UNC-Asheville/Syracuse End of 1st Half

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

I am joining the thread late and I will address all of the three plays in the order that they occurred.

Play #1: First, some of the posts in this thread questioned the use of PST. I thought that PST was used all throught the Tournament becuase it is used in just about every Division I game played during the regular season; and I think that the use or non-use of PST in this game has a bearing of how this play is handled. As an example: Let us assume that the Shot Clock is not a factor and only the Game Clock is a factor. If a player is fouled in the Act of Shooting before the Game Clock expires but the ball is not released before the Game Clock expires then the FG if successful will not count, and the Shooter will be awarded two or three FTs depending upon the type of FGA.

I just watched APG's video post of the play at the end of the first half. That said, my take from watching APG's video post is this: The foul occurred as the Syracuse player was starting his Act of Shooting and well before he released the ball and it also occured before the the Shot Clock expired.

If PST was being used the Game and Shot Clocks should have stopped on the whistle (It is my learned opinion that this play is a perfect example of why the Shot Clock should not stop with the game clock and another reason why I am not in favor of a Shot Clock but that it the subject matter for another thread.). If PST was not used, one question that can be asked is was there too much lag time between the time whistle sounded and the clock stopped.

From my viewing of the video was that the Official's whistle sounded and the Shot Clock expired at the same time which appeared to have happened just before the ball left the Syracuse player's hand. It is my opinion that the foul in the Act of Shooting definitely occurred before the Shot Clock expired. Since the ball was not released before the Shot Clock expired, then the basket should not count and two FTs should have been awarded.


Play #2: The FT Violation. I do not know what the big deal is. I thought the L missed the defensive violation on the low block opposite of him, but the C got the "really" obvious one by the defender outside the three-point arc.


Play #3: This is either a foul by the Asheville Player or OOB off the Syracuse Player. My call is a CF by the Asheville Player because the contact was before the ball had touched OOB.


MTD, Sr.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

I just watched APG's video post of the play at the end of the first half. That said, my take from watching APG's video post is this: The foul occurred as the Syracuse player was starting his Act of Shooting and well before he released the ball and it also occured before the the Shot Clock expired.

I've seen this written a few times now. Wouldn't the shot clock stop on the whistle? It's not treated the same as the game clock, is it?

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by GROUPthink

I've seen this written a few times now. Wouldn't the shot clock stop on the whistle? It's not treated the same as the game clock, is it?

Poor timers. When you're near the buzzers, you best be sure to not screw up.

[Brad]

Originally Posted by GROUPthink

I've seen this written a few times now. Wouldn't the shot clock stop on the whistle? It's not treated the same as the game clock, is it?

Yes — the shot clock and game clock would stop at the same time. However, on this play neither one of them stopped ... looks like the timer just missed it and allowed time to expire.

The foul was clearly before either clock expired —*but the shot was not released until after the shot clock expired. The correct thing to do would have been to disallow the basket and put the player on the line for two free throws.

Unlike what the announcers said, the shot clock does not cause the foul not to count.

If the officials decided that the shot clock expired before the foul, then the shot-clock violation would take precedence. I think that is what they may have done and, if so, they were wrong.

[APG]

I don't understand the people that say he should be awarded two shots but not count the basket. There's no need to account for any lag time...you have use of the monitor so you have definite knowledge of the timing devices.

You go to replay and see if the foul happened before the violation. Since it occurred before the violation, it means the clock should have stopped. Him releasing the ball before or after the expiration of the shot clock has NO bearing on this play since it expired erroneously. Put the time back on the game clock for when the foul occurred, count the basket, and shoot one shot.

[Brad]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

I don't understand the people that say he should be awarded two shots but not count the basket. There's no need to account for any lag time...you have use of the monitor so you have definite knowledge of the timing devices.

You go to replay and see if the foul happened before the violation. Since it occurred before the violation, it means the clock should have stopped. Him releasing the ball before or after the expiration of the shot clock has NO bearing on this play since it expired erroneously. Put the time back on the game clock for when the foul occurred, count the basket, and shoot one shot.

That's a damn good point.

Hadn't thought about it that way. I think you're right.

(This is what a one-year leave of absence from the court gets me!)

[APG]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Play #1: First, some of the posts in this thread questioned the use of PST. I thought that PST was used all throught the Tournament becuase it is used in just about every Division I game played during the regular season; and I think that the use or non-use of PST in this game has a bearing of how this play is handled. As an example: Let us assume that the Shot Clock is not a factor and only the Game Clock is a factor. If a player is fouled in the Act of Shooting before the Game Clock expires but the ball is not released before the Game Clock expires then the FG if successful will not count, and the Shooter will be awarded two or three FTs depending upon the type of FGA.

PTS or not doesn't not effect how this play should have be occurred. All PTS would have done is stop the clock in a timely fashion.

And in your hypothetical, in a game with a monitor, you would be wrong. You go to the monitor to see if the foul occurred before the expiration of time. If it occurred before the expiration of time, then any made basket would count along with the the remaining free throws. If the foul happened after time expired, no basket nor FTs.

In a game with replay, there's no way to award FTs like you would suggest.

*****

Went and looked at the case book play and it appears you may be right MTD, and if that's so, that's a godawful use of replay and don't understand the logic behind the case book play.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

PTS or not doesn't not effect how this play should have be occurred. All PTS would have done is stop the clock in a timely fashion.

And in your hypothetical, in a game with a monitor, you would be wrong. You go to the monitor to see if the foul occurred before the expiration of time. If it occurred before the expiration of time, then any made basket would count along with the the remaining free throws. If the foul happened after time expired, no basket nor FTs.

In a game with replay, there's no way to award FTs like you would suggest.

APG:

I didn't mean "go to the monitor to determine if the foul occurred before or after the expiration of time", I meant to see if the shot was released before the Shot Clock had expired and if time should be put back on the clock. I am shooting FTs in this situation no matter what.

MTD, Sr.

[jbduke]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

PTS or not doesn't not effect how this play should have be occurred. All PTS would have done is stop the clock in a timely fashion.

And in your hypothetical, in a game with a monitor, you would be wrong. You go to the monitor to see if the foul occurred before the expiration of time. If it occurred before the expiration of time, then any made basket would count along with the the remaining free throws. If the foul happened after time expired, no basket nor FTs.

In a game with replay, there's no way to award FTs like you would suggest.

Dissent.

If PTS had been used and functioning properly, the clocks--both of them--would have stopped on the whistle. Replays show that when Corbett hit the whistle there was one second remaining on the shot clock. So the SC never would have hit zero, and no SC violation would or even could have been called. Basket would have counted, etc.

I've spent a bunch of time studying the applicable rules and ARs, and this thing is simply not totally clear. That doesn't mean that there aren't some arguments that are better than others. But for sure there are no directly applicable casebook plays which would clarify the entire situation (including the amount of time to be put back on the clock following the review).

One mistake that does seem clear is the amount of time that was put back on the clock. There was a 1.6 second difference between GC and SC at the beginning of the last Syracuse possession. Why, then, would the crew put 1.4 on the clock following the review?

Lastly (for the moment), the casebook needs to be clarified. AR 143 is what I think screwed everybody up yesterday, but it doesn't explicitly mention how it fits in with 13.2(c).

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

I am joining the thread late and I will address all of the three plays in the order that they occurred.

Play #1: First, some of the posts in this thread questioned the use of PST. I thought that PST was used all throught the Tournament becuase it is used in just about every Division I game played during the regular season; and I think that the use or non-use of PST in this game has a bearing of how this play is handled. As an example: Let us assume that the Shot Clock is not a factor and only the Game Clock is a factor. If a player is fouled in the Act of Shooting before the Game Clock expires but the ball is not released before the Game Clock expires then the FG if successful will not count, and the Shooter will be awarded two or three FTs depending upon the type of FGA.

I just watched APG's video post of the play at the end of the first half. That said, my take from watching APG's video post is this: The foul occurred as the Syracuse player was starting his Act of Shooting and well before he released the ball and it also occured before the the Shot Clock expired.

If PST was being used the Game and Shot Clocks should have stopped on the whistle (It is my learned opinion that this play is a perfect example of why the Shot Clock should not stop with the game clock and another reason why I am not in favor of a Shot Clock but that it the subject matter for another thread.). If PST was not used, one question that can be asked is was there too much lag time between the time whistle sounded and the clock stopped.

From my viewing of the video was that the Official's whistle sounded and the Shot Clock expired at the same time which appeared to have happened just before the ball left the Syracuse player's hand. It is my opinion that the foul in the Act of Shooting definitely occurred before the Shot Clock expired. Since the ball was not released before the Shot Clock expired, then the basket should not count and two FTs should have been awarded.

First, PTS, (not PST) hasn't been used in the NCAA Tournament in years.

Second, if the foul occurs prior to the shot clock expiring, the shot clock is of no consequence. The SC and game clock should stop on the whistle.

The foul occurred just as the shooter started the habitual motion with his arms going up. NO question it occurred before the SC expired.