I've seen so much conflicting info on this. ESPN radio was insisting the call was blown. Anyone out there who has done some refereeing that knows?
The over-and-back call may have been wrong, but he also traveled. So, either way, Marquette ball.
A senior guard should be smart enough not to get into that situation. Just let the pass go into the backcourt and run it down. The guy who threw it in is not better. I can't feel bad for Cuse.
Jardin took a horrible shot and stepped on the line. But, SU is better than MU according to him.
It was wrong, but so were a half dozen other calls during the game. How about the call against Chris Otule when Rick Jackson tackled him?
We have been on the short end of so many close losses and questionable calls, we were overdue to get one.
Incidentally, Scoop traveled on the over-and-back play, so the result was proper even if the call was not.
Quote from: poopyscoopy on March 21, 2011, 10:49:07 AM
I've seen so much conflicting info on this. ESPN radio was insisting the call was blown. Anyone out there who has done some refereeing that knows?
does it really matter? what's done is done and like people have mentioned, he traveled anyways.
It was the wrong call. He never established himself in the front court. However, his reaction made it look like he made a mistake.
Quote from: MUFanatic4 on March 21, 2011, 10:58:10 AM
does it really matter? what's done is done and like people have mentioned, he traveled anyways.
I can guaranty you that if the situations were reversed, MUScoop would have blown up by now.
I have to watch it again. However, how I envision it he caught the ball and continued backwards and stepped on the line. He was not on the line when he caught the ball.
http://www.youtube.com/v/PsQoNkIZ3Lw&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3
He caught the ball and landed on the line. It wasn't a backcourt violation, and, I think hadn't he responded, he wouldn't have been charged with it. He travelled right after that, so the end result remains the same, IMO.
And yes, MUScoop would be in an uproar if it was Marquette. I do not begrudge Syracuse being pissy right now...I just don't care. I'm going to take this time to be happy for my team.
Quote from: Utile et Dulce on March 21, 2011, 11:06:10 AM
http://www.youtube.com/v/PsQoNkIZ3Lw&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3
He caught the ball and landed on the line. It wasn't a backcourt violation, and, I think hadn't he responded, he wouldn't have been charged with it. He travelled right after that, so the end result remains the same, IMO.
And yes, MUScoop would be in an uproar if it was Marquette. I do not begrudge Syracuse being pissy right now...I just don't care. I'm going to take this time to be happy for my team.
I do not believe that is a travel. After both feet are established, he is allowed one pivot foot. His right came down, then his left and then he moved his right - establishing the left as a pivot foot.
Impossible to say, but it looks like those feet are still sliding from the momentum. You can't see them behind the ref, though. I'm not going to put any money on the fact that he travelled, but I like to think he did :)
Officials are human but the whistle is never wrong. Overall they did a nice job officiating.
wasn't a travel.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on March 21, 2011, 11:00:09 AM
I can guaranty you that if the situations were reversed, MUScoop would have blown up by now.
What?! I prefer to think that there would be a lot of "Ya win some. Ya lose some" threads started on here ;)
It was a travel.
NCAA traveling rules are stated as follows when a player is catching the ball on the move:
Art. 3. A player who catches the ball while moving or dribbling may stop and
establish a pivot foot as follows:
a. When both feet are off the playing court and the player lands:
1. Simultaneously on both feet, either may be the pivot foot;
2. On one foot followed by the other, the first foot to touch shall be the
pivot foot;
3. On one foot, the player may jump off that foot and simultaneously
land on both; neither foot can be the pivot foot.
Jardine caught the ball in the air, landed on his right foot, making it the pivot. Then he landed on his left foot and moved his right foot. Traveling. The result is the same as before, Syracuse turnover.
So the NCAA officials technically got a call right (a turnover by Syracuse) for all the wrong reasons (over and back, which did not happen, but traveling, which DID happen). Based on all the things that have happened this weekend in the tournament, I get a feeling the refs slept peacefully tonight.
http://bayarea.sbnation.com/2011/3/21/2063135/ncaa-basketball-rules-scoop-jardine-syracuse-orange-over-and-back-call-traveling-pivot-foot
I stand corrected.
Quote from: HoopsMalone on March 21, 2011, 10:53:28 AM
The guy who threw it in is not better.
Something I saw that I don't want to get lost - Junior did a great job defending the inbounder and overplaying the pass down the sideline to the corner. It seemed that was the primary target on the inbounds. When it didn't work, the Orange ran the screen action at the top of the key and for whatever reason, the passer hesitated a beat (something about JFB's length fighting around the screen made him second-guess it?). So, I want to make sure Junior and Jimmy get some props for their individual efforts on that play. They forced the cuse into that mistake.
I also thought it was not a backcourt violation at the time. I think i've heard the expression that there is not half court line on an inbounds play.
Lastly, I agree travel would have been a correct call - though that often gets overlooked (where a guy is try to keep balance by bouncing on one foot).
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on March 21, 2011, 11:00:09 AM
I can guaranty you that if the situations were reversed, MUScoop would have blown up by now.
Very true
I thought it was the correct call and I may be wrong in my interpretation, but since he caught the ball in the air he was in the front court. As soon as he landed and touched the line he had committed the violation. I figured it was the same establishing your position in bounds. It matters where you took off from not where you land when catching the ball in mid air. You can't jump from out of bounds and catch the ball mid air and land in bounds.
Quote from: Warrior97 on March 21, 2011, 11:43:12 AM
I thought it was the correct call and I may be wrong in my interpretation, but since he caught the ball in the air he was in the front court. As soon as he landed and touched the line he had committed the violation. I figured it was the same establishing your position in bounds. It matters where you took off from not where you land when catching the ball in mid air. You can't jump from out of bounds and catch the ball mid air and land in bounds.
That's the same explanation I heard. I don't know if it's right, but that's what I heard.
Quote from: Pakuni on March 21, 2011, 11:24:00 AM
NCAA traveling rules are stated as follows when a player is catching the ball on the move:
Art. 3. A player who catches the ball while moving or dribbling may stop and
establish a pivot foot as follows:
a. When both feet are off the playing court and the player lands:
1. Simultaneously on both feet, either may be the pivot foot;
2. On one foot followed by the other, the first foot to touch shall be the
pivot foot;
3. On one foot, the player may jump off that foot and simultaneously
land on both; neither foot can be the pivot foot.
Good find Pakuni. I am happy to be wrong!
Art. 8. After a jump ball or during a throw-in, the player in his/her front
court, who makes the initial touch on the ball while both feet are off the
playing court, may be the first to secure control of the ball and land with one
or both feet in the back court. It makes no difference if the first foot down
was in the front court or back court.
To answer the question, the back court violation was wrong but he did travel so the outcome was the same.
Boeheim had mentioned it in the presser that they should have done a better job communicating and Waiters should have allowed for more space. He didn't say anything about the call (for obvious reasons).
That was an over-and-back call. I believe the rule states that where you leave is the last place you have position - so all his points were in the frontcourt, and then he stepped on the line, creating the backcourt.
Regardless, he traveled.
That was a walk.
Also, the player obviously was confused. That's no the refs fault.
Finally, there was nearly a minute left. Syracuse didn't lose because of that call. They lost because of the following 2 3 point shots by Marquette.
If you want a phantom call that went against MU in the game, check out the 19:00 mark of the second half. Otule was called for a 3 second call, just as he received a pass in the lane.
It was the third time he tried establishing position in the lane on that possession. He cleared himself properly twice and only had been in the lane for 1.5 seconds tops before receiving the ball. The whistle blew immediately upon catching the pass.
Complete phantom call that took away a possession. Incidentally, this was 1 or 2 minutes before Rick Jackson tackled Chris taking another possession away from MU, and ultimately contributing to Otule's foul trouble.
The over-and-back/traveling by Jardine canceled each other out. Nothing canceled out those 2 terrible calls that went against Chris.
True Warriors persevere. :)
but we are still advancing.
http://blog.syracuse.com/orangebasketball/2011/03/it_appears_by_ncaa_rules_that.html (http://blog.syracuse.com/orangebasketball/2011/03/it_appears_by_ncaa_rules_that.html)
Hmmmmmmm
It was a travel.
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=26143.msg291714#msg291714