![]() |
Shot clock violation in Pitt-Xavier Game
Are possible shot clock violations reviewable by video?
If they went to the monitor, they would see clearly that they missed the call on the court. Can they correct this? |
I saw the play too and thought it was a violation.
I'm not familiar enough w/ NCAA rules however to know the answer, but I would think it's not reviewable. |
I'm pretty sure it's not reviewable.
|
They can determine if there is a malfunction with the shot clock. I am not sure that took place here though.
Peace |
Quote:
|
Shouldn't the horn and "0" be simultaneous since they don't show tenths of a second?
And if you watch the replay, you can clearly see the ball still in contact with the player's hand well after the clock hits zero. |
I've been told by a few D1 officials about this and the sentiment is this:
They must state that the crew is going to the monitor to review a "timing error;" not for a violation. They can then check to see if the ball hit the rim or not. It's a technicality on words by saying they are checking a timing error. Rule 2 Sec 13 Art 2c Timing 4. Determine whether the shot clock failed to properly start, stop, set or reset or that the shot clock has malfunctioned. Determination is based on the judgment of the official. The mistake or malfunctioning problem may only be corrected in the shot clock period in which it occurred. Any activity after the mistake or malfunction has been committed and until it has been rectified shall be canceled, excluding a flagrant personal foul, intentional personal foul or any technical foul. |
Quote:
|
Watch this video.
YouTube - Kyle Korver Beats the Shot Clock to Ice the Game for the Jazz I know it's NBA, but 0 and horn sure seem simultaneous to me. |
They didn't show a real-time replay and the TV I was watching on didn't have DVR, so I couldn't rewind it.
The slow-motion replay showed there were at least 3 frames between 0 and the release of the shot. Not sure how much time that equates to, but that kind of play could have a real impact on the game. The play in question gave Xavier a one point lead at the time, and the way that game was going, it very well could have stayed a one point game. If this sort of play isn't reviewable, I think it should be. They shouldn't have to find a loophole in the rules to get a call right. |
Not reviewable unless the game clock shows 0:00
Here's the NCAA rule that says that this call is *not* reviewable:
2-13.6 The officials shall not use such available equipment for judgment calls such as: d. Whether the ball was released before the sounding of the shot-clock horn, except as in 2-13.3.b. The exception only occurs where there are zeros on the game clock: 2-13.3 When there is a reading of zeros on the game clock and after making a call on the playing court, the officials shall use such available equipment in the following situations: b. 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. |
Thanks for that citation, Lotto.
i still think they should look at changing this rule, because many times, it's clear one way or the other. With HD technology being pretty prevalent, I would bet they would be able to get this call correct nearly 100% of the time |
Quote:
|
Quote:
At least according to a lenghty explanation given on eofficials in discussing the answer to one of this season's NCAAW quiz questions. Frankly, I think there's way too much review. Lots of calls happen (or don't happen) during a game -- the teams need to "overcome" those calls. Only calls that happen at the end of the game (and I admit it's tough to come up with a specific definition of this), where the team doesn't have a chance to "overcome" it should be allowed. |
Quote:
There is alot of review, and this is a debate that could go on for days, so I'll just throw in my 2 cents now. There is alot of review, in all sports. Even baseball has succumbed to reviewing a certain play. Some don't like how much review there is. But there's an increasing desire to get the calls right. If you have the technology, why not review it and make sure you get the correct call? That way, you don't have people wondering, "what if?". You know you've got the right call, and you can move on. |
Quote:
|
I think there's a difference in reviewing fouls because they aren't black and white like whether or not the ball was in or out of the shooter's hand before the clock hits 0.
|
It's good being able to comment on these situations now from down under. We've recently launched a new 24/7 sports channel, and I get to see a fair bit of NCAA.
Just thought I'd chime in and say that the ball definitely hadn't left his hand. I don't know your rules though... |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
High school? Not a chance. Violations should not be reviewable. You gonna add whether or not he stepped on the line to the list of reviewable plays? |
An interesting point that is not really directly responsive to the question here, but it's about the game and shot clocks in NCAA.
The game clock usually shows less time on the clock than there really is in the game, until zero. The shot clock shows more time than is usually on the shot clock. For example, when the game clock shows 11:11, there is really MORE than (or exactly equal to) 11:11 on the clock -- maybe as much as .99 seconds. The best way to see this visually is at the beginning of the game, when the clock ticks from 20:00 to 19:59 immediately, not in one second. You see it again when the clock goes to tenths of a second. The clock lingers on 1:00 for a full second before showing 59.9. The reason is that while the clock is showing 1:00, the amount of time left is really between 1:01 and 1:00. In other words, the game clock is always rounding down to the nearest second (or in the last minute to the nearest tenth). The shot clock is different. You don't see the second tick off UNTIL the second is actually expired. So, unlike the game clock, when the shot clock is started, it takes a full second before it goes from 35 to 34. This is why, for example, you can see the odd situation where the game clock shows 34.5, but the shot clock still shows 35. It seems the shot clock should be off at the point, but not really. The true time left on the shot clock might really only be 34.2, even though it shows 35, because it doesn't tick down to 34 until it gets to 34. Very long winded way of saying that the shot clock horn should always be simultaneous with 0, because as soon as it says zero, there is no more time in the 35 seconds. |
actually....
Quote:
They don't state a reasoning, but it's likely because not all shot clocks operate the same (different manufacturers). The most obvious solution will be to include tenths of seconds on shot clocks, but it may not happen for quite a while. We discussed this here: http://forum.officiating.com/basketb...k-no-horn.html |
Quote:
As an example, I've worked at two different D-I schools, each of which has the shot clock set to automatically turn off when there is less time on the game clock than on the shot clock. At one school, the shot clock turns off when there are 35.9 seconds on the clock, at another, it doesn't turn off until 35.0. |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:12pm. |