Foul call at end of Cinci/UConn game

[Nevadaref]

John Cahill just whistled a critical one against #33 of UConn right at the end of the 2nd half. Score tied at 69 and under a second left.
Upon replay the action looked awkward, but not illegal. I have to wonder how good of a look he had from his position as the Lead.

Upon checking the monitor, the crew put 0.7 on the clock and administered 2 FTs. Obviously, the decision of the foul cannot be reviewed and the crew was only looking at the clock, which I believe was handled properly given the determination that a foul occurred.

Anyone else see the end of this game? What are your thoughts on the decision?

Note: The Cinci player made both FTs and they won the game 71-69.

[KJUmp]

Watched it. Thought the whole crew handled the game well, esp. at the end...although I'm not versed in NCAA mechanics. The crew had to go to the monitor 2 other times during the game (at end of 1st half & in 2nd half on a shot clock reset issue).
(BTW..I'm a UConn fan.)

[Bad Zebra]

I thought Cahill had a marginal view of the shot as well. Pretty tough call against UConn at that point. Looked to me like Edwards got all ball or if he did get some contact on the shooter, it was the hand-on-ball. My first thought was "crap, he just screwed UConn" who had hit a clutch three to tie it a few seconds before. But they blew enough free throws to screw themselves. From a management perspective, they looked like they handled it well.

Disclaimer: I'm a Huskies fan.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Bad Zebra

I thought Cahill had a marginal view of the shot as well. Pretty tough call against UConn at that point. Looked to me like Edwards got all ball or if he did get some contact on the shooter, it was the hand-on-ball.

My take too..after viewing all the replays that they showed also.

Kind of a wierd call in a game with so much contact being let go.

Disclaimer: I don't like either team. If they both hadda lost, I'd have been happy.

[truerookie]

Being twenty feet from the T.V. I thought the call was marginal too.

[Rufus]

Disclaimer - I'm a UConn grad and fan.

I thought the call was marginal as well but justifiable. He may not have had the best look at the call but he sold it (BTW, was anyone else ticked at the ESPN announcer who kept saying "He's calling the second contact! Do you see how his hand goes up at the second, not first, contact?" We're talking fractions of a second and she's wanting instantaneous. Ok, end of rant). Both my son and I thought .7 was a bit of a gift, actually, since it appeared there was only .3 on the clock when the contact occurred (couldn't hear the whistle in the replays).

Personally I thought they missed a play about 30 seconds earlier when the shot clock was reset during a scrum for the ball. They gave the ball back to Cincy with 1 second on the shot clock (and UConn almost let them score with the inbound from backcourt!) so it ended up being not a big deal I guess.

Finally, I agree the crew did a good job overall. On separate plays they called a carry and a throw-in violation (moving beyond 3 foot box - not sure if the rule is the same in NCAA as HS but that's what it looked like) on Cincy that I don't think I've ever seen called in a D1 game before.

[bbcof83]

Originally Posted by Rufus

...
Personally I thought they missed a play about 30 seconds earlier when the shot clock was reset during a scrum for the ball. They gave the ball back to Cincy with 1 second on the shot clock (and UConn almost let them score with the inbound from backcourt!) so it ended up being not a big deal I guess.
...

I thought so too at first but when you think about it, what option did they have? The shot clock hit 1 then was reset to 35 and didn't start right away. It started as the player requested and was granted a TO. Had the operator not screwed up I definitely think it would have been a violation. BUT, definite knowledge is required (I'm not an NCAA guy, but that's the NF rule anyway) and they didn't have it. What they had was a 1 on the shot clock. I think they got it right. That said, I wouldn't have blamed them for calling a violation either but I think they had rules support for the 1 on the clock.

Tough game and that crew did a great job.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

John Cahill just whistled a critical one against #33 of UConn right at the end of the 2nd half. Score tied at 69 and under a second left.
Upon replay the action looked awkward, but not illegal. I have to wonder how good of a look he had from his position as the Lead.

Upon checking the monitor, the crew put 0.7 on the clock and administered 2 FTs. Obviously, the decision of the foul cannot be reviewed and the crew was only looking at the clock, which I believe was handled properly given the determination that a foul occurred.

Anyone else see the end of this game? What are your thoughts on the decision?

Note: The Cinci player made both FTs and they won the game 71-69.

I thought the bump earlier was likely a stronger foul, but one they weren't going to call.

This is a tough call for the L. It's in his primary, but he has a tough look at the jump shot. I gotta say, the best ANGLE probably comes from the center opposite (right through the jump shooter and the defender), but he's along way away and isn't going to reach over there.

He made the call. It was a well-sold call.

[rulesmaven]

Was Cahill primary on the bump earlier in the sequence by number 11 visitors? The play on sportscenter highlights seems weird because I'm not sure how you take a pass on the bump but call the foul on the shot. Seemed like a bad non-call on the bump to me.

Didn't see a good replay on the foul to have any basis to criticize the call. It's John Cahill -- the guy is final four ref multiple times this decade. So, my guess is if I had a camera from his angle, I'd see it too. That said, I understand he has some very tumultuous history with Calhoun, so I doubt he was all that bummed about the foul or the opportunity to miss overtime on the night before new year's eve.

[Rufus]

Originally Posted by bbcof83

I thought so too at first but when you think about it, what option did they have? The shot clock hit 1 then was reset to 35 and didn't start right away. It started as the player requested and was granted a TO. Had the operator not screwed up I definitely think it would have been a violation. BUT, definite knowledge is required (I'm not an NCAA guy, but that's the NF rule anyway) and they didn't have it. What they had was a 1 on the shot clock. I think they got it right. That said, I wouldn't have blamed them for calling a violation either but I think they had rules support for the 1 on the clock.

Tough game and that crew did a great job.

I agree and should have been more specific in that while they seemed to miss the call (or the person operating the shot clock did) they derived a solution that seemed appropriate. Can't speak to whether it actually was or not as I'm not familiar with NCAA rules pertaining to shot clock violations.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Rufus

I agree and should have been more specific in that while they seemed to miss the call (or the person operating the shot clock did) they derived a solution that seemed appropriate. Can't speak to whether it actually was or not as I'm not familiar with NCAA rules pertaining to shot clock violations.

They went by the game clock when consulting the monitor. It is simple to use subtraction and determine what the shot clock would have been had it not been reset.