Buzzer Beater. Or Not?
 

From another board. In a Minnesota Subsection semi final tonight a game ended on a buzzer beating shot. But did he get it off in time? I have no ties to either school and frankly want an officials opinion.

WORTHINGTON MN BB ending - YouTube

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/dWKc-IfJhqw" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

I do not think, based on just this video, that it was released in time.

I also wonder why there are 2 Cs, no L, and a T. And why did the C who quickly ran down to the lead position bang it home? Hell, it looks like ALL THREE of them count the bucket and the one guy who should've sold the hell out of it gave a weak little "basket counts" signal as he's tiptoeing off the court.

And then the one official stays way too long and the other two leave him on the court by himself.

Another case of stellar late-game officiating.

No good based on this video. buzzer sounds the ball is released wave it off.

2 guys leave their buddy hangin:eek:

This basket was NO GOOD on each of the three times I watched the video (if I watch it thirty more times I still won't be able to figure out what the officials were doing before, during, or after the shot.......).

Have to agree with the others so far. Did not get the shot off in time. And I have the same questions as Rich...plus one more: is Minn. one of those states that does not use 3 man crews until a certain point in the playoffs? Anyone know?

3-person isn't mandated in MN.

In the Twin Cities metro area, a couple of conferences require 3-person for varsity games. One conference that I know of uses 3-person for both varsity and JV games.

Some schools schedule 3 officials for their "top tier" varsity games, and 2 officials for the "regular" varsity games.

This season I had 10 2-person varsity, and 4 3-person varsity.

I have no idea if outstate schools (Worthington is in the southwest corner of the state) use 3-person during the regular season or not.

The shot is no good, and that is the least of their worries. What in the hell are they doing? This is a complete clusterf*ck from the get go. There is a Lead, but then we have a Center and Trail on the same side of the court "stacked" on top of each other. This does not look good folks.

Edit: After watching again, the guy that is tableside did not pick up on a rotation just before the change of possession that went away from the camera. He should be the new Center, the guy with his back to us should be the Trail, and the guy in no-man's land opposite the table in the corner should be the new Lead. This is what happens when you just throw three guys out there who hardly ever work 3-person mechanics.

I guess the guy who stayed too long likes to get yelled at. Why even address the coach after that anyway? You made the call, leave.

They are officiating a playoff game duh!

There wasn't even a rotation, really, nor should there have been since all three weren't in the frontcourt and there wasn't much time left in the quarter. I think the guy who was tableside simply forgot he was the C in the heat of the moment (FUBAR #1). The guy who had been the new T before the change of possession may have tried to compensate once he saw the guy on the other side run to the end line so he stopped in no-man's land (FUBAR #2). Why they both signaled the goal was good is a mystery (FUBAR #3). The guy who ended up being the T on the final shot is the only one who did what he was supposed to.

And yes, the shot was late. I would post a still frame but it's blurry since the camera was handheld.

Poor guys. They look up in years, especially the T who is away from table and responsible to sell either a made bucket that counts or waived off. Instead, he bolts for the locker room, then realizes his partners are going to the table for a conference and does an about face.

If you're going to gather with your partners to discuss the final shot, I don't see how a brief explanation to the coach hurts: "I heard the buzzer after the shot was released, Coach." Or, had it gone the other way, "The ball was still in his hands when the buzzer started, Coach."

I think just bolting off the floor when a coach is looking for an explanation sends the wrong message. What's wrong with keeping it brief, stating what happened, then getting off?

In this situation there was only one outcome that required staying on the floor: waving off the shot. If it's no good this game would've gone to OT. Why would I need to explain to the coach what I saw/heard if I scored the goal? That's going to be obvious and all being out there does is put me and the crew in harm's way.

They weren't in the frontcourt for the possession going away from us and the camera, I agree. I'm talking about the possession before the ball changes hands and we go the other way for the game-winning shot right when the video starts. It looks like the old Lead (New Trail) had just rotated to the side where the camera was right before the change of possession. The guy that was tableside did not realize this and thought he was still the old Trail/new Lead and went to the endline as a result instead of being the new Center like he should have been. I can't tell if the guy in the corner on our side figured it out or not. He looks completely lost like everyone else.

Edit: After watching it yet again, you could be right...I have no idea. You would think if the guy in the far lower left of the screen knew he was the Lead, he would have acted like it and let the guy tableside do his thing and let him live and die with his screw up. I still think the new Trail initiated a rotation and neither of the other two picked up on it. They were still in their old positions when White got control of the ball and took it the other way.

I'm looking at it full screen...stopping and starting as the play progresses. Shooter collect the pass at :0.4 and unloads. Unfortunately the entire frame is blurred as the clock hits 0.0 and it is impossible to see ball location. It is razor thin as to whether it should count. I'm willing to defer to the officials on the floor here. I don't see it as conclusively "no good".

All that being said, floor positioning of the officials is a debacle. Looks like there was a late rotation at the other end that wasn't picked up. Two LEADS at one point...no center. Makes ya wonder if there was any communication who had last shot.

Another example of why I like to have all three officials have an opinion when it's close.

Agree. Without imagining a much better video, I think it is too hard to make a conclusion one way or other. Some of these video are just not sufficient to tell much.

The quality of the video makes it very difficult to read the time on the clock and the position on the ball in relationship to the hand. As has been discussed already the mechanics causes some concern but in the end really has no bearing on the outcome of the call (at least that's my opinion).

I will throw this out for discussion:

From a game management perspective, if it's as razor thin close as it appears in the video, is it better to wave it off and go to OT? Personally, I think waving it off would be an easier "sell" and more acceptable to everyone.

NO. imo, of course.

From a game management perspective, be sure the crew knows who is responsible. That person make a call. All officials have an opinion. Get together and if someone else has "100% knowledge" that the call is incorrect change it, otherwise live with it.

Here's a little snipet from a newspaper article that describes what transpires just prior to the start of the video.

"MCW had the ball and used a pair of timeouts — one with 19.7 seconds left and another with 7.3 seconds showing — in an attempt to set up a last-second shot.

But a sideline out-of-bounds pass from near halfcourt was stolen by Traylor, who quickly got the ball to Will Mulder as Worthington looked to score in rapid fashion after a sudden change of events."

Now I'm even more perplexed on the positioning of the officials :confused:

I also don't know if 3-person crews are used in the regular season but in the post-seasson 3-person crews are used from the sub-section semifinal games om this section on. That is the 2nd round and this was a 2nd round game

So quite possibly these were three guys who had worked few - if any - three person games during the season?

Could explain the positioning issues.

First, I feel pretty confident in saying the shot was no good.

Second, what possible good can come from talking to the coach at this point? What new information can you give to the coach that is going to clarify the situation for him? The coach is going to know what your judgement is by virtue of you counting or waving off the basket.

+1

They not only had an opinion, each of them sold their opinion! The fact that they all signaled a good basket (although only one of them should) makes me think the basket was good.

The crew picked a bad time to be out of position and worried about proper rotation. The C should have stayed with play, who cares if they get back into proper position, at this point just stay put and have an opinion on the shot.

The shot was after the buzzer.

The score is tied, just play the OT

I simply believe it's a matter of common courtesy. Assuming the coach hasn't been a jerk or uncivil in this game, I have no problem with a brief word, should he request one (and he probably will). I also don't like the message sent when we high-tail it off the court after any game (unless our safety is in danger), particularly in a situation such as this, where a partner conference was necessary. And bear in mind, you will likely run into that coach again.

JMF mentioned "harms way." Perhaps I just don't see enough harm in my little corner to be concerned about that. If there's a higher chance of danger in your part of Rome, I can certainly see that point.

If you feel there might be a need to speak to a coach in this situation you bring the 2 coaches together at the table BEFORE the decision is announced and explain what is about to happen.

Fair enough but even in this situation I'd say you don't need to. It's a shot at the buzzer that will either win the game or send it into overtime. If either of them isn't sure what is about to happen there's not much I can do about that.

It doesn't matter whether they've been a jerk, civil or an absolute angel. It's a potential end-of-game situation. There are two possible decisions and one of them results in his team losing the game immediately, meaning there's a 50% chance he and/or someone connected with his team - including a fan - is going to be very unhappy. There's no reason for the crew to stay out there once the game-ending decision is rendered. None.

The message we're sending when we exit the court is "the game is over." If a coach good enough to get his team to a championship game doesn't understand that, I can't help him. As to whether I run into that coach again: if he's going to be upset with me/my partners after the game and into the future, he's going to be upset regardless of whether we stand there and talk to him.

Common courtesy?! Really at this point? The coach was standing there for the entire discussion about 6-8 feet away and he was certainly not going to agree with counting the basket. That was clear from the video. Once the decision was made to score the basket, it is time to leave. Nothing the coach might have said was going to change it. Just another chance to get MF'd off the court.

Coach will figure it out when the referee's are gone.

And render the decision boxing/wrestling style....grab both coaches by the arm and raise up the arm of the winner.... :D

Seems like a big waste of time that can only bring negative...he's either going to be happy or pissed off at you, and no amount of talking to the coach is going to change that. All you've done with your method, in this situation, would be to give the head coach a head start in ****in at you.

Game's over. Leave. You might not think there's danger - doesn't mean there isn't.

Just A Thought ???
 

Would 3-13 help us here? I know that the equipment didn't fail, but can we still go to the table?

If the red/LED light fails to illuminate and the timer’s signal fails to sound, or is
not recognized by the officials, the timer shall go onto the court or use other
means to immediately notify the nearest official. If in the meantime, a goal has
been made or a foul has occurred, the referee shall consult the timer:
ART. 1 . . . If table officials agree that time expired before the ball was in flight,
the goal shall not count.
ART. 2 . . . If table officials agree that the quarter or extra period ended, as in
5-6-2 before the foul occurred, the foul shall be disregarded, unless it was
intentional or flagrant.
ART. 3 . . . If table officials disagree, the goal shall count and/or the foul shall
be penalized, unless the referee has knowledge which alters such ruling.

No, Billy. The rules clearly state that the table crew only gets consulted in the case of an equipment malfunction. Barring that, the officials on the court need to make a decision.

Didn't look like it was off in time to me.

Game is over.....if he asks me something as I'm running by him....maybe "Coach,shot was good" Never breaking stride.

Nothing good will ever come out of a conversation that you allude to.

2-13-1