This bothers me:
"To the naked eye, it was hard to determine whether any player had touched the ball, or any player had possession when the horn went off. The protest committee was not allowed to look at a film of the final seconds, according to Kowalick. "You can only protest the rule, not a judgment call by the officials," he said."

The correct ruling depends on if the ball was touched (throw-in ended) before the "inadvertent whistle". Film would confirm it either way. Touched = officials got it right. Not touched = they got it wrong. Any testimony is just worthless, biased opinion.

Confusing. How can they impose a rule if they (apparently) don't know what the judgment call was -- and aren't willing to look at it on film that is available? Two-out-of-three, indeed. One way or another, it doesn't sound like the officials are getting much support. :mad:

Again, we seem to not have all the information. If the officials gave their side of the story and why they did what they did, then the only question should be whether they applied the rule correctly based on what they judged (was the ball touched or wasn't it) occurred.

Strange.

Sounds like a potential re-enactment of the '72 Olympics basketball final.