Tennessee--Rutgers ending--Women's Game

[blindzebra]

Doesn't change the fact that the clock stopped when the foul occurred.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by blindzebra

Doesn't change the fact that the clock stopped when the foul occurred.

The clock stopped before the foul occured.

Peace

[truerookie]

As I observed the thread and I watched the replay on ESPN. IMO, it should have been a no call. Clearly, Anosike jumped back into the defender(s) to draw contact on the play.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by truerookie

As I observed the thread and I watched the replay on ESPN. IMO, it should have been a no call. Clearly, Anosike jumped back into the defender(s) to draw contact on the play.

There was more contact on Candace Parker before on the rebound. I am not one that feels you should swallow your whistle just to do so, but if you allowed a lot of contact on the play before, let the other contact go. But I think the bigger issue was the clock, not the call near the end of the game. That is where judgment comes into play on a foul, the clock is another story.

Peace

[JRutledge]

Dude, I just looked at the replay on SportsCenter and they ran the clock out before both officials (L and C) had their hand up. And the clock stopped at .2 and then started again. Even SC did a replay and clearly showed the clock stopped and even showed home much time would have run off the clock. I even taped the replay of this to see if what I saw was accurate. The only way BZ would be right if an official blew a whistle before they put their hand up, but the clock started again. If that is how the PTS works, that is news to me. The whistle is supposed to stop, not stop and restart the clock. And I would think the officials would see this on the replay and make the proper decision. I have a feeling this will not be the last we hear of this. My issue is not whether there should have been a foul, my issue is the clock stopped improperly and the foul would not have been relevant to the end of the game.

Peace

[tomegun]

Rut, this is how this is going to go. Most of us will watch this play on Sportscenter at some point. The clock obviously stopped before the foul was called. But BZ has spoken! I don't know what is going on with him right now, but he can be obviously wrong and not admit it. He did the same thing in the thread about shoes and now this. It isn't an issue with PT because, like you said, they ran it several times on SC and the clock clearly stopped. The only thing they said about a whistle was an inadvertant whistle. If that happened, play would stop with .2 on the clock, NOT an inadvertant whistle that stops the clock and then the foul.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by tomegun

Rut, this is how this is going to go. Most of us will watch this play on Sportscenter at some point. The clock obviously stopped before the foul was called. But BZ has spoken! I don't know what is going on with him right now, but he can be obviously wrong and not admit it. He did the same thing in the thread about shoes and now this. It isn't an issue with PT because, like you said, they ran it several times on SC and the clock clearly stopped. The only thing they said about a whistle was an inadvertant whistle. If that happened, play would stop with .2 on the clock, NOT an inadvertant whistle that stops the clock and then the foul.

Peace

[cford]

This was the most amazing finish to a game that I have ever seen (When it comes to officiating)!

Let me break it down for everyone that didn't see it. I will try and post a clip of it later.

Tennessee (White) is losing 58-57.

5.5 Tennessee player shoots from behind the free throw line and misses.
3.8 Tennessee player (Parker) gets the rebound.
1.6 Tennessee player shoots 7 feet from the basket and misses
0.4 Tennessee player grabs the rebound in the air.
0.2 Tennessee player lands from gathering the rebound.
0.2 Clock Stops
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2 Rutgers player grabs Tennessee player from behind and yanks her to the ground.

This is what should have occurred.

0.4 Tennessee player grabs the rebound in the air.
0.2 Tennessee player lands from gathering the rebound.
0.2 Clock Stops
0.0 Time should have expired.
-0.1 Rutgers player grabs Tennessee player from behind and yanks her to the ground. (This should be an intentional foul! Obviously this opens a whole new bag of worms!)

(For the timing above I used frame by frame step though from my DVR and everything is very accurate. Eight frames (from one of the angle that they played in slow motion) is exactly 0.1 seconds. I went back 2 seconds and counted each frame, 24 frames went by before the Rutgers player made contact to start her foul. Time should have expired at 16 frames.)

For those saying that the C had a whistle. The C could NOT have had a whistle because the foul had not yet occurred! The clock stopped before any contact on a foul occurred. Was it the timer? Was it a malfunction?

So time should have expired and Rutgers should have won, right? Or, if time had expired would they have called an intentional foul? NO they ruled it a common foul (based on the fact that players where lined up at the free throw line and after both made free throws Rutgers was permitted to make the throw-in from any point outside of the end line). So by rule if they decided it was a common foul then the game should have been over (if the time did not stop). Also this is women's college rules so even if there was an intentional foul after time expired they cannot penalize it. If this was a High School or Men's college game then they could penalize the intentional foul.

I don't know if there is any rule in place that would allow them to fix the timing issue. They must have definite knowledge that the time expired. I think that a case play is needed for this situation where the clock stops when it should not and a video monitor is available for the officials. The officials need a timer (on the monitor) that is external from the game clock that continues to run. This would allow them to fix this play.

By the way anyone that says this is not intentional needs to watch it again because this is the exact definition of an intentional foul!

The Tennessee player is then allowed to shoot 2 free throws and makes both with 0.2 seconds showing on the clock. Rutgers is then allowed a throw-in along the endline which they eventually throw away. (The clock actually didn't start on this play but it was touched before going out of bounds so by rule the game is over.)

WOW

[rulesmaven]

What are the NCAA rules on what is correctable using video? Might not be the refs' fault.

The thing that's weird about is that something caused the clock operator to hit the button. Or do we think it was a malfunction?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by rulesmaven

What are the NCAA rules on what is correctable using video? Might not be the refs' fault.

The thing that's weird about is that something caused the clock operator to hit the button. Or do we think it was a malfunction?

The refs could look at the video and determine if there was a foul called after the time ran out.

Not only was there not a foul until the game clock had 0:00 (at least based on the reaction of the officials), the ball hit the rim on the put back before a whistle was blown. I just feel bad for Rutgers who based on what I saw should have won the game and beat the two top teams in the country.

Peace

[wildcatter]

By the way anyone that says this is not intentional should never call an intentional foul ever again in their games b/c this is the exact definition of an intentional foul!

Well, I guess I'll be spending the rest of the night trying to unlearn that signal.

-0.1 Rutgers player grabs Tennessee player from behind and yanks her to the ground. (This should be an intentional foul! Obviously this opens a whole new bag of worms!)

How do you have an intentional foul occur after you say the game (hypothetically) has ended? Are you saying you would have called an intentional technical? (which doesn't exist in NCAA-W)

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by wildcatter

How do you have an intentional foul occur after you say the game (hypothetically) has ended?

His point was that all you could call was an intentional foul if the game was technically over (or a flagrant foul). In other words the clock not running properly could not have had a shooting foul with .2 on the clock.

Peace

[cford]

Originally Posted by wildcatter

How do you have an intentional foul occur after you say the game (hypothetically) has ended? Are you saying you would have called an intentional technical? (which doesn't exist in NCAA-W)

Your right I was thinking about Men's college and high school when I typed that.

In a women's basketball game you could not call this foul after time expires but in a men's college or high school game you could, right?

[truerookie]

[QUOTE=cford]
For those saying that the C had a whistle. The C could NOT have had a whistle because the foul had not yet occurred! The clock stopped before any contact on a foul occurred. Was it the timer? Was it a malfunction?

IMO, when it was all said this is what they went with.

[fullor30]

[QUOTE=truerookie]

Originally Posted by cford

For those saying that the C had a whistle. The C could NOT have had a whistle because the foul had not yet occurred! The clock stopped before any contact on a foul occurred. Was it the timer? Was it a malfunction?

IMO, when it was all said this is what they went with.

As Hawk Harrelson, White Sox announcer would say, "This ball game is ovah!"