Two mistakes by the G'town/S. FL crew

[Nevadaref]

The crew in the G'town/S. FL game this morning at MSG didn't have a great performance. It didn't impact the outcome as the Hoyas won by 20, but they made two fairly serious errors.

1. In the early part of the 2nd half G'town made a jumpshot from the wing which the convering official clearly marks as a two. The shooter had the edge of his shoe just barely touching the arc. S. FL inbounded and went to the other end where one of its players was fouled and awarded FTs. The first FT was successful. At this point the officials decided to consult the monitor and have a look at the previous jumpshot to clarify if it was worth 2pts or 3pts. I guess when you work at MSG in the 2nd round of the Big East Conf. tourney, you can ignore the rule governing the CE timeframe.

2. Vaughn fouled out with 9:10 remaining and Monroe was on the bench with four fouls, so in comes the 3rd string center, Sims, who rarely plays. Shortly thereafter S. FL attempts a four footer and Sims extends his hand up through the ring from below and blocks the approaching try for goal. No whistle. It was pretty obvious as the net was pushed up by his hand. Stan Heath seemed so dumbfounded that the violation was missed that although he argued, he couldn't really throw a tantrum. He was just in disbelief.

[Judtech]

I was trying to figure out if their was a change in the uniform rules during the Quinnipiac/Robert Morris Game. Some players were wearing white shirts under yellow jersey's and some were wearing yellow shirts under yellow jersey's

[Fan10]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

1. In the early part of the 2nd half G'town made a jumpshot from the wing which the convering official clearly marks as a two. The shooter had the edge of his shoe just barely touching the arc. S. FL inbounded and went to the other end where one of its players was fouled and awarded FTs. The first FT was successful. At this point the officials decided to consult the monitor and have a look at the previous jumpshot to clarify if it was worth 2pts or 3pts. I guess when you work at MSG in the 2nd round of the Big East Conf. tourney, you can ignore the rule governing the CE timeframe.

I'm just a fan here, but does shooting the first of two free throws constitute "the second live ball?"

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Fan10

I'm just a fan here, but does shooting the first of two free throws constitute "the second live ball?"

Absolutely. You got it. After the ball becomes live for that FT attempt it is too late to correct the possible error in the value of the previous try.

[Fan10]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Absolutely. You got it. After the ball becomes live for that FT attempt it is too late to correct the possible error in the value of the previous try.

Got you. I knew that it had to be before the second live ball, but I was thinking that since the clock was still stopped, the ball was still dead. I wonder if that's what the crew was thinking.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Fan10

Got you. I knew that it had to be before the second live ball, but I was thinking that since the clock was still stopped, the ball was still dead. I wonder if that's what the crew was thinking.

Believe me, guys at the D1 level know the basics of live/dead ball.

They either got caught up in the moment and forgot to consider if they could still correct this before going over for a look or simply decided to try to do it anyway and justify it later as "it was the right thing to do" or "it was technically a bit late to fix that, but getting the proper value was more important than following the rule to the letter." In other words try to couch it as a spirit of the rule situation. I can't bring myself to agree with that type of reasoning.

I can forgive just about any error in judgment, but imo failing to administer the game correctly is inexcusable.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

.... he couldn't really through a tantrum.

He had to stay outside the tantrum?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by just another ref

He had to stay outside the tantrum?

Grumble, grumble...the consequence of posting while tired. Fixed now.

[NewNCref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

1. In the early part of the 2nd half G'town made a jumpshot from the wing which the convering official clearly marks as a two. The shooter had the edge of his shoe just barely touching the arc. S. FL inbounded and went to the other end where one of its players was fouled and awarded FTs. The first FT was successful. At this point the officials decided to consult the monitor and have a look at the previous jumpshot to clarify if it was worth 2pts or 3pts. I guess when you work at MSG in the 2nd round of the Big East Conf. tourney, you can ignore the rule governing the CE timeframe.

If I am reading the NCAA book correctly, this was actually handled correctly. I'll copy the two pertinent rules here.

Rule 2, Section 12, Art. 1. The correctable errors are as follows:
...
e. Erroneously counting or canceling a score.
Note: In order for this to be a correctable error, the official must have
erred in counting or canceling a successful try for goal according to a
rule (i.e., after basket interference or goaltending, incorrectly counting
or failing to cancel a score or counting a three-point goal instead of
a two-point goal). A correctable error does not involve an error in
judgment.

Rule 2, Section 13, Art 2. Officials may use such available equipment only in the following
situations:
...
b. Scoring.
1 Determine whether a try for goal was a two- or three-point
attempt.
2. Prevent or rectify a scoring mistake by the scorer.
3. Determine whether a score was erroneously counted or canceled
as per 2-12.1.e.

Now, per my reading, if the officials simply declare it to be a 2-pointer by their judgement, then they may go to the monitor AT ANY TIME to determine whether it was a 2-pointer or a 3-pointer. On the other hand, had they done something like (and excuse the hyperbole, but it's the only real example I can think of) say that a shot released from behind the 3-point line and on which the defense commits basket interference can only count for 2, then that would be a correctable error situation.

In the interest of full disclosure, however, I do not officiate at the college level, and perhaps there are rulings or interpretations that have been released contrary to my reading. If so, I'm sure I'll be corrected soon.

[Nevadaref]

No, that is not the correct understanding of how the CE rule works.

Note the rule specifying the 2nd live ball time-line.

[Adam]

The only way this is correctable at any time is if the scorer had made the error and not put up the number of points indicated by the officials. That makes it a scorer's error.

[sseltser]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

No, that is not the correct understanding of how the CE rule works.

Note the rule specifying the 2nd live ball time-line.

I believe that NCref is claiming that this isn't a CE. Note how 2-13-2-b-3 specifically references the CE rule, while 2-13-2-b-1 does not. This tells me that 2-13-2-b-1, namely using video to determine if a shot is a 2 or 3, is not a CE. I'm still not aware of what, if any, is the time limit, if this is the case.

Additionally, this is an "error in judgment" which according to 2-12-1-e can not be a CE.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by sseltser

I believe that NCref is claiming that this isn't a CE. Note how 2-13-2-b-3 specifically references the CE rule, while 2-13-2-b-1 does not. This tells me that 2-13-2-b-1, namely using video to determine if a shot is a 2 or 3, is not a CE. I'm still not aware of what, if any, is the time limit, if this is the case.

Additionally, this is an "error in judgment" which according to 2-12-1-e can not be a CE.

2/3 pt shots do fall under Correctable Errors:
2.12.1e. Erroneously counting or canceling a score.
Note: In order for this to be a correctable error, the official must have erred in counting or canceling a successful try for goal according to a rule (i.e., after basket interference or goaltending, incorrectly counting or failing to cancel a score or counting a three-point goal instead of a two-point goal). A correctable error does not involve an error in judgment.

2/3 pt shots are not part of the excluded list:
2.13 Art. 7. 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:
A flagrant foul
b. Determine whether basket interference or goaltending occurred.
c. Determine whether a violation occurred.
d. Determine whether the ball was released before the sounding of the shotclock horn, except as in 2-13.3.b.

[NewNCref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

No, that is not the correct understanding of how the CE rule works.

Note the rule specifying the 2nd live ball time-line.

I guess where I'm getting hung up is the part that says a correctable error is not an error in judgement, which would seem to suggest to me that the case you've mentioned is not in fact considered a correctable error.

[jalons]

Originally Posted by NewNCref

I guess where I'm getting hung up is the part that says a correctable error is not an error in judgement, which would seem to suggest to me that the case you've mentioned is not in fact considered a correctable error.

The NCAA rulebook has a section dealing specifically with the use of the monitor (2-13). The time frame for using the monitor is the same as that of the correctable error. This adds consistency for the officials. The play in question (2/3 point basket) is not a correctable error (NCAA 2-12).