Big Sky Suspends 3 Men's Officials

[AZ_REF]

From http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200....suspended.ap/ :

HELENA, Mont. (AP) -- The Big Sky Conference has suspended three officials for making an incorrect ruling during a weekend men's basketball game between Montana and Idaho State, league commissioner Doug Fullerton said Monday.

Eric Curry of Minnesota, Bob Scofield of Arizona and Scott Harris of Washington each will be suspended for one game.
ADVERTISEMENT

The Sunday game, held in Pocatello, Idaho, was tied at 58-58 in the final second when a Montana player called for a time-out after securing a rebound.

According to a statement from the league, television replays confirmed the time-out was recognized by the officials before the final horn.

The statement said Montana had used its allotment of time-outs and should have been called for a technical foul, awarding Idaho State two free-throw attempts with time still on the clock. After the technical foul shots, Montana should have taken possession, the statement said.

Instead, the officials ruled that the time-out was recognized simultaneously with the final horn.

Curry, the head official, made the incorrect call, said Jon Kasper, director of media relations for the Big Sky. However, the game was televised, so all three officials had the option to use replay to determine how much time remained when the time-out was recognized.

They chose not to review the play, and Montana won the game 73-62 in overtime.

Reached at his office in Minneapolis on Monday, Curry declined to comment. A message left for a Bob Scofield in Tucson, Ariz., was not immediately returned, and a listed phone number for Harris, of Normandy Park, Wash., could not be found.

"We give officials great flexibility to interpret plays within the rules," Fullerton said. "We never allow officials to set aside a rule. We're not sure whether the game would have ended on the free-throw line, but Idaho State should have been given that opportunity."

The NCAA Men's Basketball Rules Committee does not recognize or allow protests, so the outcome of the game will not change, the statement said.

MY understanding of the play:
Montana secured a rebound with about 1 second left and requested a time out. The lead official knew that they were out of timeouts and ignored the request, however the C came in and got it. As he was hitting his whistle the horn went off. The C (who was also the R) met with his partners and said, I have a timeout simultaneously with the horn, we're going to disregard it and go to OT.

My question to you guys:
Are we correct in ignoring a request for a time out when we know a team is out of them?

Bonus points:
1 of these officials was suspended last year, who was it?

1 of these officials was selected to work both the men's and women's NCAA tournament last year and was told by Mary Struckhoff that he had to choose, he ended up working a 1st round men's game, who was it?

1 of these officials chartered a private jet in order to make an assignment last year, who was it?

If you can answer all 3, you win.

[BktBallRef]

My question to you guys:
Are we correct in ignoring a request for a time out when we know a team is out of them? [/quote]

NO! Definitely not!

[just another ref]

An official should not ignore the request, no matter what he knows or doesn't know. Did the guy confess about ignoring the request? If not, how do they know?

[tjones1]

Originally Posted by just another ref

An official should not ignore the request, no matter what he knows or doesn't know. Did the guy confess about ignoring the request? If not, how do they know?

I believe one of them blew it dead going to grant the timeout. When they got together they decided the request was granted with the horn. In addition, they had the choice of going to the monitor and didn't.

[VTOfficial]

Anyone still remember the 1993 Michigan/North Carolina NCAA championship game? That timeout wasn't ignored.

[lpneck]

I love this play, because of the inherent discussion of "game management" vs. "rulebook" officiating that always occurs on this website.

This is a great example of why it is important to know both.

Here are my points:

1.) If I can get away with ignoring a time-out request by a player on a team that doesn't have one with one second to go in a tie game 84 feet from their basket, you are darn right that good game management dictates to do so and allow the game to go to overtime. We always talk about patient whistles. If I can be patient for one second- bang, time is expired, we're going to OT, and nobody cares.

HOWEVER

2.) Once that discretion has not been utilized, and one of the officials has put air in the whistle, it is too late to take it back. You HAVE to go to the monitor now, and if the whistle blew before time expired, you HAVE to grant the timeout and assess the technical foul and put the appropriate time on the clock.

It seems to me like they tried to have it both ways here and got burned for it. They didn't manage the clock well as time expired, and once they made that mistake, they didn't manage the rule book well either.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by lpneck

1.) If I can get away with ignoring a time-out request by a player on a team that doesn't have one with one second to go in a tie game 84 feet from their basket, you are darn right that good game management dictates to do so and allow the game to go to overtime. We always talk about patient whistles. If I can be patient for one second- bang, time is expired, we're going to OT, and nobody cares.

Following this logic, do you also ignore a last second foul?

[just another ref]

This provokes another question. NFHS rules A1 requests a timeout with time running out in a tie game. The official definitely hears the request before the buzzer, but the buzzer sounds before the whistle. Nobody has definite knowledge of the time involved, but the request was definitely before the buzzer. What's the call?

[mightyvol]

I am going to protest my losing wager that was placed on Idaho St +3.5. I feel robbed.........lol

[lpneck]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Following this logic, do you also ignore a last second foul?

Is that what I said?

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by lpneck

Is that what I said?

You didn't say, that's why I had to ask. You ignore one thing which should be a technical foul, I wondered if you would ignore anything else.

[Mark Dexter]

This press release and the NCAA rulebook tend to indicate that any one of the officials can go look at the monitor. Who's the final arbiter on whether you go to TV or not, though? What if U1 thinks the crew should review something, but R says they shouldn't?

[ca_rumperee]

Originally Posted by lpneck

I love this play, because of the inherent discussion of "game management" vs. "rulebook" officiating that always occurs on this website.

This is a great example of why it is important to know both.

Here are my points:

1.) If I can get away with ignoring a time-out request by a player on a team that doesn't have one with one second to go in a tie game 84 feet from their basket, you are darn right that good game management dictates to do so and allow the game to go to overtime. We always talk about patient whistles. If I can be patient for one second- bang, time is expired, we're going to OT, and nobody cares.

HOWEVER

2.) Once that discretion has not been utilized, and one of the officials has put air in the whistle, it is too late to take it back. You HAVE to go to the monitor now, and if the whistle blew before time expired, you HAVE to grant the timeout and assess the technical foul and put the appropriate time on the clock.

It seems to me like they tried to have it both ways here and got burned for it. They didn't manage the clock well as time expired, and once they made that mistake, they didn't manage the rule book well either.

... not that you have a chance to think this play through!

Excessive Timeout

[MadCityRef]

How many last second-minute fouls have you seen NOT called this year? NCAA or otherwise.

The prevailing thought is not to influence the outcome, let the players decide. But if a player fouls and it's not called, haven't we just influenced the outcome, something we loathe to do?

If a kid travels before making the winning basket, do you call that? What's the difference between that and not calling the foul to put the kid on the line?

[TRef21]

All 3 on this crew are caliber officials.
One of the officials last year worked pretty deep in the tourney.
I don't like to drop names. I don't understand why in a play like that if you have the ability to go the monitor why not do it. Even if you are right, it's better to be safe than sorry.