Free timeout in Ohio St.-Arizona game

[kape]

Does this rule need to be addressed?

After Ohio State's 3-pointer with 2.0 seconds left, the officials checked the monitor to make sure the time left was correct. They couldn't have been reviewing whether it was a 3 -- the shooter was nowhere near the line -- and the time was pretty much right, too.

But this gave Arizona, which was out of timeouts, a free timeout to set up a play. The officials wound up putting 0.1 seconds back, making it 2.1 seconds left in the game.

This happened in the Marquette game, too, helping Marquette win.

[Raymond]

I don't know, Marquette won by 10 last night.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by kape

Does this rule need to be addressed?

How would you propose changing it?

If they don't check, and it's wrong, then the mediots complain about that.

and, both teams got to use the "free time out" -- so if AZ had made a shot, then OSU has one extra to use later.

[JRutledge]

To me this is all to do about nothing. Both teams get the same time to talk to their teams. If the officials do not look at the time and do not put time on the clock, that will be the issue all over the news if the "wrong thing" happens. Both teams get to draw something up or talk to their teams. Are we going to police where the players stand now as a result of some change? I just do not see what you can do when a review is being made.

Peace

[JetMetFan]

The scenario has been mentioned in at least one other thread (by me). I think the NCAAM rules committee will probably talk about it during the summer but there may be little chance of doing anything.

My suggestion was not allowing teams to huddle with their coach - or, as I just thought of now, go to their bench areas - during monitor reviews.

[SE Minnestoa Re]

I am only a high school official but if the officials by rule have to stop the clock for .1 of a second to check the clock, then the rule is bogus.

If they stopped the clock on their own, then it is on them. When a team is out of timeouts, I think we have to do everything on in our power to not have a stoppage that is equivilent to a time out.

Could you image Thad Motta's response if Arizona would have hit a three after the stoppage?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by SE Minnestoa Re

I am only a high school official but if the officials by rule have to stop the clock for .1 of a second to check the clock, then the rule is bogus.

If they stopped the clock on their own, then it is on them. When a team is out of timeouts, I think we have to do everything on in our power to not have a stoppage that is equivilent to a time out.

Could you image Thad Motta's response if Arizona would have hit a three after the stoppage?

Clock stops anyway on all made baskets in the final 1:00 of the 2nd half and OT.

Now THAT'S a rule I would like NFHS to adopt long before they consider adopting a shot clock.

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by SE Minnestoa Re

I am only a high school official but if the officials by rule have to stop the clock for .1 of a second to check the clock, then the rule is bogus.

Bogus, no. Flawed? Certainly.

Let's not pretend both teams get the "time out," as the team on offense in this situation clearly gets an advantage with the stoppage. If we should trust our partners, shouldn't that extend to the timekeeper, too, especially in a NCAA D-I tournament game?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by SE Minnestoa Re

I am only a high school official but if the officials by rule have to stop the clock for .1 of a second to check the clock, then the rule is bogus.

If they stopped the clock on their own, then it is on them. When a team is out of timeouts, I think we have to do everything on in our power to not have a stoppage that is equivilent to a time out.

Could you image Thad Motta's response if Arizona would have hit a three after the stoppage?

Then he should have drawn up a better defense. No one is caught by surprise at that point. Shame on a coach that cannot talk to his team and figure out what to do in their favor.

Peace

[Jesse James]

Originally Posted by bainsey

Bogus, no. Flawed? Certainly.

Let's not pretend both teams get the "time out," as the team on offense in this situation clearly gets an advantage with the stoppage. If we should trust our partners, shouldn't that extend to the timekeeper, too, especially in a NCAA D-I tournament game?

This. Arizona had run themselves out of time-outs. OSU had not--but they sure weren't going to use one in that situation.

I'm not sure how to resolve the "check the clock" stoppage either, but I'd be surprised if that scenario isn't at least revisited by the rules committee. It was a major advantage to Arizona last night.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Jesse James

This. Arizona had run themselves out of time-outs. OSU had not--but they sure weren't going to use one in that situation.

I'm not sure how to resolve the "check the clock" stoppage either, but I'd be surprised if that scenario isn't at least revisited by the rules committee. It was a major advantage to Arizona last night.

It is a judgment call by the officials whether or not they need to go to the monitor. I don't see what the rules committee can do to legislate judgment.

[Jesse James]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

It is a judgment call by the officials whether or not they need to go to the monitor. I don't see what the rules committee can do to legislate judgment.

No, but they could legislate that no substitutes can take place in this instance. Butler had one guy who's four-year role was to throw full-length inbound passes. Never played otherwise. Nice weapon to have, but in last night's game wouldn't have been available without the monitor check (or a quick transfer to Arizona, for that matter).

It wouldn't be much, but it's something.

[blindzebra]

It actually looked like the AZ player going to do the throw in asked for a TO and the monitor was a way to not have a Chris Weber moment.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Jesse James

No, but they could legislate that no substitutes can take place in this instance. Butler had one guy who's four-year role was to throw full-length inbound passes. Never played otherwise. Nice weapon to have, but in last night's game wouldn't have been available without the monitor check (or a quick transfer to Arizona, for that matter).

It wouldn't be much, but it's something.

Yes, they could re-write the rule to match the NCAA-W rule about subs in the last minute after a made basket. But it won't stop the reviews that occur and the teams gathering at their benches during this time frame.

[zebraman]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Clock stops anyway on all made baskets in the final 1:00 of the 2nd half and OT.

Now THAT'S a rule I would like NFHS to adopt long before they consider adopting a shot clock.

You must have better timekeepers in your HS games than we do around here. I can envision all kinds of messes if timekeepers were supposed to stop the clock after all made baskets in the last minute of a HS game.