12/27/14 Gonzaga vs BYU (Video)

[WhistlesAndStripes]

3.1 seconds left i the first half. Goaltending call on a player smackng the backboard following thorough after a block attempt. Ball rolled off the rim and the official called goaltending.

Is the rule different from NFHS?


Additionally, kicked ball call with 15:19 left in the second half. Shot clock did not reset. Is this correct??

[crosscountry55]

Yes. There's an identical vid request that went out the same time you posted yours, and this is what I said to that one:
-------------
I saw it, too. ESPN2. Was just about to make a vid request and then saw that you beat me to it.

Was all set to say, "bad call," but then I checked the NCAAM book, and lo and behold, see Rule 9-17-2a(5), which was new for the 2013-15 edition:

"Basket interference occurs when a player...causes the basket or backboard to vibrate when the ball is on or within the basket or the backboard and/or is on or in the cylinder."

So then I used my DVR to look at the play again and...turned out it was an excellent call.

Based on this information, I need to go back and reassess an opinion I had on an earlier thread regarding a rim grab that caused backboard vibration in the Wichita St. vs. GWU game on 12/25. The officials no-called that one, and in hindsight based on 9-17-2a(5), maybe it was BI after all.
------------------------

[Sharpshooternes]

Originally Posted by Whistles & Stripes

3.1 seconds left i the first half. Goaltending call on a player smackng the backboard following thorough after a block attempt. Ball rolled off the rim and the official called goaltending.

Is the rule different from NFHS?


Additionally, kicked ball call with 15:19 left in the second half. Shot clock did not reset. Is this correct??

As for the kicked ball? What was the shot clock at? NCAAW the shot clock resets to 15 if it is below 15 or stays where it is if it is 15 or higher. I am assuming the rule is the same if they didn't reset it.

[crosscountry55]

I remember it. Shot clot was at 26, I believe. Same rule for NCAAM as NCAAW, so that's why it stayed where it was.

[APG]

[Raymond]

Official simply kicked the call. He thought ball was touched after touching backboard above the rim. I would hardly call that smacking the backboard.

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Official simply kicked the call. He thought ball was touched after touching backboard above the rim. I would hardly call that smacking the backboard.

Has nothing to do with the ball being touched, nor is there a certain amount of "smack" that is required....

Did he cause the basket or backboard to vibrate while the ball was in the cylinder? Yes. Therefore BI.

Worth clarifying that this is NOT an NFHS rule. That's not BI in NFHS, and the contact with the backboard was not intended to draw attention to the player, so not a T, either.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

Has nothing to do with the ball being touched, nor is there a certain amount of "smack" that is required....

Did he cause the basket or backboard to vibrate while the ball was in the cylinder? Yes. Therefore BI.

Worth clarifying that this is NOT an NFHS rule. That's not BI in NFHS, and the contact with the backboard was not intended to draw attention to the player, so not a T, either.

You have a rules reference?

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

You have a rules reference?

Yes. NCAAM/W Rule 9-17-2a(5):

Section 17. Basket Interference and Goaltending

Art. 2. Basket interference

a. Basket interference occurs when a player:

5. Causes the basket or backboard to vibrate when the ball is on or within the basket or the backboard and/or is on or in the cylinder.

To me the language is fairly clear. But like any rule, fairly subject to interpretation.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

Yes. NCAAM/W Rule 9-17-2a(5):

Section 17. Basket Interference and Goaltending

Art. 2. Basket interference

a. Basket interference occurs when a player:

5. Causes the basket or backboard to vibrate when the ball is on or within the basket or the backboard and/or is on or in the cylinder.

To me the language is fairly clear. But like any rule, fairly subject to interpretation.

Good rules reference. And with that I still think he kicked it because the board wasn't smacked anywhere close enough to vibrate it.

[JRutledge]

I don't see a violation.

The official anticipated the call.

Peace

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Official simply kicked the call. He thought ball was touched after touching backboard above the rim. I would hardly call that smacking the backboard.

I agree. The player didn't cause any vibrating of the basket or board that was noticable by an official. Certainly no more vibration was caused by the player touching the board than the ball hitting the board less than a second before. The official must have thought the player touched the ball after it contacted the board.

[Blindolbat]

Slo-mo you can't see the board move, but watch it again in full speed.
That board most definitely is moving after contact.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I agree. The player didn't cause any vibrating of the basket or board that was noticable by an official. Certainly no more vibration was caused by the player touching the board than the ball hitting the board less than a second before. The official must have thought the player touched the ball after it contacted the board.

Agree.

[Rich]

Not enough to make that call, IMO.