Ucon MU OT
 

.

I have the exact same question?

On what basis did they give MU (Marquette?) the ball?

NCAA 4-71: Act of Shooting

"A try for field goal is an attempt by a player to score by throwing or tapping the ball into their basket"

I would like to see video of this if anyone can dig it up. I was watching this game earlier but switched off of it.

Since there was no goaltend the only means of determining control was the arrow. Which favored Marquette since UConn won the tip, even going the wrong way.

But why was the GT cancelled out? I think they screwed the pooch here and went with the "shot at wrong basket so can't have GT" even though the officials set them up going the wrong way....

Wrong basket = not a try = no goaltend

But the officials set them up going the wrong way off the tip! When that happens, you trat it as if they were going the right way and then get them going the right way once it is found out

Doing so would violate the definition of a "try" as quoted in a previous post. If there was no attemped goaltend and Marquette went the wrong way also and scored then yes you would correct as if they went the proper way. However, the attemped goaltend is the difference here.

For any new guys!!
 

Given the situation as in the UConn/Marquette game where a player goes to the wrong basket. Here is a hypothetical situation that can happen:

A1 attempts a lay-up and is fouled. Upon the whistle and reporting of the foul the officials recognize that A1 attempted the shot at Team B's basket (the wrong basket).

1) How would you administer (shots, foul, etc)
2) Team A is in the bonus

I haven't seen the video yet, but the OP says they were lined up on the jump going the wrong way. (officials error). This will cause the answers to 1&2 to be a bit different than just A1 getting confused and throwing ball at the wrong basket.

So if the teams went the wrong directions the entire first half, and you don't realize it until the horn sounds to end the period, what would you do?

I beg to differ (and can be wrong). In both cases you have a shot at the wrong basket. Whether by confusion during the game or going the wrong way after the tip. Though most of the time it is after the tip that you will see the situation I presented.

Treat it as if they went the proper direction, which is different than what happened in the game in question.

How is it different? In both cases, the officials allowed the players to go the wrong direction to start a period, no?

Check NCAA 5-1-3 and NFHS 4-5-4, 5.2.1.E, & 5.2.1.F.

I agree. The difference IMO is the situation that leads to the discovery. Which in this case is the "goaltend". You cannot have one at the wrong basket and you must correct the wrong direction based on that situation.

The "situation that leads to the discovery" is irrelevant. The goaltending violation, along with everything else that happens prior to the discovery of the officials' error, is to stand, and be treated as though the teams were going in the proper directions.

According to StatSheet, there was a big crew on the game.

Karl Hess, Michael Stephens, Mike Stuart

NCHSAA read 4-5-4. After the GT is called the mistake was recognized. Count the basket and get everyone going the proper direction.

If there's no GT, then there's no try, then there's still TC.

IW gives the ball back to the team with TC.

Who had control?

What is the difference then in the case book play where you have a foul and the ball goes in if going the wrong direection??? You still do not count the basket and you correct off of that.

You cannot disregard NCAA 4-73 (Page 64)

So if they went the wrong way for 2 minutes and there were several field goals scored then MU's commits a goaltending violation at which point the error in direction is discovered, you are going to ignore the goaltending?

If the officials lined them up in the wrong direction then UConn was shooting at the "right" basket as far as the violation is concerned.

You are completely and illogically ignoring the fact that officials lined them up wrong. It's not the same as inadvertently shooting at the wrong basket. It's just that simple.

One, if it takes 2 minutes then something is wrong. I'm speaking at the college level. Where this should not happen for 2 minutes. I'm not convinced yet based on a try being at your correct basket. And I'm not saying I wont be convinced

The team last in control is still in team control, because, by your logic in this play, there wasn't a try.

First, the rule application for this scenario is the exact same in the HS and college games. Second, per NCAA: Rule 5. Section 1. Article 3. The amount of time the officials permit the players to go in the wrong directions is irrelevant. And invoking 4-73 is not relevant either, because the officials' error led the players to believe they were attempting tries at their own baskets.

The officials erred in allowing the teams to line up and go the wrong way. The GT should score the basket, then turn the teams around and continue play. The crew screwed the pooch.

Well, since you are quoting rules to back your stance where does it state that time is relevant to a ruling?

Anybody ever see this happen in a D1 game before?

I find it embarrassing when we let teams go the wrong way in a jr. high game.
I personally have never been involved when it happened at the start of any quarter.

per twitter:

Andy Katz‏@ESPNAndyKatz

From MQ: BE official Karl Hess said officials responsible for wrong direction of players, UConn OT goal tend basket should have counted.

Karl Hess reads the forum?

Then uconn should have been given the ball by virtue of team control.

It is only the wrong basket if the teams were going the right directions. Since they started the OT going the wrong way, it was the correct basket until they turned them around.

Thus, it was a try and it was a GT.

Karl Hess Post Game Statement
 

Posted on the UConn Men's Basketball website:

Official's Statement On Play At Beginning of Overtime
Jan. 1, 2013

"Based on rule five, section one, article 3,[NCAA 5.1.3], when the official permits a team to go in the wrong direction, and the the error is discovered, all activity and time consumed is shall count as though the each team had gone in the proper direction. Play is then resumed with each team going in the proper direction.

"The players went in the wrong direction (tonight). Because we* allowed that to happen, the only thing that was wrong is there was a goaltend on the play. We should have scored the goaltend and give Connecticut two points for that.

"You have no team control after that, because you have a shot, so now you got to the alternating possession arrow. Because there is no team control at that point and then Marquette gets the ball and you head them all in the right direction."

Karl Hess BIG EAST Official

* Crew as listed in box score, Mike Stuart, Karl Hess, Michael Stephens

Hess STILL Doesn't Know the Rule
 

Did I read his quote correctly? Alternating possession has NOTHING to do with why MU would get the ball!! UConn should have been allowed the score and then give MU the ball based on this event going in the right direction. MU would still have the arrow...DAMN MAN!!!

How can this guy officiate NOT knowing the rules???

It looks to me like the new Lead on the play recognized that the players were going the wrong way. Look at where he is when he makes the GT call. It looks like he was coming out to stop play anyway. He made it to the end line, then starts walking out toward the Trail official. When the drive starts, he stops and officiates the play three steps onto the court.

If he'd just blown the whistle when he realized "something" was wrong. . . :)

Agreed with this, as I understand the play. NCHSAA (and the officials on the game, and Karl Hess in his statement) are wrong.

He wasn't sure.

He moved to his proper mechanics spot after he the outcome of the toss. After he was on/near the base line, he was likely 97% sure of the error, but knew it'd be a reeeeeeally bad call if he was wrong (his only correct decision on the play). And in the time he took (likely around 2-3 seconds) to check, the drive started coming toward him, so he let it go. He clearly signaled for the GT call, which should have stuck, and the non-scoring team a TI under the appropriate basket.

So the crew screwed up the rule there. They should have all met together and discussed what happened and how to proceed. Each official gets a voice.


Also watch the U1 position after the toss. He takes a small step backwards after he sees black obtain the jump. He thinks he's going to the L spot. But when he see black go the other way, and everyone else too, he sorta fades away. He never becomes the slot, and stays out of the video range the whole time. So he likely knew something was up too. But I'd say less than 97%. :) If he was 100% sure, he would have whistled play before the drive and set things straight.

It appears that the only official who had no clue is the tosser.


This is why every official doesn't just give the status quo thumbs-up. In your dead ball officiating, you assume responsibility as though you're the CC for setting up the play. Examples: the U2 also checks direction, the FJ also checks penalty application, the line judge also checks the score for switching sides at 12 points (or whatever the rule is).

Hopefully everyone checks to ensure the teams are going the proper direction to start the game, second half, OT, etc. Especially when the period starts with a jump ball we need to make sure the game starts properly. This is so easy to do, but we all have lapses in concentration. All 3 bear equal burden for this big mistake.

NFHS 4-5-4

If by mistake the officials permit a team to go the wrong direction, when discovered all points scored, fouls committed, and time consumed shall count as if each team had gone the proper direction. Play shall resume with each team going the proper direction based on bench location.

Seems the goaltending should have counted, Marquette ball, possession arrow to Marquette.

Correct. It was the officials' screw-up. In this case you wouldn't penalize the players for the officials' mistake.

While the NCAAM rule may be exactly the same (I have no idea), citing a high school rule for a college play is not really relevant.

It is relevant to those of us who don't call college and might have this play come up. Or is this situation limited to only the NCAA?

I agree that it is absolutely relevant to an equivalent high school play. I was just saying in the context you wrote it, it had no relevance because you drew a conclusion for the college scenario based on a high school rule reference.