NCAA First Four & NIT
 

I haven't seen either situation personally, but was notified by fellow officials of two situations for which we can hopefully obtain video clips.
1. NCAA game Tenn vs Iowa: FT situation rebounding foul. Arm to the chin deemed a dead ball contact tech.
2. SMU's opening NIT game: correctable error situation. Crew removed the points, but was it following the 2nd dead ball?

Sorry that I don't have more info, such as times during the games. Perhaps someone else can provide.

This is what I read about this one:

A player was apparently disqualified and the crew didn't realize it. He then scored 2 points. The other team scored and after the throw in, the scorer flagged them down to stop play.

(I'm telling you what I read, NOT what I saw).

Only found video of the correctable error. Some of you may be able to browse to the play (starting at 8:16, CE starts at 7:24 second half) here: ESPN -- UC Irvine vs. SMU

That's not a CE.

In Replay: At 8:16 UC Irvine common foul on SMU player (6th Team Foul) then a T on UC Irvine bench, and table says that's number 7. SMU shoots 2 shot technical then shoots 1-1 makes them both. (The 1-1 is the error). Irvine scores and then at 7:16 irvine is fouled and during this (2nd) dead ball they take the 2pts off for a CE. Like bob said. It's not a CE

That's a completely different play, and it is a CE, but it's too late to fix.

Contact Deadball Technical Foul
 

At 15:48 of the 2nd half, Iowa #15 shoots his last FT.

While the ball is in the air, Tenn #5's elbow hits Iowa #34 in the neck and moves up under the chin. Then the ball passes through the net for a scored FT.

The crew goes to the monitor. They penalize Tenn #5 with a Contact Deadball Technical Foul. A different Iowa player shot the 2 FTs. Iowa was given back the ball at the division line opposite the benches. :confused:

Unfortunately, I believe the crew adjudicated this incorrectly. :(

Tenn #5 should have been penalized with a F1 (since the ball was live during the shot FT). Iowa #34 should have shot the 2 FTs. The ball should have been inbounded by Iowa at the end line underneath the basket.

It'll be interesting to see if the crew advances to the Sweet 16 round next week despite this error. :rolleyes:

That's exactly what the fellow official who called told me. We both know Mike Reed prides himself on knowing the rules, so we were shocked that his crew botched this. Sad, but if there is any justice in the NCAA evaluation process both Mike and Verne Harris will only work their previously assigned games this weekend and then be done for the 2014 NCAA tourney. Too bad as they are quality officials, but this kind of mistake is unacceptable with access to the TV monitor!!! Ouch.
This contest went to OT as well, so one can certainly make the case that each and every FT mattered.

Thanks to Triad Z for providing us with the details of the situation. I'm now really proud of my referee friend for picking up on this while watching the game. It is semantics, but I will also agree with Bob on how this should be categorized. CE, but too late to correct. Those unmerited FTs now have to stand.

What is with these officials working post-season tournaments kicking simple rules?!?! These were both matters of knowing the basic definitions for a when a dead ball occurs.

Agree.

Iowa would've gotten 2 FTs regardless but allowing a different player to shoot them (and not the offended player) is unacceptable.

Mike will be in St. Louis this weekend; we'll see what happens next weekend.

If a deadball T was called, why was Iowa given the ball at the division line? NCAA technicals are 2 shots and POI, not 2 shots and the ball.

Not true in NCAA-M for a dead ball contact T

I love it when people are so sure that they are right, only to find out otherwise.
Sadly your rules knowledge is no better than that displayed by the crews on these two games.

(3) Iowa State vs. (7) Connecticut - Verne Harris, Tony Padilla, Mike Reed
Two of them did advance!
Either the NCAA staff in charge of tournament officials didn't recognize this as an incorrect rule application or felt that it wasn't enough to prevent them from moving forward versus the performances of other officials/crews.

Clear some of your PMs. I tried to send you one for their "explanation" :rolleyes: but your inbox is too full to send a PM.