Cheerleader T Almost Costs Louisville Game....

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by JBleach85

This was a huge mistake that thankfully didn't cost Louisville the game. As for the technical foul it falls under 10.9d under Admin. Fouls, and team followers.

9d: Delaying the game be preventing the ball from being promoptly made live or by preventing continuous play...

That is the reason why it represents a T, because the male cheerleader picked up the ball and threw it in the air.

I understand what happened and the rule reference. But read the rule again. The technical foul is for "DELAYING the game". This cheerleader did not do that. The clock had already expired and the horn had apparently sounded. So there was going to be a delay anyway, while the officials fixed the clock.

The cheerleader's actions do not fall under the rule you cited.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

I understand what happened and the rule reference. But read the rule again. The technical foul is for "DELAYING the game". This cheerleader did not do that. The clock had already expired and the horn had apparently sounded. So there was going to be a delay anyway, while the officials fixed the clock.

The cheerleader's actions do not fall under the rule you cited.

That's if the article is correct in its description of the play. According to Bleach the clock stopped after the made basket, the cheerleader pick up the ball, and then the clock started again. The action by the cheerleader thus prevented Pitt for getting the ball at their disposal.

Guess we need someone to youtube this one for us.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

That's if the article is correct in its description of the play. According to Bleach the clock stopped after the made basket, the cheerleader pick up the ball, and then the clock started again. The action by the cheerleader thus prevented Pitt for getting the ball at their disposal.

Guess we need someone to youtube this one for us.

There's a video at the link in the OP, and it's hard to tell on my screen for sure, but it looks like the timer lets the clock run all the way down after the ball is thrown. So, when it was thrown, the clock was stopped (presumably at .5, it's hard for me to tell).

I can't hear the horn, either, so that's hard to tell.

If that's correct, then you've got the cheerleaders on the court celebrating with time still on the clock.

Now, another question is coaching. Why in the world would he take that shot?

[Jesse James]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Now, another question is coaching. Why in the world would he take that shot?

Yeah, the audacity of a coach to support a break-away gimme to make it a two possession game with fractional time left.

Pitino should have foreseen this flaming meteor.

Good grief.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Jesse James

Yeah, the audacity of a coach to support a break-away gimme to make it a two possession game with fractional time left.

Pitino should have foreseen this flaming meteor.

Good grief.

Sorry, did you need me to put a smilie on that?

[Judtech]

Originally Posted by Jesse James

Yeah, the audacity of a coach to support a break-away gimme to make it a two possession game with fractional time left.

Pitino should have foreseen this flaming meteor.

Good grief.

He actually wasn't really that happy the kid took the shot. He could have just dribbled the clock out.
And BTW, there was someone else in the stands who REALLY looked like Col Sanders!

[JBleach85]

YouTube - Louisville cheerleader almost costs them the game

There is the video for everyone to see. If you watch the video around :18 seconds you will see the clock is down .3, and then the cheerleader jumps for joy and grabs the ball and tossed it in the air before the old L --> new T, blows his whistle.

They went back and looked at the monitor to determind how much time was left after the ball went through the basket at .5. That is where it should have stopped and played should have resumed from there except for the bonehead T for the cheerleader.

I hope this helps everyone.

[Adam]

Which means the CL tossing the ball delayed the game; unless the officials would have checked the monitor with .3 seconds showing on the clock and a 5 point lead.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Which means the CL tossing the ball delayed the game; unless the officials would have checked the monitor with .3 seconds showing on the clock and a 5 point lead.

99% (SWAG) of the time they will check the monitor in this situation.

[26 Year Gap]

It is a stretch to say the cheerleader 'almost' cost them the game. Both FTs would need to be successful and a successful 3 pointer inbounded with.5 left. Not impossible. But, extremely improbable.

[Raymond]

Thanks Bleach. The clock had most definitely stopped after the dunk and was still sitting on 0.03 after the cheerleader launched the ball. Then for some reason they restarted the clock.

So the video review was to see where the clock should be reset to at which time they reset it to 0.05 instead of 0.03.

So, IMO, it was a righteous T.

[chseagle]

After seeing the replay on CBS College Sports, the officiating crew was right in assessing the T.

The clock did happen to stop at 0.3, however without the ball being out into play except by the "Yell King" the clock did restart without Pitt inbounding.

The time should not of ticked off so there was a delay of game due to the game not being yet over.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by chseagle

After seeing the replay on CBS College Sports, the officiating crew was right in assessing the T.

The clock did happen to stop at 0.3, however without the ball being out into play except by the "Yell King" the clock did restart without Pitt inbounding.

The time should not of ticked off so there was a delay of game due to the game not being yet over.

Hey chseagle, I think I already said that.

Cheerleader T Almost Costs Louisville Game....

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by chseagle

After seeing the replay on CBS College Sports, the officiating crew was right in assessing the T.

The clock did happen to stop at 0.3, however without the ball being out into play except by the "Yell King" the clock did restart without Pitt inbounding.

The time should not of ticked off so there was a delay of game due to the game not being yet over.

But, if the clock started in error, then the officials would have stopped play to re-set the clock. So, the cheerleader's actions did not affect (delay) the game.

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

But, if the clock started in error, then the officials would have stopped play to re-set the clock. So, the cheerleader's actions did not affect (delay) the game.

But did the cheerleader's mistake induce the timing error? If the officials thought so then the cheerleader did cause the game to be delayed.