Wagner @ Santa Clara last shot
 

Don't know if anyone has posted this yet, so here it is for discussion and those who haven't seen it.

Kenny Ortiz's Game-Winning Shot - YouTube

<object width="480" height="360"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube-nocookie.com/v/1-ra_2Dvcz0?version=3&amp;hl=en_GB&amp;rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube-nocookie.com/v/1-ra_2Dvcz0?version=3&amp;hl=en_GB&amp;rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="480" height="360" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>

That is the PERFECT camera angle! Looks good to me as it hit the front of the rim first. If it had been a "swish" I think it may have been a violation.

Why??

Because the shot would have passed over the backboard from behind.

Ir
 

Is this a reviewable play?

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/1-ra_2Dvcz0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>


Only reviewable to see if shot was released in time, not for trajectory.

should be no good right? it went over the backboard. Whether it swishes or bounces on the rim 10 times shouldn't matter.

It also looks like the first shot landed out of bounds, but that is a different argument.

You are correct that the issue is the trajectory itself, and not whether the ball hits the rim. The point is that the trajectory from (about) the spot the ball was released might be (barely) legal if it results in the ball hitting the rim and (barely) illegal if it goes straight through.

It looks to me as if it's legal, but I'm not sure we can really tell (and no, I didn't do a frame-by-frame analysis).

Does the ball not bounce OOB off of the first try?

I think it did.

Then it shouldn't matter if it hit the rim first or is a "swish". It would be a violation regardless. That is the reason for my question "why".

I didn't see a ball go over the top of the backboard. If it's not illegal, it's legal.

I still love the radio call, though. Oh, sweet bias!

That was not my point.

Connect the dots (point of release ---> front of rim). That line of flight "seems" to not pass over the backboard.

If it would have been a "swish" that line would seem to pass over the backboard.

Legal shot.

The shot went up roughly inline with the edge of the board (as viewed by the camera) and came down on a line in front of the edge of the board (as viewed by the camera). That means that the ball, at it's peak, short of a massive wind gust to move it, was (or at least most of the ball was) outside the corner of the board.

Of course, there is the issue of whether the rule means it is a violation if part of the ball, the center of the ball, or the whole ball passes over the top. If it were any part of the ball, I'd think this would be a violation (I think some of the ball probably did clip the space above the backboard) but if it were the center of the ball or the whole ball, no violation.

As discussed back in this thread, I still think it was most likely a violation. And post #19 on that thread has the NCAA rule reference regarding "any part" of the ball.

Words To Live By ...
 

Amen.

Where It Belongs ...
 

Hey Camron Rust. Take this over to the soccer Forum.

True, regarding the NCAA rule, but the NFHS rule is silent on that element (which is what I was thinking about with that comment).

Still, it is not clear that any of the ball crossed over the backboard....it was certainly close, but not certain by anything we can see for sure in this video....and if it is uncertain, I'm not calling it.

The side of the backboard isn't OOB, are you saying it hit the back of the backboard because it went backwards? I could go along with that.

Or are you saying it lands out of bounds? I thought the same thing.

I wouldn't kill the shot unless I was 100% certain it went over the board. I'm not that certain watching the video. So count it. It was a great shot.

Quite frankly, I thought this was great awareness by the C cause who would expect that shot to go in?

When calculating the two endpoints along the end line where a shot could be legal, one matches the endpoint closest to the corner with the ball hitting the flange, and the endpoint furthest from the corner with the ball hitting the front of the rim.

My math shows that the endpoint furthest from the corner is about 165" from the corner. This is 13' 9" from the corner, or 11' 3" from the midpoint of the end line. This is 15" further from the corner than the midpoint of the top/bottom half of the end line. It is also 8' 3" outside the edge of the backboard. It is also 5' 3" outside the key.

Does any of that change your opinion of the shot? :eek:

I have two math degrees and I have no clue WTF you're talking about. :D

Think Angry Birds.

Yeah I was thinking it hit the endline after the first try. Tough angle

My head hurts, but I think i understand, and agree that - geometrically speaking - the ball broke the plane. But unless the C pulled out his slide rule, this would be too close to call. The more I think about it, this would be more convincing from the Lead (ala the official in the Larry Bird shot).

Here is an image I created a few years ago when discussing the same topic...

http://cbrust.smugmug.com/photos/384524600_c4zTf-L.png

I searched for the old post where I commented on it but have not yet found it...

...FOUND IT: http://forum.officiating.com/basketb...tml#post540504

Geek Heaven ???
 

I can tell that you guys know your way around a slide rule. Now, do either of you wear a pocket protector?

My numbers were quite similar to those.

I did do some rounding, which is why I italicized "about".

My main calculation was based upon the middle of the ball hitting the front of the rim. In your example, it looks like you used the two edges of the ball.

I'm going to save your graphic rather than draw my own. ;)

You have to allow for the wind.

Wind Is 40 Knots On The Flight Deck ...
 

Well, they did play on that aircraft carrier a few weeks ago.