SC 4A Final - you make the call

[Gimlet25id]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

Thanks for the youtube link, it's the first I've actually been able to see the play.

It's about as close as close can get - my impression of the video is that the shot probably was off in time, but no way to tell for sure due to the quality of video.

Those are outstanding officials that got that game (biggest class boys championship gets the "highest rated" around here), and I'm sure they made the call based on all the evidence they had.

Its amazing to me how easy it is to call a play like this from the comfort of my lounge chair with the ability to stop/play, stop/play. You most definitely cannot fault the officials for a play that is this close without the ability to go to a courtside monitor for either ruling it go or not, IMO.

If you look @ the Youtube video and pause it @ the 38 second mark, then play/pause all the way up until the shot is released you can see the ball in the air while the LED lights are not on around the backboard.

Again this is with us slowing a real time play down & watching it over and over again to see. IMO, this would be next to impossible to know for sure if it was good or not. I'm not saying they guessed, I'm just saying that as close as the play was it could've went either way.

[socalreff]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

That reference has little or nothing to do with the play that took place. The official got together because not only did the play decide the state finals title, they wanted to be sure someone else did not have another angle. And what evidence do you have that they were not sure the goal should not have counted. They got together and made a decision. I must be missing something here.

Peace

Really?!?! It has nothing to do with this play? This play is exactly why that specific language is in the book. Do you honestly believe there's any chance they were sure it wasn't released in time? There's really no way that could be the case since the replay showed he got it off. And the verbiage is in the book to back the officials in cases like this. If you're not sure, count it. I had a play just like that this season and we counted the basket exactly because we had no definite knowledge that it wasn't good.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by socalreff

Really?!?! It has nothing to do with this play? This play is exactly why that specific language is in the book.

How do you know there is doubt? Did you talk to the officials after the game? Did you read their minds based on the video?

Originally Posted by socalreff

Do you honestly believe there's any chance they were sure it wasn't released in time? There's really no way that could be the case since the replay showed he got it off.

The replay was not a very good angle. Near the floor with being almost a half court away is not a very good angle to determine much of anything. Not even the angle the officials would have had to make the call.

Originally Posted by socalreff

And the verbiage is in the book to back the officials in cases like this. If you're not sure, count it. I had a play just like that this season and we counted the basket exactly because we had no definite knowledge that it wasn't good.

Well you need to go back and read the rulebook. The rule only says the Referee makes a decision if the calling officials disagree. There is no evidence of a disagreement. Did the officials make two different signals? Did the official argue as to what should happen? You have no idea unless you have some kind of conversation with the guys after the game. And there is no evidence that they are totally unsure of the result of the basket. It looks to me that the calling official did not want to put such a call on his shoulders and his shoulders alone and they all got together to help with another angle. I completely commend them for doing so. We are not the officials on the court. The officials on the court I am sure had a different take on the play and what they saw on a video. And the angle is so bad that even if you can see the play more clearly, it is still not the best angle to determine the result of such a close play.

Peace

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by socalreff

And the verbiage is in the book to back the officials in cases like this. If you're not sure, count it.

And if they ARE sure that it was too late, they don't count it. The officials got together and they were sure it was too late. That's why your cite is completely irrelevant.

See rule 2-5-3. Note that this article only comes into play IF the officials disagree. Quite obviously the officials DIDN'T disagree. They waved the basket off.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

. The rule only says the Referee makes a decision if the calling officials disagree. There is no evidence of a disagreement.

Bingo!

[Nevadaref]

When I saw the video on the news website, I thought that the shot was late.
After seeing it on youtube, I believe the opposite. I was able to pause the clip at 33 seconds and the ball is definitely in flight.

Tough call. Big call. Very close.

[JoeTheRef]

I can't really tell in the video, but can anyone say with certainty that the ball was out of his hands before the horn? The rule is clear the quarter ends at the sound of the horn. In the video it appears that the ball was clearly in flight when the horn went off and one of official was is in perfect position to see that because he was even with the ball when it was going over half court and the horn sounds.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by socalreff

For someone who knows the rules as well as you do, that's a surprising response. Directly from the book:
"When the evidence for counting or not counting the goal is equal, the referee shall rule that the goal counts."

Please provide a RULE reference where I can find this quote.

Originally Posted by socalreff

Really?!?! It has nothing to do with this play? This play is exactly why that specific language is in the book. Do you honestly believe there's any chance they were sure it wasn't released in time? There's really no way that could be the case since the replay showed he got it off. And the verbiage is in the book to back the officials in cases like this. If you're not sure, count it. I had a play just like that this season and we counted the basket exactly because we had no definite knowledge that it wasn't good.

Looking at the slo-mo replay, the center official clearly comes across the floor and is emphatically waving the shot off. So I have no idea why you think they were guessing.

[canuckrefguy]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Maybe we can generate 15 pages hounding these officials, making assumptions (ie "they guessed"), and second guessing these guys, who got assigned a state final game, on a play they had to decide on the spot without benefit of instant replay repeated over and over again in slow motion.

Originally Posted by rainmaker

Well, sure, why not? Sounds like more fun than calling each other misogynists, fanboys, Donaghys, bus-runners, etc. Let's gang up on a couple of random refs who aren't here to defend themselves. Yup, yup, yup.

Here, here.

[lpbreeze]

I wish they would make some sort of tv/video exception of the big games like State playoffs. Not for the regular season though. I'm not sure if the equipment was there for that game. The video could have been shot by a fan so that would not be allowed. Instead the refs are put in a very tough place and are forced to decide a victor. Sorry, but I don't buy that refs don't decide the game argument. They did in this case and it looks like they got it wrong although I can't fault them for it because it was such a difficult call. If they could have reviewed it perhaps they would have overturned it. Only reviews for a few types of plays.

---FoxSpots here in California were showing the high school state games on tv and they had highlights. It was obvious on a play the ball did not cross the line for a touchdown. They did it in slow motion. If there is access then why not use it in a very limited fashion?

[socalreff]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Looking at the slo-mo replay, the center official clearly comes across the floor and is emphatically waving the shot off. So I have no idea why you think they were guessing.

Have you ever had a call that you thought you nailed and then looked at it on tape and were clearly wrong? When this has happened to me, and I try to review as many of my games as possible, I say I must have guessed.
The one reason I say they were guessing is because they got it wrong. The ball was clearly in flight before the LED light and the horn. And I'm not saying they should have known for sure either way.... it was a highly unusual play with a quick release from 80 feet. We all get plays wrong. All I was doing was using book language to back what I have done and will continue to do in those situations. I had a double overtime game this year and we had buzzer beater shots at the end of regulation to tie it, 1st overtime to tie it, and the 2nd overtime to win it. On first one, the gym was so loud no one on the crew could hear the horn and it was so close that we had no definite knowledge it shouldn't count, so we counted it. 2nd shot we had definite knowledge as the ball was released with .4 and the 3rd was released with .3 on the clock.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by socalreff

.... it was a highly unusual play with a quick release from 80 feet.

I think this is the key to the whole thing. C is ahead of the play, not sure which way he was looking. T is on the opposite side of the court, probably with no angle to peek at a clock in anticipation of this shot. Moreover, I would guess that everybody's first thought, including the officials, was, "WOW, HE MADE IT!"
even before they thought, "Was it in time?"

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by socalreff

Have you ever had a call that you thought you nailed and then looked at it on tape and were clearly wrong? When this has happened to me, and I try to review as many of my games as possible, I say I must have guessed.

What does any of this have to do with how the officials came to their conclusion on this call? They could not review tape. Even if there was using college rules, the tape would not be at this angle or on the floor 50 feet away from the play.

Originally Posted by socalreff

The one reason I say they were guessing is because they got it wrong. The ball was clearly in flight before the LED light and the horn.

Clearly is not a word I would use in this case.

Originally Posted by socalreff

And I'm not saying they should have known for sure either way.... it was a highly unusual play with a quick release from 80 feet. We all get plays wrong. All I was doing was using book language to back what I have done and will continue to do in those situations.

Some of us are still waiting for that rules reference you claim you quoted.

Originally Posted by socalreff

I had a double overtime game this year and we had buzzer beater shots at the end of regulation to tie it, 1st overtime to tie it, and the 2nd overtime to win it. On first one, the gym was so loud no one on the crew could hear the horn and it was so close that we had no definite knowledge it shouldn't count, so we counted it. 2nd shot we had definite knowledge as the ball was released with .4 and the 3rd was released with .3 on the clock.

Where is the rules reference to back that up? Because there is nothing in any rule I have seen that says you can count a basket just because you are not sure. You pulled that out of the sky. That is why you have yet to show the reference yet.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Because there is nothing in any rule I have seen that says you can count a basket just because you are not sure. You pulled that out of the sky. That is why you have yet to show the reference yet.

It depends who "you" is. If "you" means table crew, there is such a NFHS rule. If the crowd noise is so loud that the officials can't hear the horn, then they try to get help from the table. If the crew at the table can't agree, then use Rule 2-13: If table officials disagree, the goal shall count and/or the foul shall be penalized, unless the referee has knowledge which alters such ruling.

[just another ref]

In this case, the horn did sound. We have no indication that trouble hearing the horn was any part of the problem.