Apparently an oops that has been publicized.

[Juulie Downs]

The story is so clearly biased that there's no way to know if it even gets it's part of the story correct. I can't even imagine calling it reporting. It's an opinion page piece if ever there was one.

[TimTaylor]

Originally Posted by Juulie Downs

The story is so clearly biased that there's no way to know if it even gets it's part of the story correct. I can't even imagine calling it reporting. It's an opinion page piece if ever there was one.

Yeah, it had my "BS" detector twitching pretty hard......

As others have said, way too much missing information....

[Amesman]

Originally Posted by Juulie Downs

The story is so clearly biased that there's no way to know if it even gets it's part of the story correct. I can't even imagine calling it reporting. It's an opinion page piece if ever there was one.

Respectfully disagree here, Juuuulie. Once you get past the "sick to the stomach" "with good reason" lead (a doozy), I thought the reporter did a pretty good job of recounting what happened -- with the exception of letting us know when/how/if the ball was touched on the inbounding play. That and possibly the "reasonable" arguments phrase (how does he know if the coach has reasonable arguments unless he goes to some authority or is an authority to speak out?).

When I skimmed by the lead paragraph (which I did somehow the first time), I didn't know which of the teams might have been in his paper's main circulation area (or if both are). The reporter is complimentary to both sides' players. And he also sought comment from both coaches, etc.

When I first read it, I thought the losing team might have actually inbounded the ball and THEN made a long throw across the division line (still a possibility because of the info gap).

And, sorry, but if this is such a high-profile game to report about, the officials' names are fair game. To truly neutral observers, it tells them veterans were on the call and likely got it right. You leave out "veterans" and it casts a different light.

Like others, my main quibble is the reporter apparently didn't try to find out from an official (either working the game or in his Rolodex) what the official reasoning was. But then again, he might not have had the time. A follow-up article, even small, would be appropriate to clear it up in readers (and participants') minds. It happens all the time in many news outlets. So far, it appears there's been none.

[gslefeb]

During the throw in - if the ball was in the air and the officials blew the whistle, this would go to POI - which in this case would be the AP correct, resetting the clock to 3secs?

If the officials waited until possession in bounds, then the POI is team A's ball out of bounds closest spot, with some time needing to come off the clock for the catch. Therefore, Team A ball - reset clock to 2.7 secs (3 secs minus the .3 for the catch).

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by gslefeb

During the throw in - if the ball was in the air and the officials blew the whistle, this would go to POI - which in this case would be the AP correct, resetting the clock to 3secs?

Why AP for this accidental whistle? Although there is no team control, the throw-in is not complete yet. I'm redoing the throw-in.

[Amesman]

Any chance one of our New York group members here can inquire as to the missing information on this scenario and fill us in?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by gslefeb

During the throw in - if the ball was in the air and the officials blew the whistle, this would go to POI - which in this case would be the AP correct, resetting the clock to 3secs?

If the officials waited until possession in bounds, then the POI is team A's ball out of bounds closest spot, with some time needing to come off the clock for the catch. Therefore, Team A ball - reset clock to 2.7 secs (3 secs minus the .3 for the catch).

Without regard to the clock, accidental whistles are always POI.

Consider this, though. What if A1 was still holding the ball for the throw in when the accidental whistle blew? No team control, so would you go AP? Of course not, because it's during a throw in. The same concept still applies if the throw has been released but not touched; POI is the throw in.

[gslefeb]

mbyron thanks: 4-36-2b

So would the throw in be at the end line or closest spot to where the ball was? 3secs back on the clock?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by gslefeb

mbyron thanks: 4-36-2b

So would the throw in be at the end line or closest spot to where the ball was? 3secs back on the clock?

The key here is to define ball location.

Go back to the end line and put all the time back on.

[Amesman]

Got a hold of the reporter who wrote the article in question and it cleared up a lot. I'll post his e-mails below.

But overall, it sounds like our striped brethren nailed it (though I told the reporter I'd get full confirmation here -- sounds like he's sharp and willing to learn) and an inattentive clock operator needs a talkin'-to.

From the reporter:

"TI inbounded the ball under the basket and the kid threw the ball toward mid-court. Two or three players on each side jumped for the ball and I believe several kids touched it. The Hanrahan kid looked like he might have outjumped everybody for ball, but the horn sounded I believe before he had possession. LaLonde [his coach] thought otherwise.

"But the only way to be sure is if there was a replay, which of course there wasn’t. I was not aware of the rule that a clock malfunction was the same as an inadvertent whistle, but I bowed to the officials who both are among the best in our area. On the surface, it didn’t seem fair for Thousand Islands not to get the ball back. But If it’s a rule, it’s a rule. The fact that TI allowed the South Jeff kid to make a lay-up at the end was probably overlooked.

"If you have any input I’d appreciate a note back.

"And, yes, it was difficult to describe all that happened in those final frantic seconds. And as you said, it was a difficult game to officiate because both teams were going to the basket hard. But the officiating had nothing to do with the outcome.

"Here’s what I was told about the horn.

"There was a timeout with three seconds left. The clock operator set the automatic timer for the timeout, but then forgot to turn it off before the timeout was over. Thus, the timeout horn went off when the ball was in the air. The TI fans booed the officials for that call. They should have gone after their own clock man.

"It’s just a good thing this didn’t happen at South Jefferson."