LV at UConn rule misapplications
 

The crew misapplied two rules during this contest:
A. About 10:30 remaining TWO officials whistle and signal offensive BI for a player grasping the ring who reaches out and grabs the ball which was nowhere near the cylinder. Call should have been a T. Class B.
B. with just over 1:30 left LV has the ball. It gets knocked away by a defender and then strikes the LV player before going into bc. The covering official gives the "tip" signal and does not call a bc violation.

Perhaps it has something to do with UConn games this season!

My son told me about Play A. Made me go, Hmmmm as I quizzed him about BI vs GT. Glad his account was accurate as it didn't sound right. But, I guess it was!

I do not consider the second one a misapplication of the rules, I consider that a missed judgment. I am not sure he saw the touch of the leg. He was signaling rather quick.

Peace

More times than not, in this case, it is a misapplication. I've seen it too many times when the contact was obvious where it couldn't be chalked up to judgement.

I think in most of these cases the only way you know it is a misapplication of the rule based on not knowing the rule is talking to the official. I also think officials often do not want to "guess" on a play like this either.

Peace

Play #1
 

<iframe width="853" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/qCcZyym2ypE" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Why...?
 

Why would a person even call that BI or a T? He attempted a shot, missed, didn't hang on the rim, and his hand released the rim before the gained control of the ball. Making a mountain out of a mole-hill to me. You shouldn't call a travel either, because he did attempt a shot, and he is allowed to get his own rebound even if it doesn't hit the rim.

They should have called travelling on the guard who passed him the ball. I have nothing as far as BI or grasping the ring.

NFHS: 10-3-4a

The moment he used the rim to swing to the other side for the rebound while hanging on the rim with the other hand, he lost he privilege of grasping the rim for safety and stepped into the area of gaining an advantage by contact with the rim. If he had instead let go and fell to the floor, he wouldn't have been in position for the rebound....white #2 would have got it. Personally, I think that BI would be the just ruling (but it isn't actually BI).

I don't have anything on the first play.

I agree with Camron, I'd have a T.

I'm leaning towards nothing.

and Play #2
 

<iframe width="853" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/yUA1YHJlrkM" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Agreed, that is what I was thinking when I saw this play.

Play #2 I saw live and thought this was clearly missed. I just think a lot of officials simply give the benefit of the doubt for a touch by the defense and consider it a tip and never call the violation.

Peace

I don't see him as using the rim to swing. I see an attempted dunk, a released rim and a rebound. Given that he attempted a dunk, I would need to see some secondary action that was not part of the momentum of the dunk before I would feel that he had illegally contacted the rim and I just don't see that here.

In other words, I do think he let go and fell to the floor. You seem to think that he should have fell straight down but his momentum was towards the basket so unless he used the rim to check his momentum he's going to fall to the other side of the basket, like we see in the video.

It's nothing for me.