know what that ref was thinking, so we can't assum it was supposed to be a signal as to when the clock should stop. I just think that all the comments about "I can't believe the ref ignored the whistle, and timed clear till the ball touched the table person?" are really short-sighted and small minded.

Fair enough, rain.

I'd like to see the NCAA come forth today and make a comment on the decision process. I'm more than willing to give them the opportunity to put forth a reasonable explanation. It's certainly not too much to ask considering the weight of the game.

BTW, while I stand on the side of believing an error was likely made...none of this cost A&M the game. The half-second we're fretting about wasn't going to net Kirk some clear 20-foot shot. I'm more concerned with the precedent this may have set in regard to how they decide to start using replay.

Further, they are taking way too much time to look at these plays. I haven't gone into the archives to check out the chatter on the Miami/Akron game...but that dwarfed last night in terms of poor use of the replay monitor.

In all NCAA games, there is supposed to be a stopwatch at the table for various reasons. The shot clock malfunctions and you need a stopwatch to replace it, timing timeouts, and definitely for plays where there was a timer's mistake. In fact I saw a game in the PAC 10 tourney 2 weeks ago that was almost identical to the play. They used a stopwatch to determine how much time elapsed. This is by supervisor edict.

I agree with you on everything....but I believe I did hear the whistle on replay several times. Not certain.

I agree with you. Actually in this situation the extra time would have allowed a different scenario as far as an inbound pass or dribble shot. However, the officials did get it right.

Jurrassic, I think you've missed this one.

The whistle definitely marks the point where the ball becomes dead. There is NO question about that. The fact that the clock didn't start properly has no bearing on how and when the ball becomes dead.

If (and I say IF) the official blew the wistle for an OOB violation when the ball bounced, then the time correction should have been between the time of the touch to the time of the whistle.

Sure, the whistle was wrong if the ball didn't actually bounce OOB, but that is done and you can't unblow the whistle.

Given how much time they did take off, they counted from the touch the the time the ball really did touch OOB. If the official did blow the whistle for the bounce, they got it wrong.

The ball was touched just before the ball hit the floor. Therefore, the clock should have started and run for some small amount. The clock didn't run at all so there had to be a correction.

Now, why did it take me 1,000 words to say the same thing?!?!?! :confused:

I agree with Camron's post completely.

So, you're basically saying that there was an IW, correct? How do you rule the play then for an IW on a live, loose ball?Is it the same call if A&M had been the last to touch the ball in-bounds before the whistle and the ball subsequently hitting OOB? Throw-in by A&M....ball tipped on the court by A&M and is going OOB....IW during a live loose ball....ball lands OOB. You're gonna give the ball back to A&M, even though they touched the ball last in-bounds?

Answer me that, guys, if you're so convinced that you're right. Are you going to the POI for an IW after taking time off the clock?

This is just a situation where you set aside a rule to do the right thing.

There is no situation that you set aside the rule to "do the right thing". NCAA Rule 2.2.2 specifically says, "No official has the authority to set aside any official rules or approved interpretations." Once we open the door to setting aside rules in order to do the right thing, we might as well throw out the rule book and just call whatever we want.

This is what my problem is with the whole situation. As I've been trying to point out all along, and Cameron said much better than I have, if a whistle was blown to signal OOB then the time interval that should have elapsed by rule is from the touching to whistle. By rule this is what should happen; what is right according to had things gone perfectly is another thing, and that is what the officials were trying to accomplish. However, unless we are going to start ignoring 2.2.2. we can't set aside rules as I believe they did. I'm not saying I wouldn't have done the same thing had I been in their position. In going through all that happened and all the rules/interps I'm sure they were going through in a span of 5-10 minutes, I'm sure it would be easy to overlook Rule 5.9.1c. I spent almost 30 minutes looking for it in the comfort of my own home, I'd hate to think of what I'd have come up with in 10 minutes with thousands of screaming fans yelling at me.

That's not what anyone has said. It wasn't an IW, it was a whistle for a violation, though it appears it was a missed call.

A mistaken call is not an IW.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=YiI-4_0zOiE

Form your own opinion if you think the official said this hit the line.

Well said, Boomer. Can't quarrel with any of that.

It's hard to have this discussion because 50% of the folks didn't hear a whistle, and the half of us (like myself) feel that there was a clear indication that the play was dead at the point it bounced near the line. Without agreement on that point, everyone is interpreting the situation differently...and on some levels apples and oranges are being compared here.

IF the whistle was blown, the way you just prescribed seems to be the only way to apply the rules properly.

I'd like to hear an explanation from the NCAA. Hopefully, one's forthcoming.

So you disagree with me.

No, now you agree with me...I'm confused.

It may not be too much to ask for you and me. But most of the public are gonna be like some of the fanboys on this site who don't want an explanation for intellectual reasons, they want to argue and vent. I wouldn't subject myself to that, and I don't when I ref. I certainly don't expect them to.

That's especially true if the officials are wrong.

IF it's significant, we'll see some interps or guidleines to the officials for next season.

Right.

But I suspect since the ncaa has kept their mouths shut so far we'll see some of that crew in the final game.

Just my opinion of course.

It's not always a good thing to do any with some of the o'l mechanics, ie. raised arm, open hand to kill the clock. If this was still a required mechanic at NCAA level, then that would definitely negate any question of an IW.

I too, believe there was a whistle to stop the clock, as the T, after chopping the clock in, immediately points to the floor/sideline, basically saying the ball hit OOB. No reason for him to do that if he didn't hit his whistle.

You've taken my point out of context. What I'm saying is that we in discussing what should have happened can't set aside the rule. Were I in the same place as the officials without the benefit of sitting in the comfort of my home and having the entire rule book at my disposal I would have likely done the same. All I am saying is that I can't blame the crew for the decision they came made, but nonetheless I feel it wasn't the right way to handle it given the benefit of hindsight.

Who cares? This is completely irrelevant to the question of how much time should come off the clock. It's a total non-sequitor. The possibility that the correct ruling will lead to a difficult (unusual or unpopular) resumption of play matters not at all.

So, Jurassic, if you're so convinced that you're right, what rule can you offer to justify taking time off the clock that includes time after the ball became dead by rule? I think this is a very straight-forward question, yet you haven't answered it. All you can offer is the observation that the clock never started.

Not sure why this is so hard. The clock did not start. The officials looked at the time and judge 1.1 would come off. If anyone is doing the speculation, it is those trying to talk about IW and violations that were never apart of the review from what anyone can see. The official blew the whistle when the ball was out of bounds while near the bench or table area. All I am hearing is speculation as to why they reviewed the video and that they did not apply the rule properly.

Peace

The officials need definite information as to how much time should be taken off, and when the whistle blew has got nothing to do with establishing that definite information. The actual time that elapsed between a legal touch in-bounds until the ball touched OOB is definite information.

But it is not the CORRECT information. The correct information is not the time that elapses between when the Memphis player touches the ball and when the ball is truly out of bounds. The correct information is the time that elapses between when the Memphis player touches the ball and when the official signaled to stop the clock either with his whistle or hand.

Section 5. Officials Use of Replay/Television Equipment
Art. 1. Officials may use official courtside replay equipment, videotape or television monitoring that is located on a designated courtside table (i.e., within approximately 3 to 12 feet of the playing court), when such equipment is available only in situations as follows:

f. A determination, based on the judgment of the official, that a timing
mistake has occurred in either starting or stopping the game clock.
After the ball is in play, such a mistake shall be corrected during the
first dead ball or during the next live ball but before the ball is touched
inbounds or out of bounds by a player. When the clock should have
been continuously running, the mistake shall be corrected before the
second live ball is touched inbounds or out of bounds by a player.


The fact that the point at which the official should end measured elapsed time is implied - it's when the official blows the whistle or signals for the game clock to be stopped. It's implied because the next paragraph implies it.

g. A determination of the correct time to be placed back on the game
clock when the referee blows the whistle, signals for the game clock
to be stopped, and in his/her judgment time has elapsed before the
game clock stopped.

Like I said, a different situation, but play (and elapsed time) stops on the whistle or signal, not when the ball goes out of bounds. The official must signal when the ball goes out of bounds or signal - no violation matters after the official. The fact that the clock did not start does not make the play following it any different. If a referee whistled and motioned for the clock to stop at 2.7 seconds, before a ball hit the OOB line at 2.0 seconds, then the clock would be stopped at 2.7 seconds - it's an official's mistake, and cannot be reviewed on the monitor. The fact that the timer also makes a mistake does not make this any different - measurement of time elapsed goes from signal to signal.

The whistle and signal matter. No violation itself stops the clock. A ball going OOB cannot stop the clock. Only a whistle/signal can. When the official whistled/signaled, the clock should have stopped had it been running - therefore the time that should have elapsed should be measured only until that point.

This is NOT and CANNOT be an inadvertent whistle. The ref had a call to make and he made it - he thought the ball was out of bounds early, and whistled the clock dead then. It makes no difference when measuring the time elapsed that the ball didn't truly go out of bounds for another however many tenths of a second (up to .5 maybe?)!!

The amount of time used, by rule, is the time lapsed from the ball being legally touched in-bounds by the Memphis player until the ball then touches something-anything-out of bounds.

NO! It's till the whistle. If it's early, well tough luck for Memphis, but it's till the whistle! The points at which the whistle blew and when the ball touched anything-out-of-bounds are different. There is no rule that says replay can be used to determine when the ball truly touched something out of bounds. Most times a ball going OOB and a ref's whistle are at approximately the same point - in this case, it obviously was not.

Not that any of this probably mattered in the game, it was probably a negligible less than .5 second difference... but this is an official's forum and this mistake could be made to an even greater degree where it really makes a 2 second or more difference.

The reason it is an issue is because you need to know when the ball became dead to know how much time to take off. It becomes dead either when it touches OOB or when the whistle blew...whichever came first....even if the whistle was in error. There is no dispute that some correction was needed...the clock never started.

By taking 1.1 off the clock, that means they timed from the touch to when it actually hit something OOB since there is no way that it took 1.1 seconds from the hand to the floor....that was far less than 1 second.

So, If an official blew the whistle when it hit the floor, that could have only been for a perceived violation; and, while the violation can be rescinded as an inadvertent whistle, it can't be ignored for the purposes of correcting the clock....the ball is dead on the whistle.

IIRC, the official did point at the spot on the floor where it bounced and did appear to call a violation at that time. If not and the first point it touched OOB was later, why was he signally something when the ball had not yet touched OOB.

But he did not blow his whistle when the ball hit the floor. So that only becomes an issue for those that have not seen the tape on youtube.com.

My point is you are reaching for something to complain about if that is your point of view. And if there were no tenths of a second on the clock, no one would say a word about this if you ask me.

Peace

Um, where may I confirm that a whistle had actually blown and the clock was dead? Am I to believe the conspiracy fanboys that are posting that? Or do I believe a valid, trusted source like Dan? Afaik, the officials simply followed rule 2-5-1(f). That's what the R, Hess, seemed to say in his statement. He timed the sequence from last touched in-bounds to first touching OOB, and took that time off the clock. I agreed with the way Hess handled it.

All I'm asking is for one of the experienced, wise NCAA officials like yourself, Scrappy, to edjumucate me. If it really did happen the way that you are saying it did, and you were in Hess' shoes, what would you do? What is the proper way, <b>by rule</b>, to deal with the play <b>if</b> the whistle had gone, as claimed, <b>before</b> the ball touched OOB?

Again, an A&M throw-in is followed by (1)a Memphis player, or (2) an A&M player legally touching but not controlling the ball the ball in-bounds. The ball is going OOB, but has not touched anything OOB when an official blows his whistle.
Questions:
1) Is that an IW?
2) If it isn't an IW, then what is it?
3) How do you handle this play if an A&M player was the last player to legally touch the ball in-bounds on the throw-in?
4) How do you handle this play if a Memphis player was the last player to legally touch the ball in-bounds on the throw-in?
5) Who gets the ball in both #3 and #4 above if (a)Memphis has the arrow, or (b) A&M has the arrow.


All I'm asking is that you please share your rules knowledge with myself and others. I might even agree with you when you're done.

Much appreciated.

Great. Now would you please answer the questions also in my post directly preceding this one?

How would <b>you</b> handle the play under NCAA rules? Throw-in by A&M..touched by Memphis....whistle before the ball touched OOB....Memphis has the arrow.

Gee, that was my question to you last night.

I can't be certain, but I'm willing to bet that the timer knew how to talk.

Also, having timed for many years, I can tell you it's damn near impossible to start and stop a clock without at least 0.1 coming off of it.

I don't know. I'm not asking you to. As I said, I didn't see the play, and I haven't watched it on youtube. I'm simply asking you to give a rules reference for your claim earlier in this thread that a an accidental whistle wouldn't matter in the play in question because the clock never started. I am saying that a whistle would matter because it would cause the ball to become dead.

If you're claiming that a whistle never sounded, fine. But that still doesn't justify your earlier comment that the whistle wouldn't have mattered if it had sounded. You seem to have an aversion to providing a rules citation to back up that statement.

And again, and for the last time, I couldn't care less about how to put the ball back in play after the accidental whistle. That's simply an irrelevant distraction from the actual issue under discussion.

I've made my point as well as I can make it. So I'm done with this thread until/unless somebody can provide a reasonable answer to my question. Assuming there was a whistle before the ball actually touched out of bounds, by what rule can you take time off the clock that includes time after the ball was dead? Very simple question, really. And I think we all know the answer.

I don't agree that this paragraph implies what you're saying. I think you are inferring. The situations are different enough that I don't think this is a fair comparison.

I just don't see what's so hard about assuming that these guys got it right, even though we don't understand it.

Because understanding rules-based questions is the primary motivation for frequenting this forum. If by the rules, their ruling was correct, then it should have a direct explanation - obviously it's not clear and it's easy to conceive that if they had modified the time from 3.1 to 2.6 the majority concensus could easily be that their decision was correct.

I thought that, except for the audible whistle I'm convinced I hear, Jurrasic Referee had a good point somewhere a few pages back in which he points out the Trail may have been identifying who last touched the ball... who knows? were they using that mechanic "all game long" before killing the clock? I doubt it, but whatever. The point is that this is not a witch-hunt but a rule-hunt and the discussion is valid.

I'm starting to come around more and more after you ask the question "how would you have handled it?" after watching the replay again. I could swear I could hear a whistle before the ball went OOB on the youtube replay but: 1) youtube quality stinks, 2) that whistle could have been some other noise (squeaking of shoes, whatever), 3) there could easily be a slight delay between audio/video, 4) i don't believe the officials can listen to audio on replay equipment (can they?)

But to answer the questions, assuming there WAS a whistle/signal, and it could be seen clearly before the ball went OOB:

1) Is that an IW?

No, the definition of the IW is in the book and is clear as follows:

Art. 1. An inadvertent whistle occurs anytime an official blows the whistle as an oversight and does not have a call to make.

The ref had a call to make, and made it. It would make sense to believe he thought the ball was OOB when it bounced off the Memphis player. This call cannot be reviewed, and shouldn't matter that the replays showed otherwise.

2) If it isn't an IW, then what is it?

The whistle was for an OOB violation. Call it a blown call, but it should have stopped the clock.

3) How do you handle this play if an A&M player was the last player to legally touch the ball in-bounds on the throw-in?

Assuming we just switched the Memphis player's jersey to A&M and everything else was exactly the same - ball goes to Memphis. Check the monitor to see how much time elapsed between the touch and signal/whistle.

4) How do you handle this play if a Memphis player was the last player to legally touch the ball in-bounds on the throw-in?

Again, much the same as before, ball goes to A&M - Check the monitor to see how much time elapsed between the touch and signal/whistle.

5) Who gets the ball in both #3 and #4 above if (a)Memphis has the arrow, or (b) A&M has the arrow.

I don't believe the arrow would matter here - there is no IW (unless there is another reason that it should, which I could easily be missing)

Had the time difference been much larger between the point at which the whistle was blown and the ball actually went OOB AND there was an even 1% chance that anyone could have gotten to the ball between the whistle and point at which the ball went OOB AND had the whistle/signal been clear - I think this would have mattered, and I would have handled it differently. But I believe now that most on this thread are right - this is making a big fuss about nothing. In this situation, the officials did what I would have done (except that I had 2 days to think about it) - in general, this would not the right thing by NCAA rules as Scrapper says, the point should be measured til when the official signals - but I don't know if that's possible in this case... no whistle could be heard by the officials on their replay system, and by the time the official signals, the ball is truly OOB. I think in our youtube replay we can hear the official whistle.

So basically, I just showed myself that when you said originally, "the officials did the right thing," that was right (AND this was the most fair outcome, as it rectified the official's mistake, through some form of not having perfect information) and I just wasted a lot of words saying that. :confused:

You may be right - it's just trying to make a simple point.

You're saying if an official misses a call by blowing his whistle early, the time elapsed shouldn't be measured to the point where his whistle is blown - it should end at some later point as if the whistle was never blown.

No. The case you quote is when the clock is started properly and then doesn't stop when the whistle is blown. In that case the replay is used to determine when the whistle was blown, so that the clock can be set to that point.

I'm saying that the case under consideration is different since the clock never started in the first place. So to say that the case you quoted implies that replay should be used to determine when the whistle blew doesn't seem to me like a correct interpretation.

I just think that when the whistle blew as opposed to when the ball hit something oob isn't really an important distinction. The ref blew the whistle for the oob violation, and was a little quick on it. The tape showed that the ball did indeed go oob, and that the time between when the ball was touched legally inbounds, and when the ball gained oob status was 1.1 seconds. I dont understand why that's so hard to grasp. (I;m not dirrecting these comments to you, wildcatter, but to others who seem to think they know better than 4 of the top officials in the country).

I expect the rule that you're looking for is some sort of official interpretation of how to handle these sorts of situations that isn't necessarily obvious to us from our reading of the book. I mean look at NFHS case 10.1.8. Would you automatically have figured that was how to handle that rule?

I'm saying even though we can't find anything that says, "When the clock doesn't start you just time the play until the ball goes out of bounds regardless of the whistle" that doen'st mean they aren't going by the rules. It just means that we aren't as up on the NCAA rules and interps and fiats and dicta as they are.

Why do they owe us an official explanation? They're not even issuing explanations when it would protect their reputation such as in last night's travel/no travel problem. They have in effect issued an explanation by ruling as they did. Talking with their feet, so to speak.