Wow. Take a look at this...

[stiffler3492]

This was in New York. Do they not allow video review for buzzer beaters in the state tournament?

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by stiffler3492

This was in New York. Do they not allow video review for buzzer beaters in the state tournament?

For boys, only in the state semis or finals. For girls, not at all.

This situation reflects a huge flaw in the rule itself. If you're going to have H.S. tournament games in NCAA gyms then you need to allow video review in those games if it's available. Either that or you have to shut of the LEDs on the backboard. Making a judgment based on sight/sound with a buzzer isn't easy but we're used to it. With the LEDs - since they take precedence - you're really making that judgment on "sight/sight." It's not easy to do with a video monitor, let alone without one.

[stiffler3492]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

For boys, only in the state semis or finals. For girls, not at all.

On the video, it doesn't *look* like they ever go to the video, but maybe they did quickly when they were off camera. The one official waved it off right away. If they didn't look at the video, I wonder what was said in the quick huddle to change the call.

[JRutledge]

Something similar happened in a Sectional Final in Illinois last year. Instead there was a wave off after a conference when the calling official counted the basket (The video is on YouTube).

I am not a big fan of changing calls on the last second shot. But I am certainly away of when you are sending a team home, get it right. I think in this case they got it right. I would rather the officials huddle or make a call if it is very close.

Peace

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by stiffler3492

On the video, it doesn't *look* like they ever go to the video, but maybe they did quickly when they were off camera. The one official waved it off right away. If they didn't look at the video, I wonder what was said in the quick huddle to change the call.

I'm sure they didn't check if only because the guy doing the broadcast would've said something. That and the fact all of them would've gotten into lots of trouble if they had.

[APG]

Lights and imposed clocks from TV broadcast tend not to be in sync...just watch any NBA/NCAA game when there's a shot clock violation or end of period/half. Not unusual to see the TV clock off by .1-.2. seconds.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by APG

Lights and imposed clocks from TV broadcast tend not to be in sync...just watch any NBA/NCAA game when there's a shot clock violation or end of period/half. Not unusual to see the TV clock off by .1-.2. seconds.

That is normally the case because in those games, the broadcast is using a computer generated clock controlled by their own technician. It isn't electronically tied to the official clock...they just try to mimic the real thing. So, they can easily be off a small amount. That is why when ever they go to replay over timing issues, they look at an official clock or indicator, not the TV clock.


The difference in this case is that the superimposed clock was actually just inset image of the actual game clock....same lights, same font, same color, etc.

The only explanation of this is that the broadcast equipment was maladjusted....or the image was of a different clock in the arena (perhaps on the other end) and the in arena clocks were not in sync with each other.

[Brad]

That was awesome! Looks like it was barely off in time —*before the clock and LEDs ... but it is CLOSE!!!

[SamG]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

That is normally the case because in those games, the broadcast is using a computer generated clock controlled by their own technician. It isn't electronically tied to the official clock...they just try to mimic the real thing. So, they can easily be off a small amount. That is why when ever they go to replay over timing issues, they look at an official clock or indicator, not the TV clock.


The difference in this case is that the superimposed clock was actually just inset image of the actual game clock....same lights, same font, same color, etc.

The only explanation of this is that the broadcast equipment was maladjusted....or the image was of a different clock in the arena (perhaps on the other end) and the in arena clocks were not in sync with each other.

Not accurate. Many basketball broadcasts will have a computer tied to the clock. The clock sends the computer the countdown for game & shot (when applicable). The computer will display what it gets. This is what is used during the game.

Regardless of whether the above system is used, a camera is dedicated to shooting the clock.

If the clock system doesn't support the setup (most major arenas should), or the technology won't work for whatever reason, the clock 'camera' is actually used on the broadcast. You can tell because it will look like a scoreboard clock.

During the last minute of a period, they will record the 'game' camera with the clock camera superimposed (not the computer generated clock). It is done exactly for this situation. So the replays with the clock in the white box should be in perfect sync (action camera & clock camera).

[Brad]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

The only explanation of this is that the broadcast equipment was maladjusted....or the image was of a different clock in the arena (perhaps on the other end) and the in arena clocks were not in sync with each other.

The NBA found that long cable lengths could actually cause a delay in their systems which resulted in the clocks and LEDs being out of sync. They make adjustments to compensate for this problem.

It's definitely possible that the clock in the arena is out of sync with the LEDs by 0.1 seconds —*I think that is likely the case here.

[McMac]

The best I could slow it down (stop & go in YouTube), I see it still in his hand as the lights come on and the clock goes to 0.0. But the clock superimposed is behind by .1 if you compare to the clock on the backboard, hence why the common-taters are think he got it off.

As to why they changed the call, I don't want to speculate. Who would have had a better view that the T for this. I thought he waved it off appropriately. Was it the T that then reports the counting of the 3 after the conference?

[Andy]

Originally Posted by stiffler3492

On the video, it doesn't *look* like they ever go to the video, but maybe they did quickly when they were off camera. The one official waved it off right away. If they didn't look at the video, I wonder what was said in the quick huddle to change the call.

That is what I saw watching the video as well. I also thought I heard a whistle right as the shot was released, then saw who I thought was the T waving it off. I, too, wonder what changed his mind, if in fact, he did originally wave it off.

[the24kid]

I know 2/3 of the three officials, they did a FANTASTIC job. A real excellent representation of the officiating in the New York City area. Those two officials also officiate in the CHSAA. I'm proud to have worked with them before.

[icallfouls]

Originally Posted by the24kid

I know 2/3 of the three officials, they did a FANTASTIC job. A real excellent representation of the officiating in the New York City area. Those two officials also officiate in the CHSAA. I'm proud to have worked with them before.

who is the T? the way he ducked, did he get hit by someone/something?

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by icallfouls

who is the T? the way he ducked, did he get hit by someone/something?

He covered up after someone ran into him. I've met the guy also back in my CHSAA days. Nice guy to me when I was still a freshman/JV official.