Possible CE, MN/MSU

[JetMetFan]

It was an incorrectly applied rule that created a CE situation...and isn't that how all CE situations are created?

The error - awarding an unmerited FT - could have been corrected until the first dead ball after the clock properly started.

The interesting thing is we don't see the moment the window closed on this clip. The clock didn't start on the foul after the FT, nor should it have since the foul was commited prior to any player touching a live ball while it was inbounds.

The next dead ball after the clock properly started came 28 seconds in game time later. Minn #55 shot - and missed - the front end of his one-and-one then there was a foul commited by MSU with 1:17 left in the half.

[BillyMac]

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by afsst

I don't agree with making up rules to suit my personal opinion about a rule. That's a slippery slope. Were your partners happy about wiping out the rebounding foul? If so, now you have three officials on the court that have decided they will interpret the rules to suit themselves. Not a good situation.

I was the U2 so I didn't make the decision. But I had no problem with it. And my career didn't get halted by it.

And you never answered my question. In the OP's situation what is actually going to be done by the officials to correct the error?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

It was an incorrectly applied rule that created a CE situation...and isn't that how all CE situations are created?

The error - awarding an unmerited FT - could have been corrected until the first dead ball after the clock properly started.

The interesting thing is we don't see the moment the window closed on this clip. The clock didn't start on the foul after the FT, nor should it have since the foul was commited prior to any player touching a live ball while it was inbounds.

The next dead ball after the clock properly started came 28 seconds in game time later. Minn #55 shot - and missed - the front end of his one-and-one then there was a foul commited by MSU with 1:17 left in the half.

I do not consider a completely kicked rule the same as a mistake in whether we shoot bonus or not. THe officials should know better and not even be shooting here.

And I stand by my original statement, this was a kicked rule. It could have been corrected under the CE rule or it could have more than likely been corrected by someone say, "Hey that was a TC foul." Nobody said anything obviously.

Peace

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by billyu2

Instead of the foul on the rebound, let's say the rebounding team advanced the ball down the court and scored at which time the error was recognized. Would you have cancelled the basket?

Willing to cancel foul if next foul occurs during rebounding action. And wish rule was written to legally do so. Otherwise in the case of an unmerited free throw what are we really correcting in the OP.

I'm not some 1st year JV official who is ignorant of the rule. Unlike some folks here I acknowdge when I'm doing something outside the letter of the rules and I'm willing to eat the consequences if there are any.

[HawkeyeCubP]

Originally Posted by billyu2

Instead of the foul on the rebound, let's say the rebounding team advanced the ball down the court and scored at which time the error was recognized. Would you have cancelled the basket?

Nope. All action after the FT would stand, including time consumed, points scored, and fouls committed. Then the ball would be put back into play at the POI, which would be a throw-in to the team that didn't make that last basket from anywhere along that end line.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by HawkeyeCubP

Nope. All action after the FT would stand, including time consumed, points scored, and fouls committed. Then the ball would be put back into play at the POI, which would be a throw-in to the team that didn't make that last basket from anywhere along that end line.

So essentially all you're doing is what if the CE was an unmerited free throw that was missed?

[HawkeyeCubP]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

So essentially all you're doing is what if the CE was an unmerited free throw that was missed?

Yep. But if it were my game, it'd help save some of what little a$$ I have left with my supervisor, at least (and that FT shooter's percentage for stat purposes).

[Forksref]

Originally Posted by just another ref

I think you're right.

We're missing the point you're making.

And Michigan State missed the FT and did not make the point or have a chance at the second point so the discussion point is made even though the FT point is not made but should not have been even attempted and that is the point that Rut was making and others were making for a different reason but the points are both good! Kumbaya

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Forksref

And Michigan State missed the FT and did not make the point or have a chance at the second point so the discussion point is made even though the FT point is not made but should not have been even attempted and that is the point that Rut was making and others were making for a different reason but the points are both good! Kumbaya

Then the question I have now, how do you have a CE on a missed FT? You are not taking off points. You cannot give the ball back to Minnesota at the spot of the foul. So how is this really a CE situation at all?

Peace

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Forksref

And Michigan State missed the FT and did not make the point or have a chance at the second point so the discussion point is made even though the FT point is not made but should not have been even attempted and that is the point that Rut was making and others were making for a different reason but the points are both good! Kumbaya

That's what makes it an error.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Then the question I have now, how do you have a CE on a missed FT?

Whether the free throw is made or missed has no bearing on whether or not it was a correctable error.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Whether the free throw is made or missed has no bearing on whether or not it was a correctable error.

Yes it does. You cannot invoke 2-10 or 2-12 (NCAA Rule) unless you are counting or cancelling something.

BTW, here is a note out of the NCAA Rulebook.

Note: In order for this to be a correctable error, the official must have erred in counting or canceling a successful try for goal according to a rule (i.e., after basket interference or goaltending, incorrectly counting or failing to cancel a score or counting a three-point goal instead of a two- point goal). A correctable error does not involve an error in judgment.

No points were scored or needed to be cancelled.

Peace

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Yes it does. You cannot invoke 2-10 or 2-12 (NCAA Rule) unless you are counting or cancelling something.

BTW, here is a note out of the NCAA Rulebook.

Note: In order for this to be a correctable error, the official must have erred in counting or canceling a successful try for goal according to a rule (i.e., after basket interference or goaltending, incorrectly counting or failing to cancel a score or counting a three-point goal instead of a two- point goal). A correctable error does not involve an error in judgment.

No points were scored or needed to be cancelled.

Peace

The above note goes with:

e. Erroneously counting or canceling a score.

It has nothing to do with the play at hand.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by just another ref

The above note goes with:

e. Erroneously counting or canceling a score.

It has nothing to do with the play at hand.

I agree. You are correct.

Calling a foul on the team in control but not penalizing it correctly is not an error in judgment but is a correctable error. What would not correctable is not calling an infraction that should be called or calling an infraction that wasn't....such as calling GT when it shouldn't have been GT. The points that come from that are not a correctable error because the GT call is a judgment call. In this case, it was call correctly made but unmerited FTs were awarded.