Storm vs. Liberty - Last Night

[APG]

The play will be towards the end of the clip starting at 1:26

[NCHSAA]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

Here's a link to the replays...obviously, the play is towards the end of the clip.

WNBA.com: WNBA Video Player

I know E. Brewton, the ref in the game, personally and I have that same question for him when he gets back in town. The way I think I understood it is the OOB call was incorrect and the timeout the one team asked for could not have been granted under the recorrected OOB situation. That is why they had that team ask for the timeout again. Or it could have been related to the officials looking at the monitor, and more time being taken. All in all I really don't know either.

As to the original situation, I agree with the no call. Hand on the ball by the defense blocking the shot, then marginal body contact = nothing.

Contact then hand on the ball = then another story.

[APG]

Except a timeout could have been granted...the ball was dead regardless of whom the ball was awarded to. The was not a suspension of play which is kind of sounds like they were alluding to.

What I think they might of thought was, they should have reviewed the play anyway before they granted a timeout. In that case, a timeout would not be granted as it would be treated as a suspension of play. In the interest of "fairness" they decided to retroactively take back the timeout since they felt they should have reviewed the play first.

This type of play happened in the 2010 NBA Finals in game 3 Los Angeles Lakers vs. Boston Celtics...if I remember correctly, a timeout was granted, the officials went back and reviewed the play and overturned an OOB call on KG. If I also remember correctly, the timeout was not given back.

[APG]

Originally Posted by NCHSAA

As to the original situation, I agree with the no call. Hand on the ball by the defense blocking the shot, then marginal body contact = nothing.

Contact then hand on the ball = then another story.

I think the only question on the play was the body contact. I agree the contact was marginal with everything else being clean. In reality, I think the shooter flailed her arms out, and fell to the ground when she realized the ball was being blocked in an attempt to try and draw the foul.

[tomegun]

That makes two of us.

[twocentsworth]

my "twocentsworth" on that play....there is NO foul....

the dunk and the blocked shot are the two most exciting plays in the game. why would we call a foul on marginal contact in either situation (or ANY situation, for that matter)?

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by twocentsworth

my "twocentsworth" on that play....there is NO foul....

the dunk and the blocked shot are the two most exciting plays in the game. why would we call a foul on marginal contact in either situation (or ANY situation, for that matter)?

The amount of excitement, or lack thereof, is not a factor in determining whether or not there was a foul.

[Andy]

With the benefit of being able to watch the play several times, I have ball contact first, then body contact and no foul. The shooter was also jumping forward and that probably made it look a lot worse than it was.

I can also say that in real time, on the court, it would be awfully tough to swallow the whistle on that play.

The official, however, was in a great position to see the play.

[bainsey]

Hmmm, the C was clearly signalling something, before waving it off. The ball wasn't out of bounds yet when her hand went up.

[tref]

I havent seen this particular play yet, but thats some good stuff to think about. Next level mindset!

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by tomegun

That makes two of us.

Same here, if this was in my high school game, boys, or girls. The ball was certainly cleanly blocked up on top, but then the defender's follow-through practically takes the head off the shooter, followed by the defender's inertia carrying her into the shooter's body, causing the shooter to fall to the floor, all while the shooter was still airborne, and, by the book, still in the act of shooting. And, yes I know that the "shot" itself was not affected by any illegal contact since the ball had already been released when the illegal contact occurred. It's still a two shot in the act of shooting foul.

In high school games, in my little corner of Connecticut, this is a foul almost every time. I'm calling this foul at the beginning of a game, at the end of a game, in a blow out game, in a close game, in a high school varsity game, in a Catholic middle school game, in a boys game, in a girls game, with cordial coaches, with hostile coaches, on the road, or at home (whatever that means, as an official, I'm never at home?). And none of my colleagues, and only few coaches, would question my call.

If college, or professional, officials want to call this differently, I have no problem with their interpretation.

[amusedofficial]

Sue Bird has what Belichick would diagnose as Bernie Kosar Disease.