2011 Tournament Discussion Redux

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Jay R

Cartmell made the call he thought was correct. I'm assuming he's since seen the replay that shows he never got to 5 seconds. He has not admitted to his mistake.

And you know that....how?

Afaik the NCAA tries to keep anything like that in-house.

[jophyal]

why do they try to keep it "in house"? I am not indicting anyone. I am making a point. If you do not agree, that is your choice. I never insinuateed that there is a perfect 5 count. However, if you can't count to five or know you are between four and five, that is an issue. My point of contingency was that instead of saying that was HIS five count and leave it at that, we have people coming up with guesses as to whether there is still a rule disallowing a player to call timeout between four and five seconds. The NCAA just admitted that there was a mistake in the Syracuse game... was that kept in house? I read, on this site, all the complaints of coaches and fans hollering about "over the back" fouls aand the fact there is no for for that. But when another official asks about a non exixtent rule concerning the granting of a timeout, it's different because you feel like we are puting a fellow official in the grease. I have yet to hearor read anything concerning the ball being handed to player instead of tossed. What about that mechanic? has anyone factored that into his count?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by jophyal

why do they try to keep it "in house"? I am not indicting anyone. I am making a point. If you do not agree, that is your choice. I never insinuateed that there is a perfect 5 count. However, if you can't count to five or know you are between four and five, that is an issue. My point of contingency was that instead of saying that was HIS five count and leave it at that, we have people coming up with guesses as to whether there is still a rule disallowing a player to call timeout between four and five seconds. The NCAA just admitted that there was a mistake in the Syracuse game... was that kept in house? I read, on this site, all the complaints of coaches and fans hollering about "over the back" fouls aand the fact there is no for for that. But when another official asks about a non exixtent rule concerning the granting of a timeout, it's different because you feel like we are puting a fellow official in the grease. I have yet to hearor read anything concerning the ball being handed to player instead of tossed. What about that mechanic? has anyone factored that into his count?

Pretty sure the consensus here was that there's no longer such a rule. That part wasn't questioned much.

I'm really not sure what the rest means.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by jophyal

... The NCAA just admitted that there was a mistake in the Syracuse game... was that kept in house? ...

Difference being that the Syracuse mistake was a mis-application of the rules. Cartmell's call was a judgement call. We've all seen the replay and have our opinion about Cartmell's mechanics (and I believe he should have granted a TO) but it still comes down to whether or not Cartmell felt he reached 5 before the player requested a timeout. All the rest of us are doing is speculating.

There is no speculation that the backcourt call was wrong, it's a fact, and it's been acknowledged.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Difference being that the Syracuse mistake was a mis-application of the rules. Cartmell's call was a judgement call. We've all seen the replay and have our opinion about Cartmell's mechanics (and I believe he should have granted a TO) but it still comes down to whether or not Cartmell felt he reached 5 before the player requested a timeout. All the rest of us are doing is speculating.

There is no speculation that the backcourt call was wrong, it's a fact, and it's been acknowledged.

Of course, if they'd called a travel in the 'Cuse game, it would have been the correct call.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Of course, if they'd called a travel in the 'Cuse game, it would have been the correct call.

But even that would have been a judgement call. Some on here think Jardine didn't have control of the ball immediately.

[Judtech]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Of course, if they'd called a travel in the 'Cuse game, it would have been the correct call.

Pudding stirer!

In a conversation with an official who WILL be working this weekend. I think they made some good points:
If we are going by an officials "judgement" on obvious timing situations (not 3 sec) then why have a visible count? Why not just count to ourselves? No one is agruing that our visible count is precise. What it DOES do is show a visible representation of what our 'timing judgement' is by swinging our arms. Some do it faster then others, but that is THEIR judgement. It also gives an empirical record of how much we have counted, ie. the video.

I remember a few years ago at a camp a person I worked with made a 3 second call. The evaluator took us to the film room and we must have spent 20 minutes on that one play. The official would not admit that it was about 2 seconds. The point the evaluator was trying to make was we need to be extra special certain and give the benefit of the doubt in situations like this. I of course was happy b/c I absolutely BLEW a rebounding foul and we didn't have time to discuss it!

[rulesmaven]

Originally Posted by Judtech

In a conversation with an official who WILL be working this weekend. I think they made some good points:
If we are going by an officials "judgement" on obvious timing situations (not 3 sec) then why have a visible count? Why not just count to ourselves? No one is agruing that our visible count is precise. What it DOES do is show a visible representation of what our 'timing judgement' is by swinging our arms. Some do it faster then others, but that is THEIR judgement. It also gives an empirical record of how much we have counted, ie. the video.

This seems like a good insight. If you're going to swing, you have to assume players or coaches are relying on the swing. Otherwise, why do it?

The place where it seems to me most weird is after a made basket where there's a shot clock. What if the swinging isn't commensurate with the clock? If an official swings 10 when the clock shows 26, can he call a violation? Or not call on where the clock shows 24 because he hadn't swung 10? If they are going to swing, it should matter. And the swing seems to me to objectify a judgment based decision.

Anyway, on the Syracuse backcourt, has anyone other than Adams said anything? I still have some hope that this was actually a missed judgment call. Is it possible that he thought Jardine's right heel touched the backcourt line after the step (in other words, he didn't call the violation on the foot originally touching the line, but on the mistaken view that it touched the line after he'd established back in the front court)? It was very very close to the heel touching. If it was a rules goof, to me, for all the discussion of the tournament so far, that's the one that is most surprising. In fact in my memory it's almost unprecedented -- I just can't remember another rules misapplication that basic at that level. I think there was a hockey official in the NHL this year who called a delay of game for the goalkeeper playing the puck outside of the "trapazoid" who forgot that the penalty can not be called if the player's skates are in the crease. But other than those two, I just don't remember a call like it, if it wasn't a judgment call, which makes me think maybe he knew the rule but thought he saw something that didn't happen.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Difference being that the Syracuse mistake was a mis-application of the rules. Cartmell's call was a judgement call. We've all seen the replay and have our opinion about Cartmell's mechanics (and I believe he should have granted a TO) but it still comes down to whether or not Cartmell felt he reached 5 before the player requested a timeout. All the rest of us are doing is speculating.

There is no speculation that the backcourt call was wrong, it's a fact, and it's been acknowledged.

Y'all just saved me from commenting on a coupla posts, Newz. All I have to say now is that you're wise beyond your years.

Agree completely and I couldn't have put it better.

[26 Year Gap]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Y'all just saved me from commenting on a coupla posts, Newz. All I have to say now is that you're wise beyond your years.

Agree completely and I couldn't have put it better.

Reminds me of one five second violation call I made a few years back. Near the team bench, as I am putting air into the whistle, the coach requested a time out. I asked him if he still wanted it.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by 26 Year Gap

Reminds me of one five second violation call I made a few years back. Near the team bench, as I am putting air into the whistle, the coach requested a time out. I asked him if he still wanted it.

Yup. Exact same story as granting a TO versus blowing your whistle to confirm that it's been granted. There's always that little time lag.

[Jay R]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

And you know that....how?

Afaik the NCAA tries to keep anything like that in-house.

Do you mean that he has not admitted his mistake. Not publicly. If Joyce had admitted his mistake only to his superiors, he would not have had the support he did form the public.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Jay R

Do you mean that he has not admitted his mistake. Not publicly. If Joyce had admitted his mistake only to his superiors, he would not have had the support he did form the public.

So? It's not like he cost the kid a perfect game. It's not like he took away a touchdown or even a FT. He called a violation, for crying out loud. The kid knew it was close, but do you really think he had his own count or was watching the official's arm swing? No. He waited just a hair too long to request the TO.

Good grief.