I don't know but if you read Rice's comments he talked about mistakes that he, his staff, and his players made and did not take what would have been an easy route and focus on the officials.

And as an official, it does not matter one bit that the coaches didn't coach until the end of the game (whatever that means). Bottom line is that was a REALLY bad miss at the end of the game by this crew. We all miss calls but one of the main points that they guy who trained me stressed was to always officiate to the end of the game. It seems that this crew did not do that today.

A Sports radio call in host?

I don't feel it's inappropriate for the coordinator of men's basketball to have a comment on the play if asked.

Without seeing the play? The right thing would've been to say, "I'll have a comment after I see the video."

Well you said it was a conference matter and you would have rather the conference supervisor have comment. While it's totally acceptable for him to comment, I don't see a problem with John Adams having an opinion (I'm talking in general here. If it's true that he didn't see the play first, and I have a hard time believe that, then he should have waited to comment).

Bilas just commented that Burris made the same "No Call' in Maui at the MSU/Uconn game (?) Anyone remember this?

NCAA official head: Finish 'unacceptable' in St. John's win - ESPN

(The video specifically says Adams hadn't seen the play. He made his comments based on a description.)

Adams, reached by phone in Indianapolis where he is sequestered with the men's basketball selection committee for the remainder of the weekend, hadn't seen the video of the final seconds of the game but was going to discuss it with Big East coordinator of officials Art Hyland upon hearing the play-by-play of the final seconds.

"And then we'll notify the guys sometime Sunday if they're working or not," Adams said.

+1. My training with a great mentor in Michigan stressed that over and over again.

Well he probably shouldn't have had a comment here though I guess one might argue you don't need to see a video of the play as it wasn't a judgement play rather a clear out of bounds violation.

I would rather him not comment until after seeing the video. Still, in general, I have no problem with Adams commenting on plays in addition to conference supervisors. Adams may be more accessible than most supervisors.

What does this have to do with the end of game sequence? How we officiate is not dictated by if the coaches "did not coach until the end of the game either," though I'm not sure what you even mean by that.

So Adams is saying basically that Burr, Higgins and Walton deliberately ignored everything that happened in the last 10 seconds. Thats pretty strong and uncalled for and not in keeping with these officials background.

If he says there were terrible calls and no calls in last 10 seconds thats ok and probably right on the mark, but to infer these officials did not want to make calls at end of game to me is libelous.

I can just see officials in the tournament thinking, if you want to advance, make a call in the dying seconds. That will prove I officiated until the end of the game.

or.....
 

[QUOTE=LeeBallanfant;738377]So Adams is saying basically that Burr, Higgins and Walton deliberately ignored everything that happened in the last 10 seconds. Thats pretty strong and uncalled for and not in keeping with these officials background.

If he says there were terrible calls and no calls in last 10 seconds thats ok and probably right on the mark, but to infer these officials did not want to make calls at end of game to me is libelous.

I can just see officials in the tournament thinking, if you want to advance, make a call in the dying seconds. That will prove I officiated until the end of the game.[/QUOTE]

These are pretty ridiculous statements IMO, particularly the last one. I don't think Adams is saying they ignored everything in the last 10 seconds or that they did not want to make calls at the end of the game. And I'm definitely not saying that. In fact I haven't even seen what others are calling questionable no calls leading up to the throw in with 4.7.

But when a guy CLEARLY steps out of bounds with 1.7 on the clock and there is no whistle then ITS EVIDENT that the officials did not referee until the end of the game. That has nothing to do with wanting or not wanting to make a call. It has to do with refereeing until there are all zeroes on the clock. This crew didn't do that today evidenced by the fact that they allowed a player to clearly step out of bounds with significant time left on the clock.

Here's the video. I wish I knew how to embed it on this board.

I mean, it's kind of hard to defend "missing" that OOB. He's right there, whistle in hand, looking down the pipe at the sideline. His whole foot was almost entirely OOB; in fact, the outer edge was the only thing that was touching the line.

The only defense he could have for missing it, was his vision may have been blocked by the St. John's player and the coach, who was entirely out of his box and was right at the division line.

"Finishing" games will be a POE next year, with major talk about the philosophy of "let the kids decide the game." (i.e., swallowing the whistle.)

We get paid for the final minutes. (And all the other minutes.)

Plus, NCAA will expand reviewable situations.

Here it is.

<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="640" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/YlOWkNBxlTo" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

It's inappropriate for him to single out one official as good or bad and have no comments on the other 2.

And who the hell made you king? You sound as if you are best buds with these guys. I started the thread asking about his health. I think he is beyond his years of keeping up. You can kiss my ***!

But , if I recall correctly, a couple of years back when there was a bump in the backcourt in the last second of a tournament game (Georgetown vs. Somebody, maybe?) which caused a player to step out of bounds. The foul was called, the subsequent free throws were the winning margin, and Bilas said the whole thing should have been ignored.

Why is Burr 94' from the throw-in? He is standing on the endline in the middle of the paint. He is no help on the play. If he had set up free throw line extended to help with the catch and any 3-point attempts he would have been in position to view the OOB.

Yes, the fanboys were blasting that call. It was G-Town/Villanova regular season game.

Not really. The game you're thinking of was Georgetown-Villanova two seasons ago. Bilas never even acknowledged the possibility that the foul had been called because the ball-handler was bumped out of bounds. Replays were ultimately inconclusive, but they did show Bob Donato in perfect position to referee the play. I'll go to my grave convinced that he called the foul because he saw the Georgetown player step out of bounds. Perfectly officiated play.

And I just heard all of Rice's comments in the post game press conference. He was a class act and went way above and beyond to take the blame off the officials, praised them, and said "we have the best officials in America."

Makes the comment above even more absurd.

It should have been either a travel, if inbounds, or an OOB violation.

The "travel" was obvious...after the dribble, the ball was caught, the player then stepped with the right, the left and then the right again....then thew the ball.

It wasn't actually traveling however since the left foot step was OOB....as was the last right foot step. But since the OOB violation wasn't called, the ball was still live and the traveling was still possible.

Either way, all 3 officials are at fault. The L and the T for the line coverage and the C for the travel....the C has the mid-court area from sideline to sideline in such situations and should have had the travel even if he couldn't (and shouldn't) know that the player was OOB.

Actually he bounced the ball twice. The first time you could say he batted the ball away from ball handler and the second one was an actual dribble. Then he gathered the ball (this is judgment of course) and put his foot down on the division line. The second foot landed out of bounds. You are right that this could have been a travel of the out of bounds was not called, but that assumes that they knew the clock was still running in their minds.

Peace

I don't follow. If you think it's a travel, you blow the whistle. Period. If after doing so, you think that the final horn clearly beat your whistle, fine: ballgame. But blowing the whistle is the only chance you have there to completely eliminate the possibility of a dreadful mistake.

As the C, Walton would have been completely justified in banging a travel there. But it appears that almost immediately after the St. John's player controlled the ball, Walton looked away for some reason. I don't think he saw the whole play, so I'd be shocked if he thought that a travel was even a remote possibility there.

So you call traveling when the clock has run out? Really??? And since you quoted what I said and highlighted, you must did not read it. You do not call anything if you are under the impression the game is over. They obviously thought the game was over or they would have looked at the monitor to see how much time to put on the clock. They did not do that, so they must have figured the game was over.

The person that would have called this was the Lead and that was Jim Burr. He has the ball, the feet and the line all in sight, much better than anyone across the court. Sorry, I am not making that call for an assumption. And across the court that is probably an assumption as you need to judge control. Burr had a much better look if he was looking there. Not sure how Higgins (the Trail) would see he is looking at the back of the player at best.

Peace

By what indication was time expired? The horn? A backboard light? A partner's whistle? Until one of those happens, they should officiate the play.

After the turnover, Burr was the Trail, Higgins (white hair) was the lead. Burr was looking at the back with Higgins having the best line view.

I know he bounced it twice...once was a bat away from the other players, the other was a dribble. Everything I mentioned was after he picked it up which was after both bounces.

There was no reason to think the clock wasn't running unless someone sounded a fake horn...and I haven't seen any indication of that.

And what part did you read where I said they should not still be officiating? But I am sure you have been in gyms you have not heard any of those things. I know I could not tell many of these things in my little corner of the world just this week. I think they assumed that the game was over and stopped paying attention. They were obviously wrong but the only real explanation for what took place. How do you not see a kid step out of bounds and throw the ball in the air and still have time on the clock. Heck, Steve Lavin was acting like the game was over.


You know they look alike to me. :)

Peace

You really need to go back and look at the video. The St. John's player clearly did not grab the ball until he was touching the division line. The next step was out of bounds. That is two steps and if the trail thinks the game is over he is not going to make that call or guess if he has control. Just look at the video I embedded in this thread, that is clear. And the officials immediately leave the court as they clearly think the game is over. They do not even waste time as Burr is the first one in the tunnel and walks as if nothing is an issue.

Peace

So you don't make a call because you think the clock might have run out? Really? Better to make this call after the buzzer than to miss/ignore it with more than a second left.

Could you elaborate on why you think a travel wasn't called by the C?

If the center saw the whole play (I don't think he did; I think he looked away for a moment after the SJU player gained control), why wouldn't he have a travel there? He has to assume that the player is in bounds, and he hasn't heard a horn or seen an LED light. If you move the sideline over another foot, it's an obvious travel.

I do not know about you, but when the game is over, I do not blow the whistle and make an additional call. As a matter of fact when I think the game is over, I might indicate the game is over. Now based on previous posts you do not work three person it is not common for the C to make this call across the court even if time had been in play. The only person that would have likely made this call would have been the T or C and only if they had a clear view. I cannot recall ever making a call like this when the line is at play and I would call a travel completely across the court.

Peace

Because the ball was on the other side of the court and there is a Lead or Trail that can clearly see the ball much better than the C. We cannot even agree here when the guy had possession and the view across the court is not as clear as it appears the ball handler grabbed the ball with his right arm away from the C.

Peace

But apparently that was the whole problem here. For some reason, they thought the game was over when it wasn't. Making one of the calls in this play, then finding out it was after the buzzer, would have been infinitely better than what actually happened.

Because I believe the new lead (after the turnover) would have the best view of when the dribble ended as opposed to the center who wouldn't have a clear view of the gather because the player gathered it on the side furthest from him. This is a call the new L and even the new T should have made.

+1...Nice!

If you but a different face and name on Tim Higgins right now and had him go to camp nobody would hire him. It is so hard for guys to say goodbye especially with the money out there...this is a tough call for the assigner to let veteran (Final Four) officials go.

This really can't be argued imo also. They screwed up and that fact won't change. They also deserve the flak they're getting for their officiating mistake. What they don't deserve is the personal crap some people are throwing at them. Saying their careers should be over for something like this is just plain ridiculous imo, especially when it comes from so-called fellow officials who have never worked on a stage like that.

Officials are human, not machines.

<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="1280" height="750" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/YlOWkNBxlTo" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

In 3-person that sideline belongs to the trail. Since it's in transition should the lead help? Of course.

Walton had the clock, though. He could've called a travel and he should've known there was time left.

Incorrect. On the prior FT Higgins is the L Burr is the T and Walton is the C. So on the ensuing throw in Burr is new L and Higgins is administering the throw in as the T. When posession changes (when the St. Johns player makes the steal) Now Higgins becomes the new L and Burr is the new T.

The problem might have been (no way to know for sure, of course) that the person who was in the best position to see the OOB was the new L (Higgins - he was right on the sideline with the play coming toward him) but as we all know that's not his line, but if you look at the replay that is from behind the basket the new T (Burr) is (for some reason) coming up the floor from the middle of the paint. He isn't in a good position to see his line.

I think this COULD be a case where in transition everyone needs to expand their coverage areas and cover each others backs to make sure that the crew gets the call right. Of course there's no way to know if this is truly what happened, but I could see this being the case.

Just my $.02

Point of edification here, for me and I know we have discussed it BUT: When you have the "clock" at the end of a game, do you blow your whistle when time expires/horn sounds/LED light is shown? Early in my career I was told to always hit your whistle to signal the end of the game rather than just have to horn sound. Do you think that would have helped in this case? I did not see the "C" make any signal when the game was over. Since the "official" criticism was they stopped officiating a signal here would have helped abate that criticism. IMO, I would have liked to have seen the "C" come across with SOMETHING, either waving the game over, a travel or at very least an innocuous raised hand. Again, IMO, it looked like he THOUGHT something funky had happened but didn't know what and at least this would have given them a chance to huddle and sort things out before they left. Just pondering.

Because of this:

+1 I was wondering if it was a new mechanic thing. It looked like he went to the middle of the lane to get a good angle to officiate the long throw. But IMO, he would have had a better angle FT line extended. It would have given him a great look had there been a drive to the basket, would have given him great position to see if there was a foul (which I don't think there was) and put him in PRIMO position for the end of the game kerfluffel.

Totally agree.

I wonder if Higgins swallowed his whistle because it techincally isn't his call?

I hope that's not the case, but it might be.

Upon further review, you're completely right and I had 'em reversed.

Maybe Jeff was right. All those tubby white guys do look alike. :D

Yes. We always, ALWAYS have a whistle and either a stop-clock signal (if there's no shot) or a wave off if there is and it's too late. Obviously, if a shot's off in time, we have nothing until the shot either scores or doesn't (and if it doesn't we THEN blow a whistle).

I've noticed that NCAAM officials don't use their whistles as often as the NCAAW (or NFHS officials that I work with) do. Subs, for example, frequently come in without a whistle in NCAAM games that I see and I *always* whistle subs in and so do my partners.

I thought maybe you were deleting old posts to keep yourself at 19999. :D

It very well could be a PCA issue. Both new L and new T certainly had a clear view in periphery of the LED. "Be late, be needed & be right" probably should have been employed here. "Thanks for saving my butt" is a phrase I have used on occasion when someone has gotten something in my PCA because I was either straight-lined or out of position.

If any of you guys know much about Sir Alex Ferguson, then you can imagine that the supervisor might just have employed the "hair dryer treatment" in the post-game.

Just re-watched. New L looks straight-lined by SJ player AND THE COACH WHO WAS WAY OUT OF HIS BOX. Plus, a Rutgers player may have been obstructing a clear view. There must be some other views that are not on the video because I cannot see the new T anywhere. Or even the end line.

10-5-a (player T) in high school. I think (but I'm not sure) the NCAA rule is similar.

The four warnings are separate: 10-1-5c-f (under team T).

hmmmmm
 

Not surprising...veteran guys who either did the right thing for the tournament on their own or were "asked" to do this. Either way it's the right way for it to be settled IMHO. Especially for 2 guys like Higgins and Burr who between them have about 25 Final Four appearances.

I would guess after Mr. Adams' earlier statements that Burr is in next week, but Higgins and Walton are out for the NCAA tourney.

Not sure why Burr would be in if the other two are out except that none of the three events [OOB, coach way out of box, ball hurled into air] occurred in his PCA.

Seen just now on twitter: "That's the best call they've made in 24 hours." :rolleyes:

(You have to admit, that is kinda funny)

Adams went out of his way to compliment Burr on the season he was having and then "no commented" on Higgins and Walton. You don't have to read between the lines too hard to come up with the conclusion that Burr will get an NCAA assignment and the other two won't.

I would disagree with you too. Burr as the new Trail has responsibility for the line that Brownlee stepped out on so that is in his PCA, although I agree that in transition Higgins should have helped him on the OOB call.

Here's another comment from Mr. Adams, nothing earth shattering though.


NCAA supervisor pledges that refs will get younger - College Basketball News | FOX Sports on MSN

Well I heard this line from a coach one time when asked why he was using aged officials that physically couldn't maintain the level of play IMO of the 5A ball that was on the floor..


"Jeremy, a s--tty known is better than an unknown..."

I think sometimes in the NCAA the same principles apply....

The last line of that article is complete horsesh!t.

I watched this a number of times. Are you saying there wasn't contact or that the contact was incidental on the play?

The fact that Adams made the statement without having seen the video means he's probably already made up his mind about Burr and this game isn't going to affect much.

He's saying calling it a "clear foul" is horse sht.

I still have yet to see a video of the fouls that were allegedly missed.

I'm saying that I think the offense initiated the contact and that I thought a no call was the proper call on the play.

In my experience the Lead and the Trail always help each other out on these plays. They are spread out all over the court and it might be who has the better look. There are not primaries the same way there are in transition.

Peace

Rich, Thank you. I'm still a pup and am trying to learn how to judge contact on a play like that.

The only foul I think MIGHT have been missed was the push on the rebound. But the drive to the basket and the long pass/catch were realy good No Calls IMO

Really? See, I think the long pass/catch was probably the one I would've called a foul (from the comfort of my stool at Hooters, which is where I actually watched the ending). Looked like the St. John's player went right through the Rutgers player to knock the ball clear.

Just goes to show that the no calls weren't simply "the Big East philosophy of no amputation, no foul" but were difficult plays to rule on.

They both jumped into each other. Not sure who you would call the foul on. Neither had the ball and the contact put neither at a big advantage or disadvantage. It was a poorly executed play.

Peace

And I was on record yesterday agreeing with that. Good, experienced officials aren't going to bail out a shooter jumping into somebody. And if the defender isn't knocked down,you won't see a charge either.

When they get their evaluations on this game, that no-call will be a + imo.

And I can see the reason for passing on it. To me, it appeared the Rutgers player had position and was bumped from behind.

We can nitpick the other stuff to death -- the only thing that got really messed up was the last 1.7 seconds.

Amen. If the last play gets called, the officiating never gets mentioned.

Except by Jay Bilas who seemed more focussed on the alleged fouls that were missed in the last minute.

I'm with Rut. Who is the guy in front of the St John's bench? Higgins or Burr? THAT is the guy who was apparently straight-lined.

The previously posted video showed just 1:09 of coverage; this one shows 3 minutes. It also shows the plays, one under each basket, that many feel were missed foul calls.

<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="640" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/eKw6jgZVONI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Higgins is in front of the St John's bench.

For clarification:

Jim Burr

http://images1.statsheet.com/images/...jpg?1293797735

Tim Higgins

http://images4.statsheet.com/images/...jpg?1299501652

On the dribble drive by the Rutgers player, I most definitely have a foul on the defender.

That's what I was thinking. A still photo doesn't prove anything, but this one is suggestive:

http://img36.imageshack.us/img36/790...10310at208.png

That to me was the second easiest call. I was absolutely shocked there was no call and a bit confused how some are defending the no call on this one.

Why no picture of Earl Walton? :D

http://images1.statsheet.com/images/...jpg?1299501652

Earl Walton

http://images1.statsheet.com/images/...jpg?1299501652

I like the no call on the dribble drive and on the half court pass. They both look like tweeners to me. I would have been ok with a foul as well. I really like the no call on the rebounding action on the free throws, I just think the ball last goes off the white team player from behind. Just wanted to throw my .02 in on this 13 page thread! ha

Even in that picture the defender has a whole lot of ball. The reason I liked it being passed on was b/c of who initiated the contact. The Rutgers player was standing hands up when the SJ player, IMO, jumped into him first. Usually, if I have my hands in the air and someone pokes me in the gut,my hands go down. That is what I think happened on this play.
As for the rebounding foul, the principle of "How did the player end up on the ground" comes into play. IMO, had the State University of New Jersey player not been contacted by the SJ player, he would have NOT gone to the ground. Thus, the SJ player pushed the Rutgers player.

See I have the defender bring his hands down before the contact occurred. It looked like a whole of arm to me.

You're right. A still photo doesn't prove anything. I just watched it again several times and all that did was re-inforce my original impression of the play.

You can't use verticality when a shooter jumps into a defender with LGP. As always, it's a judgment call, bit imo they made the right judgment when they no-called it. You shouldn't bail out any shooter who jumps into their defender imo.

Thanks. Then we are in agreement. I just had the names mixed up. Higgins was straight-lined and was unable to assist Burr, who should have been in position to see the violation. Walton, for his part, not seeing the first OOB step, surely could have whistled the second. And a whistle, even slightly after 1.7, could have allowed the proper amount of time to be put on the clock.

:eek:Apropos of nothing, as I read this there was a bright flash of lightening and a loud crack of thunder. Seriously. Maybe I should change my thoughts on the play and bring the universe back into alignment

+1 Offensive player initiated the contact. And once that happened, to call something on the defender who had LGP would be wrong. It really is not different from a foul cannot cause a violation.

I've reffed high school for over 30 years. Never had a desire to be a college ref although I have filled in a few times at the Division 3 level. So I know I am not in these guys league. I am also certain, if there were four TV cameras at every game I have worked and we had this many people reviewing and reviewing, I have likely made awful calls at the end of a close game that would make this one look good.

However since I haven't seen video, ignorance is bliss.

That guy looks just like Rut to me. ;)

Only if you judge that the contact by the shooter caused the defender to give up the vertical position. The defender doesn't have the right to collapse on the shooter just because there was legal contact.

It was Higgin's line and I disagree he was straightlined. If a player blocked his view(which didn't happen since he was on the court by about 5-6 feet) that's different. Straightlined to me is a competitive match up which you are unable to have an angle on offense/defense. This wasn't the case. I don't see how Walton could make an across the court OOB call, it would be a guess, and he did the right thing, he trusted his partners.

I can live with the call either way. To echo others, the dribbler initiates contact.

After St. John's stole the ball it became Burr's line. But Burr was not in position to see the line b/c of how he set up on the initial throw-in. Higgins should have had secondary help on the line.

Darnnit, you beat me to it!!!!
 

I was just about to say "I am surprised no one said I was working the game." After all people say that to me all the time. :D

Peace

It appears to me that there were 3 people in the line of sight for Higgins: 1) the St John's player near Higgins, 2) the Rutgers player near the spot of the uncalled OOB violation, and 3) Lavin out of his box. Higgins was not on the line, but without the benefit of his angle, it is difficult to tell if 1, 2 and/or 3 interfered with his view. He did not appear to move to improve. I will defer to college officials as far as whose line it was, as I am not familiar with NCAA PCAs with respect to differences from NFHS. Without knowing it, I think Higgins had secondary responsibility there.

Crap, I thought I saw you at the grocery store yesterday in Denver, but that's a whole other thread.

I think I see you at the local store all the time. Not just yesterday. :D

Peace

Just like Higgins, only younger and with darker hair.

I don't joke about this with everyone since it might offend some I don't know well, but I have a white colleage in my guard unit, whose husband is black, and we joke about it all the time.

Her: "Did you see my husband earlier?"

Me: "How would I know?"

That's cuz you're Canadian, and all Americans look alike to you people. :D

Walton had good reason to not call the OOB but there was no good reason to not call the traveling...that was his call and his PCA. Unless he's heard a horn or a whistle, he has to assume that the player is still inbounds and that there is time on the clock and make that call.

It would be convenient to try to lay blame on any one or two of the crew but in reality, all three made errors on that play.