UNC-Asheville/Syracuse End of 1st Half
 

I figured someone would start a thread on this so why not me? :)

I thought the SU player was fouled before the shot clock expired. I know it's tough to post video but if anyone can it would be appreciated.

Already reminded myself to put up video of the play for later. That foul definitely occurred before the shot clock violation.

<iframe src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/-CW8JXtEocc" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" width="560"></iframe>

Syracuse vs. UNC Ashville
 

Did anybody just watch the end of the half? I am in disbelief. That ruling seems to go against all common sense. I realize very few people on this forum have ever had this situation as it involves a shot clock, but here goes:

Syracuse has the ball with about 1.3 seconds more than the shot clock, left in the half. Got down to about 11 seconds remaining (therefore about 10 left on the shotclock) and they started their offense. Syracuse throws up a 3 with maybe :04 left in the half (3 on the shotclock), airballs, rebounded by Syracuse, and the player is fouled on a shot. Whistle is clearly blown before the shotclock horn goes off, but as the player is finishing the shooting motion, the shotclock buzzer blows as the ball is still in his hands. The lead counts the basket, officials confer at the table. They decide to not only wave off the shot, but not shoot freethrows! Do the shotclock and game both not stop as soon as the whistle is blown? Shouldn't they, at the very least, shot foul shots?

I had the same idea:rolleyes: My thread has an indepth account of the play

Foul and whistle came before the shot clock expired.

Should have counted the basket and shot 1 FT.

We're discussing it in the Chat Room.

Sounds like you already know the answers to your questions. Guessing you're just surprised by the misapplication?

Just making sure it WAS a misapplication and not an odd rule. I definitely will default to 3 NCAA tournament officials' judgment over mine if I've never seen it before.

I thought it should have been no basket because ball had not left hand prior to time expiring, however two FTs because foul occurred prior.

The shotclock doesn't continue to run when a foul is called and 10 seconds left, so why should it run when there is 1 second left?

The shot clock and game clock stop when a whistle blows.

So how can the clock expire when the whistle is before the buzzer?

Are they using PTS?

Negative...count the basket and one...since the foul occurred before the shot clock expired, the clock should have stopped.

Good point. Then should the foul have been enforced? Foul happened prior to expiration of time.

PTS isn't used for the tournament.

Not in the tourney. They never do.

Sure would have prevented whatever is being discussed here. I haven't seen it yet.

Neither have I, gotta work :(

This error would have been correctable to start the half, no? I've been in the rulebook all half, and I'm struggling to see how it's not correctable.

If I'm wrong, mea culpa to the crew (sort of). If I'm right, it's a double-whammy.

Do we have a CE situation here?

It's within the next dead ball time frame but I'm not sure how the end of the period plays in under NCAA rules.

No matter, they didn't correct it. And Len Elmore is explaining to everyone how they got it right. :(

There are no end-of-half exceptions listed in 2.12. I think it's a CE.

That's what is making me mad. The crew just missed a goaltend against Cuse so now atleast the outcome of the game can't be blamed on this one call

Wanna bet? Fans can always blame a loss on a call.

fans can, but at least I can rest knowing that there was at least one major missed call against both teams with similar results

One was a missed judgement call...the other was a misapplication of the rules. Two different categories.

Fans will blame the first call on the game for the outcome. Who cares what fans think. No one call ever changes the outcome of a game. There are too many plays that if gone one way or the other have the same result.

Peace

Two wrongs dont make it right & it will be interesting to see if they advance. You would think somebody on the crew knows its a CE or at least a buddy would call to help out.

Someone want to explain to these jokers why a player can't run in from outside the 3-point line on the release?

Uhmmm because its not the NBA? :D

Or because players not along the lane lines have the same restriction as the shooter?

Where's Mike Pierrera when you need him?
 

They need a rules expert sitting in the studio to help them when they're too stupid to know the rule.

The crew looked bad on the out of bounds play right after this. The announcers are right -- either call the foul or call the OOB correctly. Film don't lie.

Yep. I don't think we'll see them on Saturday. Too bad, Corbett is a past Nat'l Champ. official.

That's the problem with having NBA guys working NCAA games...that play would be completely legal in a pro game.

That play was brutal.

And the fans on ESPN.com all think now that the officials screwed that up.

So the guys that didnt get in definitely have some ammunition now :D
I hope this crew treated their peers well...

What a shame. This was all set up to be a great smackdown of the in game announcers blatently not knowing a rule and making themselves look silly. They were so strident about what they thought was a wrong "lane violation" call, that it would have really been nice to see them have to eat their words.

But, of course, the crew has to go and make a brutal OOB call, so that now they get to acknowledge the tv guys blew it on the lane violation stuff but still were right about the crew. Bummer.

Do they no longer already preselect the 1st two rounds? It used to be that the officials would know ahead of time if they were working one or two games.

No idea. But I sure wouldn't give any of them a Saturday game, based on the rule misapplication alone.

John Adams is about to appear on the postgame show, so we'll see what he has to say about those plays.

The Studio guys made it clear this was a lane violation.

And they are talking to John Adams now.

Peace

Also John Adams came in and set everyone straight with the lane violation calls. They talked to him live and he commented on the rules. Then again it was on TruTV, so many might not have seen it. ;)

Peace

I was driving home from the gym when the madness over that inbounds play started.Can someone post the tape of the play and Adams comments on the postgame show?

Too bad they didn't ask him about the play at the end of the 1st half.

What did the commentators say in response? I was away from the TV and missed it.

And..
 

He's also my old JV/Freshman assignor for the NYC Catholic Schools :(

First, Adams said the violation was on the player in the first space who stepped in slightly early. Then, they pointed out the guard who came from outside the arc and asked wasn't that a violation too. John didn't even see that until they pointed it out. "Oh, oh, yeah, that too" is basically what he said. That didn't come off to good. :o

He then said he didn't know which one they called. Hell, the C was pointing at the kid and the path he took.

"Oh yeah, now I see it." :o :o

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...s/7b6d6cfe.jpg

Peace

Actually, the shot clock buzzer never went off. Even after the whistle, the last 1.3 seconds elapsed from the game clock as well.

I do not agree that it was bad, I thought that was the violation as well and the part the original telecast focused on. And I posted a picture that shows this was correct. Again you are not going to always know what someone calls until you talk to them personally and he commented on the obvious one you see on TV first. At the arena that might have been more obvious of the player behind the 3 point line.

Peace

Whoops.

I had the sound down but watching the replay I figured it was the kid who came from behind the 3-pt line. Then I made the mistake of turning the sound up and listening to Reggie Miller.

That step in happens on almost every FT that's shot, it never gets called and it wasn't called this time.

The C pointed to the offender and pointed to the path he took to get to the ball..

I knew immediately who he had called the violation was called on.

If I can see it, then the NCAA Mens' Officiating Coordinator should be able to.

If anyone else noticed, they ALMOST let Syracuse attempt a third free throw at the end of the game too. Pretty harsh day for those three.

Yes, the shot clock buzzer did go off.

The game clock doesn't stop when the shot clock expires. It expires when an official blows his whistle, recognizing a shot clock violation.

Forgive my question. But how do you "almost" let someone shoot? They either did or they did not shoot.

Peace

There was no light at 0. The official blew his whistle with 1.3 left and the game clock never stopped. And I'm aware they don't use PTS in the NCAA tourney.

You are correct. The light did not come on and the game clock did not stop.

However, the shot clock buzzer did blow just after Corbett blew his whistle, while the ball was in the shooter's hand. I know, I watched over and over and still have it on my DVR.

I do nothing but wreck basketball anymore, most of which use NCAA rules regarding FT. I think I call this Free Throw Violation once a night, and every time no one believes me.

Regarding the end of 1st half play...is there "lag" time in NCAA basketball? If the officials conferred and judged the horn occured before the whistle (erroneously) then they made the correct call, right?

True or False, once the ball strikes the backboard on an attempt the defense cannot touch it?

Wasn't that out of bounds call a wreck league rule...when a foul may have caused the ball to go out of bounds, award the ball out of bounds to the offended team without calling the foul...

Since they can review such a play, they can also put the exact amount of time back on the clock.

I actually thought the studio guys were pretty good with Adams. They ran the reply of the lane violation call from an angle that I don't think he had seen before -- and followed up after he made the foot in the lane comment to get his reaction to the violation the official actually called. On the OOB play, he basically said he wasn't going to make any alibis for the crew. The commentators followed up with some good questions about whether he thought there should have been a foul on the play. (He said something about how, although he wasn't there, if they judged it after the ball hit the hand (I guess he meant, not causing the violation) he would have it as incidental contact.)

Seth Davis asked some questions about whose call the OOB should have been and even got into, very briefly, proper mechanics for the ref putting the ball at the under the basket player's disposal, which I thought was significantly better than the usual in-studio stuff. Adams had a bit of a deer-in-the-headlights aspect to him at first; he's not polished like Mike Pereira, but I think having him in the studio on these sorts of plays could be really good.

John Adams on Tru TV now...does NOT look happy.

How is that a problem?

The C didn't call a lane violation for the player in the marked lane space...he pointed at the player he called it on which was for the player outside the arc running in early. While technically a violation, no official at that level is going to split hairs that closely on the player in the lane.

They apply NBA rules to NCAA games...that was why Reggie Miller was going haywire on this play...same with Charles Barkley.

He didn't admit the mistake. Said in their opinion, the shot clock violation occurred before the foul. Completely wrong. :(

Guess he didn't want to throw his guys under the bus on national television.

Story and coupla videos......
 

I don't think admitting a mistake is throwing guys under a bus.

One of the best things about Mike Pierrera, when he was the NFL officiating supervisor, was that he was willing to admit honest mistakes. It gave him credibility.

After the second successful try, they lined them up for a third free throw and had already given the shooter the ball. It took another official to blow the whistle and remind them they made the two already.

Sure, but if I'm not mistaken, Pereira isn't affiliated with the NFL anymore even if he knows most if not all of those officials personally.

How is this an NBA rule vs NCAA rule issue? The player that ran in from beyond the 3-point line clearly committed the violation. It was totally obvious. The only reason that the commentators were going haywire is because they are completely ignorant on the rules.

Are you trying to say that retired NBA officials aren't smart enough to adapt to NCAA rules? That's completely absurd.

I'm talking about the announcers...Reggie Miller regularly announces NBA games for TNT. Charles Barkely regularly does analysis for NBA games. As such, they apply NBA rules because that's what (they think) they're knowledge (I know I know) about.

It was a clear and obvious violation under NCAA rules...but they (they being the announcers/commentators/analysts) were applying their NBA knowledge which would have made the play legal.

When he was head of officials, the would regularly have a show every week on NFL.com where they reviewed the most controversial rulings of the week. If the crew was wrong, they were wrong and he flat out said it.

LOL ... I thought you were talking about NBA refs working NCAA games!

I will now excuse myself from the forums! :)

Still, even the announcers that only do NCAA games are completely idiots when it comes to the rules!!

Sir Charles says......
 

"I'd like to know how many times that's been called all yr." :rolleyes:

Didn't know that, thanks. People want transparency, especially in the digital age where we have access to replays upon replays upon replays.

"...when he was the NFL officiating supervisor,..."

Yeah, I'm sure they have stats for that Charles! "You don't call that in this situation. Players decide the game!"

Yes, they are preselected for Thu/Sat & Fri/Sun.

Also, I believe when the officials get their opening round assignments they are given some kind of indicator as to whether or not they considered for an opportunity to be one of the 36 officials who will advance to the Sweet 16/Elite 8.

Hey, guys. Haven't been on here in years, but when I saw the shot clock play, this board was my first thought. I remember posting a hypothetical a few years ago about an NFHS game with foul, whistle, buzzer, shot, and what the ruling would be. Can't say I agree with the crew on the floor on this one, although if they judged the shot clock violation before the foul, they at least interpreted the situation correctly.

Like a decoder ring?

Have a mentor on the Women's side who once told me that when they get their opening round email/letter there is some kind of code included within the notification correspondence. If your correspondence didn't have the code then you know you do not have a chance move on.

bigjake, I'm sure, can give us the details and correct me if I'm wrong.

Re: the oob play.

Pass hits A1's hands, goes through his hands, then B1 collides with him.

How many are calling that a foul?

Any idea when they get their notice? Before the brackets are set? Afterwards?

That's what you see in slo-mo. Regular speed, not so sure.

Did anyone notice that the Ashville players were committing the same violation on many of the free throws? In fact, a player crossed the line again on the second free throw AFTER the violation was called. IMO had the UNCA player not gotten that rebound, they would not have blown a violation. Like I said the Bulldogs were doing that all night/afternoon

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.

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?

Syracuse was standing on/overlapping to the Asheville lane space while Jardine's was sizing up his replacement free throws also.

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

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.

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!)

I got burned by a play like this on a big stage. Lesson learned. Call the foul. Adams is right.

But on this play Adams said he would have given the ball to UNC-Asheville right?

The contact was after the ball had already been touched and was headed oob and was therefore incidental. No foul and possession should have gone to UNCA.

I agree though that the habit of ignoring a foul and awarding possession is a dying practice and we should just call the foul.

IMO we can still get away with doing this occassionally on marginal rebounding contact where both players come close to touching the ball and we award the ball to the team whose player may have been slightly disadvantaged by contact from behind.

But this has become a dangerous practice, especially with the NBA now making oob calls reviewable at the end of games. They basically have to call the foul now if they feel the contact is what caused the player to not be able to secure possession.

Does it look like C has a foul call on OOB play? Has arm up, what else would it be? Not his line call.

Sorry if already discussed, haven't read through entire thread

Agreed. The ball was already on it's way OOB with no chance of the player recovering it when there was contact. I think it's incidental contact. No foul. Give UNCA the ball for a throw-in.

Adams said he would've given the ball to UNCA but I think that was based on what was called/not called on the play (I didn't see his interview but there was a tweet about it on the NCAA web site). That makes sense. He may have wanted the foul called but if the crew wasn't going to call the foul, the ball should've gone to UNCA since the SU player was the last to touch it.

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.

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.

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).

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.