Colorado vs Arizona - Shot at the Buzzer

[Jesse James]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

We know that part, but he does not count it and that is the key. Normally I would always use the "count the basket signal" even if it is a successful 3 point shot.

Peace

He doesn't wipe it off either. So, given a 3-signal and touchdown, which is most likely the original call, bucket or no?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Jesse James

He doesn't wipe it off either. So, given a 3-signal and touchdown, which is most likely the original call, bucket or no?

They are going to look at it anyway.

As I said, I think these guys really do not make a decision until they look at the monitor.

Peace

[jeremy341a]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

They are going to look at it anyway.

As I said, I think these guys really do not make a decision until they look at the monitor.

Peace

I think they looked at the monitor and iit was close so they went with the side that kept the score tied.

[JRutledge]

I do think they erred on the side of keeping the score tied as well then make a call that would be reviewed and debated the other way. And if the Pac 12 cannot get HD feeds for the officials then shame on them for being cheap. It was hard to determine in HD picture, it really must have been hard to do in SD pictures.

Peace

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

They are going to look at it anyway.

As I said, I think these guys really do not make a decision until they look at the monitor.

Yes, they're going to look at it because by rule they have to but they're not going to the monitor to come up with a ruling, or at least they shouldn't be. The women's CCA manual says:

When there is a reading of zeros in the game clock and after making a call on the playing court, the officials shall use such available equipment...

I added the emphasis. I know I'm quoting the women's manual so if the men's manual is any different let me know. However I doubt that it is since the review critera for last-second shots is the same in both codes. The C went up with the touchdown signal after the ball went in so he didn't have to do anything else to show it was a made three-point goal. Once he did that, the crew had to come up with "indisputable video evidence to overturn the ruling on the court." (CCA manual again)

[JRutledge]

Either way it goes, they found enough evidence in their mind to make that decision. Now we might disagree with it on some level, but that does not mean they were not convinced as some here are. It is just like an accident on the road and people that witness have different accounts of what actually took place. And I am sure it does not help that they were not looking at the best picture that many of us witnessed either.

Peace