Terrible lack of awareness

[Lotto]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

And wasn't this an NCAA game? Washington U, as in University? Doesn't NCAA have replay? Or is that for D1 only?

As others have mentioned, NCAA officials can only use replay if there is a court side monitor. However, it's not clear that this play would be reviewable even if a monitor were available.

Rule 2-13.5.c says: The officials shall not use such available equipment for judgment calls such as: Determine whether a violation occurred except in 2-13.3.a.2.

And 2-13.3.a.2 says: Officials shall use such available equipment in the following situations: When there is a reading of zeros on the game clock at the end of any period, after making a call on the playing court, and when necessary to determine the outcome of the game in the following situations: Determine whether a shot-clock violation occurred before the reading of zeros on the game clock.

So, if the issue was whether the ball hit the rim, the monitor may not be used. It also seems that the intent of 2-13.3.a.2 is a situation where the shot-clock violation occurs so near the end of the game so that there is a doubt as to which occurred first, which is also not the case here.

One odd thing here -- the LED lights usually don't light up when the shot-clock runs down to 0. (Do they?) Why did they light up in this situation?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Lotto

One odd thing here -- the LED lights usually don't light up when the shot-clock runs down to 0. (Do they?) Why did they light up in this situation?

It depends on the setup, of course, but they light up in most of the NCAA games I do.

[JugglingReferee]

So back on topic a bit....


At camp we were taught that if the T has the shot attempt, then the C has primary on the ball hitting the rim, and BI/GT. Is that still philosophy used?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

So back on topic a bit....


At camp we were taught that if the T has the shot attempt, then the C has primary on the ball hitting the rim, and BI/GT. Is that still philosophy used?

Kinda. But the T under the right circumstances can follow the ball if they do not have any chance for realistic contact on a shot. But in this case the L could have seen the ball not hit the rim either. Any official can call a shot clock violation, at least on the side I do they can.

Peace

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Kinda. But the T under the right circumstances can follow the ball if they do not have any chance for realistic contact on a shot. But in this case the L could have seen the ball not hit the rim either. Any official can call a shot clock violation, at least on the side I do they can.

Peace

Half our games have a SC and both officials call the SC violation, too.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Lotto

As others have mentioned, NCAA officials can only use replay if there is a court side monitor. However, it's not clear that this play would be reviewable even if a monitor were available.

Rule 2-13.5.c says: The officials shall not use such available equipment for judgment calls such as: Determine whether a violation occurred except in 2-13.3.a.2.

And 2-13.3.a.2 says: Officials shall use such available equipment in the following situations: When there is a reading of zeros on the game clock at the end of any period, after making a call on the playing court, and when necessary to determine the outcome of the game in the following situations: Determine whether a shot-clock violation occurred before the reading of zeros on the game clock.

So, if the issue was whether the ball hit the rim, the monitor may not be used. It also seems that the intent of 2-13.3.a.2 is a situation where the shot-clock violation occurs so near the end of the game so that there is a doubt as to which occurred first, which is also not the case here.

One odd thing here -- the LED lights usually don't light up when the shot-clock runs down to 0. (Do they?) Why did they light up in this situation?

They could have reviewed if the shot by the girl who rebounded the airball was released prior to the shot clock expiring. (if they had a monitor)

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by Lotto

As others have mentioned, NCAA officials can only use replay if there is a court side monitor. However, it's not clear that this play would be reviewable even if a monitor were available.

Rule 2-13.5.c says: The officials shall not use such available equipment for judgment calls such as: Determine whether a violation occurred except in 2-13.3.a.2.

And 2-13.3.a.2 says: Officials shall use such available equipment in the following situations: When there is a reading of zeros on the game clock at the end of any period, after making a call on the playing court, and when necessary to determine the outcome of the game in the following situations: Determine whether a shot-clock violation occurred before the reading of zeros on the game clock.

So, if the issue was whether the ball hit the rim, the monitor may not be used. It also seems that the intent of 2-13.3.a.2 is a situation where the shot-clock violation occurs so near the end of the game so that there is a doubt as to which occurred first, which is also not the case here.

One odd thing here -- the LED lights usually don't light up when the shot-clock runs down to 0. (Do they?) Why did they light up in this situation?

It's clear: the crew wouldn't have been able to use the monitor in this situation to deal with the shot-clock issue. A fellow official of mine e-mailed Debbie Williamson from the NCAA and she said it appeared the crew judged there was no shot-clock violation twice: once when the play happened and once again when they huddled after time expired.

[jeschmit]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

It's clear: the crew wouldn't have been able to use the monitor in this situation to deal with the shot-clock issue. A fellow official of mine e-mailed Debbie Williamson from the NCAA and she said it appeared the crew judged there was no shot-clock violation twice: once when the play happened and once again when they huddled after time expired.

I have yet to speak with the official directly, but I worked a game this past weekend where this play came up in discussion. One of my partners from Saturday said that he spoke with the trail on this play, and said that he was "beating himself up" over this play. My partner said that the trail said that he had no angle on whether or not the shot hit the rim due to the fact that he was watching the shooter come back to the floor after taking her shot.

He also said that when they got together they were discussing two things: whether the original shot hit the rim, and whether the final shot was before the final horn. Then he said that when they pulled the coaches together, they explained the situation to them (much like you can see from the video).

Here's the kicker though... the trail on the play said that the visiting coach never even asked whether or not the original shot hit the rim! That was never in question from the coaches. They were only worried about the last shot leaving the shooter's hands before the final horn.

In my opinion, the C HAS to have an idea as to whether the shot hits the rim or not. The L can have some idea, but I'm not putting that on him...

Like I said, I'm hearing this second-hand, but it came from a very reliable source... and I will be working with one of the officials on this game this coming Thursday. If I find anything else out, I will be sure to let you all know.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by jeschmit

In my opinion, the C HAS to have an idea as to whether the shot hits the rim or not. The L can have some idea, but I'm not putting that on him...

We had a similar play in our game on Friday, but it was near the end of the first half, and in a blowout. I was L. The first shot, taken from the outside clearly missed the rim. The offense got the rebound and put up a lay-up. I assumed (yeah, I know) that it hit the rim, but it didn't. Horn went off. C knew that it was a shot clock violation, I knew the time that should be left, and we finished the 3.6 (iirc) seconds of the half.

We've all not know for sure whether a shot hit the rim when it's taken with, say, 15 seconds left. But, the outside officials need to get it when the shot is taken with the clock about to expire.

[Jesse James]

Originally Posted by jeschmit

I have yet to speak with the official directly, but I worked a game this past weekend where this play came up in discussion. One of my partners from Saturday said that he spoke with the trail on this play, and said that he was "beating himself up" over this play. My partner said that the trail said that he had no angle on whether or not the shot hit the rim due to the fact that he was watching the shooter come back to the floor after taking her shot.

He also said that when they got together they were discussing two things: whether the original shot hit the rim, and whether the final shot was before the final horn. Then he said that when they pulled the coaches together, they explained the situation to them (much like you can see from the video).

Here's the kicker though... the trail on the play said that the visiting coach never even asked whether or not the original shot hit the rim! That was never in question from the coaches. They were only worried about the last shot leaving the shooter's hands before the final horn.

In my opinion, the C HAS to have an idea as to whether the shot hits the rim or not. The L can have some idea, but I'm not putting that on him...

Like I said, I'm hearing this second-hand, but it came from a very reliable source... and I will be working with one of the officials on this game this coming Thursday. If I find anything else out, I will be sure to let you all know.

Regardless of what was discussed when the coaches were summoned, the visiting coach certainly was questioning the lack of the shot clock violation during the officials' pow-wow.