UCLA vs. SMU (Video)

[Toren]

I thought live it was a great call. Although I did not know who made the call. As I replayed it in my mind, I knew the only official who had an angle was on the shooter and there was lots of bodies by the shooter.

I read someone said the table side trail made the call? I can't confirm that but if that's true...while it was a great call, it was also lucky as can be. It was pure and simply a guess. Sometimes better to be lucky than good. Although in this case the calling official was lucky and good.

[BryanV21]

Look at it from the other side.

If the GT was not called, UCLA could very well have a beef of their own, and we'd be giving the officials a hard time about it. Or some of us may be giving the officials a hard time. And the fact is their beef would be justified. Maybe not right, but justified.

Everybody tends to see things from the victim's angle, but rarely sees things the other way. And doing so can help you see things clearly.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Toren

I thought live it was a great call. Although I did not know who made the call. As I replayed it in my mind, I knew the only official who had an angle was on the shooter and there was lots of bodies by the shooter.

I read someone said the table side trail made the call? I can't confirm that but if that's true...while it was a great call, it was also lucky as can be. It was pure and simply a guess. Sometimes better to be lucky than good. Although in this case the calling official was lucky and good.

Antinio Petty was the trail and made the call. Seems like he would have the best angle, IMO.

[SE Minnestoa Re]

Officials sometimes decide a call by who was in the right place and who was in the wrong place. The SMU player should not have been playing the ball above the basket in this situation. When you do that, you now are at the mercy of the official's judgment.

[bballref3966]

"How does the official who was furthest away from the ball make that call?"

Fans and analysts are so funny.

[Toren]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Antinio Petty was the trail and made the call. Seems like he would have the best angle, IMO.

Table Side correct?

That's not the best angle.

The best angle is opposite the table from where the shot originated from. From the table side, you can only see if the ball is on its downward flight, you could not see if it was over the cylinder.

[MD Longhorn]

I think this horse is dead except for the one non-sheriff continuing to fire bullets into it.

I have a sidebar alluded to earlier but glossed over.

What if, on this exact play, UCLA catches the ball at the same point where the SMU player actually did, and jams it home? BI, or is the "try" suddenly a "pass"?

[todd66]

BI. If it fits the definition of GT then it has to be BI by the offense.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by todd66

BI. If it fits the definition of GT then it has to be BI by the offense.

No, the definitions are different.

[bballref3966]

Originally Posted by todd66

BI. If it fits the definition of GT then it has to be BI by the offense.

GT and BI are not the same thing. BI restrictions are only in effect when the ball is on or within the basket, or in the cylinder.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

I think this horse is dead except for the one non-sheriff continuing to fire bullets into it.

I have a sidebar alluded to earlier but glossed over.

What if, on this exact play, UCLA catches the ball at the same point where the SMU player actually did, and jams it home? BI, or is the "try" suddenly a "pass"?

If you consider it to be in the cylinder, neither team may play the ball. BI is not dependent on the throw being a pass or a try, only on the location of the ball.

However, if the ball is outside of the cylinder, the ruling depends on the rule set. In NCAA, GT is only defined for the defensive team...the offensive team may play the ball until it enters the cylinder. In NFHS, the GT rule applies to both the offense and defense....neither may play the ball on the downward flight.

And, in my opinion, the contact occurred before the ball was in the cylinder and the ball would have been playable by the offensive team up to that point.

[ronny mulkey]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

If you consider it to be in the cylinder, neither team may play the ball. BI is not dependent on the throw being a pass or a try, only on the location of the ball.

However, if the ball is outside of the cylinder, the ruling depends on the rule set. In NCAA, GT is only defined for the defensive team...the offensive team may play the ball until it enters the cylinder. In NFHS, the GT rule applies to both the offense and defense....neither may play the ball on the downward flight.

And, in my opinion, the contact occurred before the ball was in the cylinder and the ball would have been playable by the offensive team up to that point.

Camron,

So, a 50 ft. SHOT can be intercepted 3 ft. from the basket by the offense and rammed home? But, the defense has to just back off? Seems a little unfair offense over defense. Like the NFHS rule better.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by ronny mulkey

Camron,

So, a 50 ft. SHOT can be intercepted 3 ft. from the basket by the offense and rammed home? But, the defense has to just back off? Seems a little unfair offense over defense. Like the NFHS rule better.

How is it unfair? The rule applies to all teams.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by ronny mulkey

Camron,

So, a 50 ft. SHOT can be intercepted 3 ft. from the basket by the offense and rammed home? But, the defense has to just back off? Seems a little unfair offense over defense. Like the NFHS rule better.

Yes, if the official thinks it has a chance to go in. However, if it is falling well short of the rim, then the try is already over, by definition (ends when...."when it is certain the throw is unsuccessful"), and anyone can play it. It is only when the ball is on a trajectory to hit the rim (or go in) where the offense can play it while the defense can't.

Originally Posted by BryanV21

Look at it from the other side.

If the GT was not called, UCLA could very well have a beef of their own, and we'd be giving the officials a hard time about it. Or some of us may be giving the officials a hard time. And the fact is their beef would be justified. Maybe not right, but justified.

Everybody tends to see things from the victim's angle, but rarely sees things the other way. And doing so can help you see things clearly.

I actually think that if nothing had been called there would not have been any outcry that it was goaltending.

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

What if, on this exact play, UCLA catches the ball at the same point where the SMU player actually did, and jams it home? BI, or is the "try" suddenly a "pass"?

No BI because the ball was not in the cylinder. It's pretty obvious it was a try, if it was tipped in or jammed in then I guess you could call it a "pass".