NCAA Tourney - Marquette v. Missouri

[grunewar]

2) The Marquette player didn't step ON the endline, he clearly stepped OVER the endline by several inches. It was a great call backed up by the replay. T was all over it. The Marquette coach apparently was looking for an off-ball foul prior to the violation (my interpretation of his demonstrative behavior).

The game certainly had an exciting ending! Surely it was March Madness.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by grunewar

2) The Marquette player didn't step ON the endline, he clearly stepped OVER the endline by several inches. It was a great call backed up by the replay. T was all over it. The Marquette coach apparently was looking for an off-ball foul prior to the violation (my interpretation of his demonstrative behavior).

Actually, I believe after the violation, which was undeniable, the coach was telling his team: "We have to foul."

[zm1283]

Originally Posted by actuary77

2) Is it really a throw-in violation when the player inbounding the ball stepped on the end line? The color commentator was pretty emphatic about it, but I couldn't find it in the rules.

I'm a HS official and I know that in HS, this is NOT a violation, at least not when it's after a field goal. The most you can do is stop the play and do a repeat of the throw-in.

Thanks.

As others have asked, why would you stop the play and repeat the throw-in even he stepped ON the line? The Marquette player stepped OVER the line, which is a violation in HS and NCAA.

Originally Posted by just another ref

Actually, I believe after the violation, which was undeniable, the coach was telling his team: "We have to foul."

That is what I got from it also. He was telling his players to foul immediately.

[Nevadaref]

This was the final game of the weekend for me up in Boise.

There were plenty of situations in it to discuss.

A few things which have not been mentioned so far:

1. Officials consult the monitor regarding a shot clock violation call with 1:13 remaining.

2. The block/charge with 5.5 seconds left.

3. Following the end line violation, Marquette fouls. The clock stops a bit slow. Marquette HC gesturing wildly and doing jumping jacks on the court to get the attention of the officials. They see him. He points to his wrist. One of the officials gives the same gesture in return. The first FT is then attempted. After it is successful the Marquette HC takes a time-out and when the officials come over, he is able to get them to check the monitor for the game clock. It is reset from 4.4 to 5.0 and then the 2nd FT is attempted.

4. The inadvertant whistle with 36.1 seconds remaining in the first half.

[GoodwillRef]

1. Officials can go to the monitor to see if the ball hit the rim...this was the correct call and procedure.

2. This was an obvious blocking foul on Marquette.

3. I thought they handled this well...they had a few clock issues in the game...out of the officials control.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by GoodwillRef

1. Officials can go to the monitor to see if the ball hit the rim...this was the correct call and procedure.

Really??? Never seen that in the book. If I've missed it, please point it out to me.

I don't know exactly what John Adams told the guys about using the monitor prior to the start of the tournament, but I'll ask some people and try to find out. I've heard that he addressed it.

However, here are the pertinent rules:

2-13-3b. Determine whether a shot-clock violation occurred before the reading
of zeros on the game clock at the end of the first half, or at the end
of the second half/extra period only when necessary to determine the
outcome of a game.

2-13-6. The officials shall not use such available equipment for judgment
calls such as:
a. Determine who committed a foul or whether a foul occurred. Exception:
(Men) flagrant foul
b. Determine whether basket interference or goaltending occurred.
c. Determine whether a violation occurred.
d. Whether the ball was released before the sounding of the shot-clock
horn, except as in 2-13.3.b.

2-11-12. Allow the game officials to make the final decision when there
is doubt as to whether a score was made within the shot-clock period or
whether a try for goal contacted the ring or flange.
a. When there is doubt whether a score was made within the shot-clock
period or whether a try for goal contacted the ring or flange, any
activity before the next live ball shall be canceled, with the exception
of any flagrant foul, intentional foul or technical foul.

2-11-9. Sound the shot-clock horn at the expiration of the shot-clock period.
This shot-clock horn shall not stop play unless recognized by an official’s
whistle. When the shot clock indicates zeros but the shot-clock horn has not
sounded, the shot-clock time has not expired.

(Sitting in the gym, it appeared that the put-back was after the clock showed zero, but was released prior to the horn sounding. Of course, sound echos in an arena and that is a tough determination to make.)

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

This was the final game of the weekend for me up in Boise.

There were plenty of situations in it to discuss.

A few things which have not been mentioned so far:

1. Officials consult the monitor regarding a shot clock violation call with 1:13 remaining.

2. The block/charge with 5.5 seconds left.

3. Following the end line violation, Marquette fouls. The clock stops a bit slow. Marquette HC gesturing wildly and doing jumping jacks on the court to get the attention of the officials. They see him. He points to his wrist. One of the officials gives the same gesture in return. The first FT is then attempted. After it is successful the Marquette HC takes a time-out and when the officials come over, he is able to get them to check the monitor for the game clock. It is reset from 4.4 to 5.0 and then the 2nd FT is attempted.

4. The inadvertant whistle with 36.1 seconds remaining in the first half.

1) They checked to see if the ball hit the rim. It didn't and the clock expired before the put back by Marquette.

2) Block call was correct.

3) I was wondering what the HC was excited about.

4) Didn't see the 1st half

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

4. The inadvertant whistle with 36.1 seconds remaining in the first half.

Furthermore, it seemed to me that this whistle was sounded because one of the officials got confused by the clock continuing to run following the made goal by Missouri. He had to be thinking of the rule for the 2nd half.
However, there was a quick discussion about whether or not to permit substitutions by both teams following this whistle. The crew got it right and allowed the subs to enter. Again that restriction only applies in the 2nd half or OT.


Rule 3, Section 4
Art. 6. Substitutions shall not be permitted when the game clock has been
stopped after successful field goals in the last 59.9 seconds of the second half
or any extra period and before the clock has been properly started except for the
following:
a. Those substitutions permitted by rule including, but not limited to,
injury, blood, violation, foul, disqualification, timeout , or for a lost,
displaced or irritated contact lens or displaced eyeglasses. There shall be
no substitutions during the dead ball period when the clock is stopped to
correct a timing mistake or for an inadvertent whistle. After the clock has
been properly started following a made basket, then all substitution rules
apply.

[grunewar]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Actually, I believe after the violation, which was undeniable, the coach was telling his team: "We have to foul."

JAR, could be.

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Marquette HC gesturing wildly and doing jumping jacks on the court to get the attention of the officials. They see him. He points to his wrist.

I tell you what though, in several of those games where it came down to the end and controversial calls, some of those coaches were way, way out on the court!

[GoodwillRef]

Originally Posted by grunewar

JAR, could be.

I tell you what though, in several of those games where it came down to the end and controversial calls, some of those coaches were way, way out on the court!

The Marquette Coach Buzz Williams lost his mind at the end of the game.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by GoodwillRef

The Marquette Coach Buzz Williams lost his mind at the end of the game.

Watching in silence, I thought he was gonna get a T when he didn't get that foul call he wanted on his out of control shooter.
And I agree the block call was spot on; defender was moving into the shooter when contact was made.

[GoodwillRef]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Watching in silence, I thought he was gonna get a T when he didn't get that foul call he wanted on his out of control shooter.
And I agree the block call was spot on; defender was moving into the shooter when contact was made.

HC for Marquette did a good job of putting his hand over his mouth while dropping f*Bombs on the referees during the last few seconds of the game.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by GoodwillRef

HC for Marquette did a good job of putting his hand over his mouth while dropping f*Bombs on the referees during the last few seconds of the game.

I saw he had his hand over his mouth; figured he was shouting instructions to his players. Thought for sure he was gonna get a T.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by GoodwillRef

HC for Marquette did a good job of putting his hand over his mouth while dropping f*Bombs on the referees during the last few seconds of the game.

How do we know what he was saying to the official?

Peace

[Adam]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Actually, I believe after the violation, which was undeniable, the coach was telling his team: "We have to foul."

Exactly what I saw. I loved the call, but couldn't hear the announcers on it since we were at a restaurant.

My daughter ratted me out as soon as we sat down. "Dad, it's perfect for you, a big screen TV." Wife hadn't noticed yet.

"Do we need to switch places?"

"No, I'm good."