Great win, but the refs really screwed UConn there to start OT.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the refs lined the players up in the wrong direction, UConn won the tip and everyone thought there would be a goaltend called on the shot attempt. Seems like it was the refs fault and we ended up with a free possession.
From what the announcers said, the refs didn't line the players up, they just took the court and ended up on the wrong side. UConn got screwed, but to be fair, Jamil slapped the ball into the backboard and it should have been a block, not a goaltend, so all's fair.
Well, at least they didn't go as far as to give us the points for them putting the ball in our goal.
The make-up calls, which happened right in a row: Vander was fouled on his made three, Boatwright was both out of control and pushed off on Cadougan but got a blocking call, and UConn was blatantly over the back on the following missed free throw. We'll call it even.
I think the refs more than made up for it in OT. Some terrible calls (Napier trucking Jr over) and non-calls (Wolf with a blatant over the back).
negated by that awful sequence towards the end with the forearm push and the missed over-the-back call. but yes, UCONN definitely got screwed with that debacle.
Quote from: brewcity77 on January 01, 2013, 09:42:21 PM
From what the announcers said, the refs didn't line the players up, they just took the court and ended up on the wrong side. UConn got screwed, but to be fair, Jamil slapped the ball into the backboard and it should have been a block, not a goaltend, so all's fair.
It was on the way down...the goaltend call was a good one.
Quote from: chapman on January 01, 2013, 09:42:58 PM
Well, at least they didn't go as far as to give us the points for them putting the ball in our goal.
The make-up calls, which happened right in a row: Vander was fouled on his made three, Boatwright was both out of control and pushed off on Cadougan but got a blocking call, and UConn was blatantly over the back on the following missed free throw. We'll call it even.
Not to complain about the refs in a win, but this. The foul on Cadougan was egregious.
Quote from: xghostsniperx on January 01, 2013, 09:40:09 PM
Great win, but the refs really screwed UConn there to start OT.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the refs lined the players up in the wrong direction, UConn won the tip and everyone thought there would be a goaltend called on the shot attempt. Seems like it was the refs fault and we ended up with a free possession.
Rule 5, Section 1, Article 3
Section 1. Scoring
Art. 1. A goal from the field other than from beyond the three-point line shall
count two points for the team into whose basket the ball is thrown, tapped or
directed.
Art. 2. A successful try from beyond the three-point line shall count three points
for the team when the ball is thrown or directed into its basket.
a. When a player scores a field goal in the opponent's basket, it shall count
two points for the opponent regardless of the location on the playing court
from where it was released. Such a field goal shall not be credited to a
player in the scorebook but shall be indicated with a footnote.
Art. 3. When the official(s) permits a team to go in the wrong direction, and when
the error is discovered, all activity and time consumed shall count as though each
team had gone in the proper direction. Play shall be resumed with each team
going in the proper direction.Definitely got it wrong. http://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/BR13.pdf
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on January 01, 2013, 09:53:16 PM
Rule 5, Section 1, Article 3
Section 1. Scoring
Art. 1. A goal from the field other than from beyond the three-point line shall
count two points for the team into whose basket the ball is thrown, tapped or
directed.
Art. 2. A successful try from beyond the three-point line shall count three points
for the team when the ball is thrown or directed into its basket.
a. When a player scores a field goal in the opponent's basket, it shall count
two points for the opponent regardless of the location on the playing court
from where it was released. Such a field goal shall not be credited to a
player in the scorebook but shall be indicated with a footnote.
Art. 3. When the official(s) permits a team to go in the wrong direction, and when
the error is discovered, all activity and time consumed shall count as though each
team had gone in the proper direction. Play shall be resumed with each team
going in the proper direction.
Definitely got it wrong. http://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/BR13.pdf
Wow.
But hey, I'll take it anyway I can get it with this group.
Except that it is also a rule that you cannot goal tend a shot on the wrong basket, so you have two conflicting rules. Which one supersedes the other?
edit: Also they were awarded the possession arrow, so even if they got those 2 pts, they wouldn't have gotten the next points after the jump ball.
Quote from: forgetful on January 01, 2013, 10:03:19 PM
Except that it is also a rule that you cannot goal tend a shot on the wrong basket, so you have two conflicting rules. Which one supersedes the other?
edit: Also they were awarded the possession arrow, so even if they got those 2 pts, they wouldn't have gotten the next points after the jump ball.
I would interpret that they were going the "correct" way since that's how they were lined up, based on that rule.
I think they got the arrow because the jump ball arrow was used to award possession after the mix-up. Not sure if that's correct, but that was the reasoning I saw on twitter.
They discovered the teams were going the wrong way after the missed shot but before the goaltend.
I'll bet the UConn boards have some hot discussions going on this topic.
Just a hunch. ::)
Quote from: cheebs09 on January 01, 2013, 10:06:15 PM
I would interpret that they were going the "correct" way since that's how they were lined up, based on that rule.
I think they got the arrow because the jump ball arrow was used to award possession after the mix-up. Not sure if that's correct, but that was the reasoning I saw on twitter.
Giving them the possession arrow after the mix-up would also have been an incorrect call. Technically it was not a shot attempt, therefore no goal-tending, but rather a steal. Inadvertent whistle would have awarded the ball to Marquette out of bounds and still retain the possession arrow.
Quote from: forgetful on January 01, 2013, 10:03:19 PM
Except that it is also a rule that you cannot goal tend a shot on the wrong basket, so you have two conflicting rules. Which one supersedes the other?
No you are misreading what Chicos pointed out.
What the rule means is that the UConn goaltended basket should have counted because it would have "as though it would have been going in the proper direction." Then when they found out the mistake, they should have walked to the other side of the court and had Marquette inbound the ball heading in the proper direction.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on January 01, 2013, 10:09:49 PM
No you are misreading what Chicos pointed out.
What the rule means is that the UConn goaltended basket should have counted because it would have "as though it would have been going in the proper direction." Then when they found out the mistake, they should have walked to the other side of the court and had Marquette inbound the ball heading in the proper direction.
I understand that and if the basket had gone in that would be fine, but it didn't it was called a goaltend at which point you then have two different conflicting rules.
Regardless, we would have retained possession and 2 points to UCONN. The next jump ball that went to UCONN resulted in points. Those points would not have been awarded, thus it is a push.
Quote from: forgetful on January 01, 2013, 10:12:30 PM
I understand that and if the basket had gone in that would be fine, but it didn't it was called a goaltend at which point you then have two different conflicting rules.
No...I don't think you understand.
Everything that occurs up until that point, happens AS IF everything was going correctly. So if UConn would have simply made the basket, it would have been UConn's basket...not Marquette's. So the goaltend should have counted. There is no conflicting rule.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on January 01, 2013, 10:15:38 PM
No...I don't think you understand.
Everything that occurs up until that point, happens AS IF everything was going correctly. So if UConn would have simply made the basket, it would have been UConn's basket...not Marquette's. So the goaltend should have counted. There is no conflicting rule.
Thats fine. Then possession arrow stays with Marquette and UCONN doesn't get 2 points later. Still has no affect on the game.
Edit: Also for that matter it is possible that one of the refs realized things were wrong and blew the whistle not for a goal tend, but to correct the going the wrong direction. At that point they have to conference and determine what to do.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on January 01, 2013, 10:15:38 PM
No...I don't think you understand.
Everything that occurs up until that point, happens AS IF everything was going correctly. So if UConn would have simply made the basket, it would have been UConn's basket...not Marquette's. So the goaltend should have counted. There is no conflicting rule.
Which is confirmed via a Jim M tweet: Jim McIlvaine @JimMcIlvaine
Karl Hess just made a statement that everything was done correctly, except UConn should've been awarded the basket
Quote from: forgetful on January 01, 2013, 10:17:02 PM
Thats fine. Then possession arrow stays with Marquette and UCONN doesn't get 2 points later. Still has no affect on the game.
You are making the assumption that everything that happens from that point on is the same. Which I don't think is a good assumption to make. I don't think you can simply say it had "no affect" on the game.
Quote from: forgetful on January 01, 2013, 10:12:30 PM
I understand that and if the basket had gone in that would be fine, but it didn't it was called a goaltend at which point you then have two different conflicting rules.
Regardless, we would have retained possession and 2 points to UCONN. The next jump ball that went to UCONN resulted in points. Those points would not have been awarded, thus it is a push.
Since they were lined up incorrectly then it was considered their basket, hence it was goal tending. Once they discovered they were going the wrong way, everything counts as called...it was a goaltend. The rule book specifically calls out this situation and how to handle it. There is no conflict.
http://collegebasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/01/01/referees-allow-uconn-to-go-to-the-wrong-basket-in-overtime/related/
Quote
Art. 2. A successful try from beyond the three-point line shall count three points
for the team when the ball is thrown or directed into its basket.
a. When a player scores a field goal in the opponent's basket, it shall count
two points for the opponent regardless of the location on the playing court
from where it was released. Such a field goal shall not be credited to a
player in the scorebook but shall be indicated with a footnote.
Art. 3. When the official(s) permits a team to go in the wrong direction, and when
the error is discovered, all activity and time consumed shall count as though each
team had gone in the proper direction. Play shall be resumed with each team
I just don't get how you go from article 2 to 3. At what point does an errant shot at the opponents basket become the officials "permitting" the play vs counting as two points for the opponent?
Quote from: Utile et Dulce on January 01, 2013, 10:25:47 PM
I just don't get how you go from article 2 to 3. At what point does an errant shot at the opponents basket become the officials "permitting" the play vs counting as two points for the opponent?
Simple. When they line them up wrong at the beginning of the overtime.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on January 01, 2013, 10:20:27 PM
You are making the assumption that everything that happens from that point on is the same. Which I don't think is a good assumption to make. I don't think you can simply say it had "no affect" on the game.
Seriously. Points wise it averaged out. Based on your rationale it is possible that if UCONN did get those 2 points they would have became over confident and not have scored another bucket.
The fact of the matter was, they screwed up on the points and screwed up on the jump ball flip. They also screwed up on numerous other calls in the game.
The important thing is Junior carried the team again, people rag on him but as Buzz says he is the single most important guy on the team.
Quote from: AZWarrior on January 01, 2013, 10:17:48 PM
Which is confirmed via a Jim M tweet: Jim McIlvaine @JimMcIlvaine
Karl Hess just made a statement that everything was done correctly, except UConn should've been awarded the basket
Based on the rule and how I read it, that seems correct in terms of the response Hess gave. We got away with one there. There have been games we were on the other side of some calls.
Not sure in all my years of watching sports I've ever seen that play happen.
Quote from: forgetful on January 01, 2013, 10:27:52 PM
Seriously. Points wise it averaged out. Based on your rationale it is possible that if UCONN did get those 2 points they would have became over confident and not have scored another bucket.
The fact of the matter was, they screwed up on the points and screwed up on the jump ball flip. They also screwed up on numerous other calls in the game.
The important thing is Junior carried the team again, people rag on him but as Buzz says he is the single most important guy on the team.
Look, it was a mistake. A mistake that benefited MU. I don't think you can simply say "it didn't matter." Now it may not have altered the ultimate outcome of the game...or it may have. You really can't state it definitively.
Quote from: Utile et Dulce on January 01, 2013, 10:25:47 PM
I just don't get how you go from article 2 to 3. At what point does an errant shot at the opponents basket become the officials "permitting" the play vs counting as two points for the opponent?
This isn't that complicated. It the refs are the cause then article 3 applies. If not then article 2 applies. The player was told that was their basket when it wasn't which was caused by the ref.
Does this mean we don't get the Win?
nbcsports.com has some terrible writers. MU had a 'furious rally in the last ten seconds.'? The first basket of overtime was a momentum changer? Then the quote to the tweet about how that is a metaphor for the Big East. How so? Who is the Big East -- Marquette, or UConn, or the refs? Who represents football?
The world is full of errors. The refs made a noticeable mistake in a game that was horribly officiated overall. Not really shocking. My favorite mistake of the night was still Enosch Wolf goaltending his own missed dunk.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on January 01, 2013, 10:32:33 PM
Look, it was a mistake. A mistake that benefited MU. I don't think you can simply say "it didn't matter." Now it may not have altered the ultimate outcome of the game...or it may have. You really can't state it definitively.
Yes, and they made a mistake by flipping the possession arrow to UCONN, a mistake that benefited them. Points wise the two mistakes were a wash.
Anything else is pure conjecture. As I said many mistakes were made in the game. In that one instance two mistakes were made, one benefiting each team. Its not like they awarded us 2 points and gave us the ball.
Quote from: karavotsos on January 01, 2013, 10:35:36 PM
nbcsports.com has some terrible writers. MU had a 'furious rally in the last ten seconds.'? The first basket of overtime was a momentum changer? Then the quote to the tweet about how that is a metaphor for the Big East. How so? Who is the Big East -- Marquette, or UConn, or the refs? Who represents football?
The world is full of errors. The refs made a noticeable mistake in a game that was horribly officiated overall. Not really shocking. My favorite mistake of the night was still Enosch Wolf goaltending his own missed dunk.
I loved the dunk too, technically I think it should have also been a technical for hanging on the rim, but I think the refs felt bad for him.
My guess is that any formal statement from the officials/NCAA will be that there were two separate and independent decisions made.
First, they will say that the goaltend was an incorrect call, and so it was an inadvertent whistle. Thus, MU (who had the possession arrow, since UConn had won the overtime tip) got the ball out of bounds.
Second, they will say that the refs realized that the teams were going the wrong direction and so they simply accepted all play up to that point but had the teams switch sides.
So, switch sides and MU takes the ball out of bounds.
While the call about the goaltend may be questionnable, everything else seems in order.
Autry said after the game the officials told him it was an illegal shot and that because of the confusion, it was a jump ball...and which time MU had the arrow so they got possession. I did see the outside official run to the baseline official who made the goaltending call to confer immediately.
Autry also said it was Broeker who was shouting out about it being the wrong way...and that it should have been a 10 second backcourt violation even before UCONN shot. So MU noticed the wrong direction even before UCONN shot and Autry even mentioned something about the bench shouting to the MU defenders to let UCONN shoot it as it would count for MU. So, MU could argue that Paragraph 3 was invalid as MU knew the situation as that interpretation would have penalized MU.
In all, everyone was confused...the refs probably got it as right as they could after their cluster.
Quote from: AZWarrior on January 01, 2013, 10:08:04 PM
I'll bet the UConn boards have some hot discussions going on this topic.
Just a hunch. ::)
You have to protest this game with BE and play it over from the point of the mistake.
It changes everything. Uconn doesn't have to foul at the end of OT if the refs didn't pooch the start:
Dom Amore
Courant
" Ref Karl Hess admits blunder, tells Marquette spokesman UConn should have gotten two points at start of OT. "
And I don't want to hear Oh Well from the BE, These guys need to be suspended if they don't know the F#ckING Rules !!!
http://m.nbcsports.com/content/referees-allow-uconn-go-wrong-basket-overtime
Blades, having read your post.I am stunned that three officials would be stupid at the same time.That defies the laws of probability. And I teach probability and statistics. They "erred" on purpose, that is what it plainly was.What's the next move? Replay or just reprimand the refs? Maybe these 7 schools have an inside ref edge on us?
If you watch the replay you can see Broeker on the far right of the scorers table waving his arms and screaming they are going the wrong way.
In a related note, the fact that the refs screwed this up and it's become such an interesting topic of conversation probably helps MUs cause when it comes to our perception as a team this year. Junior's aweome three pointer, the weird screw-up and our winning could get some votes for us come Monday depending on how we fair against GU.
Just a thought.
Otherwise, thought we played well tonight.
While selling off the Big East assets, the C7 has sold the ref rights to themselves.
Quote from: BallBoy on January 01, 2013, 10:33:18 PM
This isn't that complicated. It the refs are the cause then article 3 applies. If not then article 2 applies. The player was told that was their basket when it wasn't which was caused by the ref.
So the refs line them up the wrong way and Marquette's bench is yelling "wrong way". If Marquette is only giving half effort because of that, is it fair to say the game is being "played" in the wrong direction?
Lets take it a step further and say the Marquette team hustles to the correct basket, while UConn to the wrong one. Does UConn get whatever basket they make?
Maybe I'm just too much of a homer, but the rule sure seems fraught with grey area....especially with only 12 seconds of playing time.
Quote from: Utile et Dulce on January 02, 2013, 06:59:53 AM
So the refs line them up the wrong way and Marquette's bench is yelling "wrong way". If Marquette is only giving half effort because of that, is it fair to say the game is being "played" in the wrong direction?
Lets take it a step further and say the Marquette team hustles to the correct basket, while UConn to the wrong one. Does UConn get whatever basket they make?
Maybe I'm just too much of a homer, but the rule sure seems fraught with grey area....especially with only 12 seconds of playing time.
+1...honestly, at that point the officials should have been allowed to start over with the tip and to reset the game clock....which is the one option NOT allowed in the rule book.
Quote from: Utile et Dulce on January 02, 2013, 06:59:53 AM
So the refs line them up the wrong way and Marquette's bench is yelling "wrong way". If Marquette is only giving half effort because of that, is it fair to say the game is being "played" in the wrong direction?
Lets take it a step further and say the Marquette team hustles to the correct basket, while UConn to the wrong one. Does UConn get whatever basket they make?
Maybe I'm just too much of a homer, but the rule sure seems fraught with grey area....especially with only 12 seconds of playing time.
It really isn't that gray of an area. The rule clearly states what is to transpire and the referees didn't follow that rule. It doesn't matter what MU thought about the direction of play...it doesn't matter what Autry said...what matters is how the officials lined them up and what transpired from there.
Why do some on this board go to great lengths to crucify the refs for bad calls during some games, yet can't wrap their head around the fact that MU benefited from one in this game?
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on January 02, 2013, 07:48:22 AM
It really isn't that gray of an area. The rule clearly states what is to transpire and the referees didn't follow that rule. It doesn't matter what MU thought about the direction of play...it doesn't matter what Autry said...what matters is how the officials lined them up and what transpired from there.
Why do some on this board go to great lengths to crucify the refs for bad calls during some games, yet can't wrap their head around the fact that MU benefited from one in this game?
Sultan, as a ref yourself, you know the last thing you want is to inject yourself directly in the outcome of a game. No one is arguing that the refs didn't blow it...including themselves. However, what we arguing is that MU did not "benefit" from the call only...what we are arguing is that both team were "neutralized" by the call on the floor. UCONN had points taken off the board...but they also gained a possession. MU benefited by having UCONN points taken off the board but were penalized by losing a possession.
When the scorer's table and MU's highest ranking Athletic Administrator are yelling In Stephens's ear BEFORE UCONN's shot...and at least a portion of MU's bench is claiming either a 10 second call or yelling to let them shoot--and that causes defensive confusion that benefits UCONN, at least in part, then to allow that rule book call to be followed by the letter only benefits one team and inserts the officials' blunder directly into the outcome of the game.
Therefore, what we are arguing is that the call on the floor, which leaves the score tied, is neutral in terms of possessions, was the most "practical" ruling on the floor as it was the most neutral. What we are also arguing is that the rule book should allow a judgment fourth option which would possibly include a live jump ball...or a do over if the mistake was discovered on the first possession only.
All in all, a very bizarre event..and frankly I like that the officials admitted they blew it after the game...based on the rule book....but I also see what they were tring to accomplish during the game to neutralize their blunder under some practical judgment because the rule book restricted the best call there, which was a do over.
Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on January 02, 2013, 08:52:29 AM
Sultan, as a ref yourself, you know the last thing you want is to inject yourself directly in the outcome of a game. No one is arguing that the refs didn't blow it...including themselves. However, what we arguing is that MU did not "benefit" from the call only...what we are arguing is that both team were "neutralized" by the call on the floor. UCONN had points taken off the board...but they also gained a possession. MU benefited by having UCONN points taken off the board but were penalized by losing a possession.
I am pretty sure that 99% of the time teams would take points over a possession. UConn clearly was on the short end of that transaction.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on January 02, 2013, 08:56:36 AM
I am pretty sure that 99% of the time teams would take points over a possession. UConn clearly was on the short end of that transaction.
Because of an officials' blunder...MU was also on a short end of the stick on the floor on defense because of confusion that is clearly seen and heard by the side official...I guess you could argue that UCONN had the shorter end of the short stick. I will argue the neutral call was the best one available because the rule book didn't allow for a fourth option.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on January 02, 2013, 07:48:22 AM
Why do some on this board go to great lengths to crucify the refs for bad calls during some games, yet can't wrap their head around the fact that MU benefited from one in this game?
I'll assume you're not talking about me, since I've not brought up the refs. I like debating minutia in rule books—the nfl is especially good for this. Sorry it bugs ya.
So, just to answer my second question above: if Marquette went to defend the "right" basket, any points scored by UConn would be valid, per the way the refs lined up the jump ball?
Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on January 02, 2013, 09:01:03 AM
Because of an officials' blunder...MU was also on a short end of the stick on the floor on defense because of confusion that is clearly seen and heard by the side official...I guess you could argue that UCONN had the shorter end of the short stick. I will argue the neutral call was the best one available because the rule book didn't allow for a fourth option.
Quote from: Utile et Dulce on January 02, 2013, 09:02:31 AM
I'll assume you're not talking about me, since I've not brought up the refs. I like debating minutia in rule books—the nfl is especially good for this. Sorry it bugs ya.
So, just to answer my second question above: if Marquette went to defend the "right" basket, any points scored by UConn would be valid, per the way the refs lined up the jump ball?
Yes. I don't think there is any gray area about what the correct call should have been, and the referees admitted as such. Regardless of any confusion that resulted from lining up wrong, the job of the players is to play. Marquette wrongly benefited from their error. Now was that error enough to cause them to win the game? I highly doubt it. But it seems pretty cut-and-dried that they made the wrong call.
BTW, to be fair, I had no clue what the correct rule was until Chicos pointed it out. So if they didn't know it either, they tried to do what I think was the most "fair" thing to do.
Quote from: forgetful on January 01, 2013, 10:38:23 PM
I loved the dunk too, technically I think it should have also been a technical for hanging on the rim, but I think the refs felt bad for him.
This is correct. Like Sultan, I also ref basketball. It absolutely should have been a two-shot technical foul,, plus a personal on the player and then possession to Marquette.
The refs obviously also blew the start-of-OT situation.
There were many bad judgment calls in the game -- the most egregious being that ridiculous call on Junior in OT when he was the aggrieved party who was being stiff-armed -- but the two mentioned above were misinterpretation of and/or simply ignoring the rules. A ref's gotta know and enforce the rules.
Kevin Ollie on the play:
"That wasn't the deciding factor in the game. It just got the overtime started in a bizarre way."
Exactly. Even if one wants to argue that it was a factor, it's a pretty big leap to say it was the factor, or even a major factor.
Quote from: MU82 on January 02, 2013, 09:51:17 AM
Kevin Ollie on the play:
"That wasn't the deciding factor in the game. It just got the overtime started in a bizarre way."
Exactly. Even if one wants to argue that it was a factor, it's a pretty big leap to say it was the factor, or even a major factor.
It's good to see that the other coach recognizes that the game wasn't determined by a 2 point swing in a tie game with 5 minutes left to play.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on January 02, 2013, 09:11:07 AM
Yes. I don't think there is any gray area about what the correct call should have been, and the referees admitted as such. Regardless of any confusion that resulted from lining up wrong, the job of the players is to play. Marquette wrongly benefited from their error. Now was that error enough to cause them to win the game? I highly doubt it. But it seems pretty cut-and-dried that they made the wrong call.
BTW, to be fair, I had no clue what the correct rule was until Chicos pointed it out. So if they didn't know it either, they tried to do what I think was the most "fair" thing to do.
I think we are all coming to the same points on this...with the gray area to me being the oddity that the best play for the Marquette players...was to let
UCONN score for Marquette. The reason I say this is that MU clearly was yelling to the officials
BEFORE the shot and Stephens HEARD them as he immediately ran to the lead official after the whistle to bring it to his attention...MU was not arguing after the play in attempt at some sort of jailhouse lawyering by MU, but before it. So, MU was also clearly confused DURING the play...or at least portions of the bench and team.
Another alternative call on the floor...based on the rule book...could have been for the officials to call ten seconds on UCONN. If--and I say if--they had made that call on the floor, which again would have been technically allowable based on the first two rules, what would have been the outcome after they conferred on the correct call and reversed the 10 second call because of the third paragraph? A jump ball and the possession arrow to MU?...or would they have reversed it and put 24 seconds back on the shot clock and awarded the ball to UCONN? If the later, we would be in melt down mode as I am sure the UCONN boards are on this one.
Did MU benefit more in the end? Yes...did they also lose? Yes. Again, not to argue this any more into the ground...but it is very interesting because of the totally bizzare circumstances. Considering the confusion...and the stage of the game...and that there was no time to run to the rule book...I cannot blame them on the most neutral call they could make. Ideally, the option of a redo would have been the fairest solution as I said and I suspect this rule will be amended. Yet, you could go 50 more years and never see that situation again.
UCONN can't make the postseason, ollie got his contract, napier got is pts, so this game was pretty meaningless for them if you think about it....
Quote from: JTBMU7 on January 02, 2013, 10:44:06 AM
UCONN can't make the postseason, ollie got his contract, napier got is pts, so this game was pretty meaningless for them if you think about it....
And yet they still tried to win it. The fools!
It wasn't goaltending. The ball was not on its way down. It was on a horizontal path.
Quote from: slingkong on January 03, 2013, 01:17:50 PM
It wasn't goaltending. The ball was not on its way down. It was on a horizontal path.
That may be, but it was clearly called goaltending by the baseline ref so that doesn't matter.
Quote from: TJ on January 03, 2013, 01:36:23 PM
That may be, but it was clearly called goaltending by the baseline ref so that doesn't matter.
The game is over and it ended in our favor. Most likely we will never see this situation again. Why is everyone still arguing about this?
Quote from: Abode4life on January 03, 2013, 02:17:01 PM
The game is over and it ended in our favor. Most likely we will never see this situation again. Why is everyone still arguing about this?
What else do we have to do?
Quote from: TJ on January 03, 2013, 04:20:36 PM
What else do we have to do?
We could talk about how Mo Acker and DJ Newbill would be averaging 40 points/game apiece for the undefeated Marquette Warriors in some alternate reality.
It seems like UConn's 1st overtime basket should of been 2 pts for Marquette.
Quote from: slingkong on January 03, 2013, 01:17:50 PM
It wasn't goaltending. The ball was not on its way down. It was on a horizontal path.
I thought my physics teacher taught us that it would be impossible for the basketball to be on a horizontal path
Quote from: TheGym on January 03, 2013, 05:43:50 PM
I thought my physics teacher taught us that it would be impossible for the basketball to be on a horizontal path
Depends on your frame of reference.
I had noticed multiple bad calls throughout the game (going both ways) and the worst (by far) of the group turned out to be Karl Hess - I think he's probably the lead guy on that crew - he had some attention in the past when he kicked Gugliotta and Corchione out of a game at NC State. I think he may be worse than Burr, which is a very scary thought.
The centers were facing the wrong way on the tip. Based on the direction of the participants, UConn went the right way when they gathered in the tip. I also think that the shot had begun its downward arc when it was blocked. To me, the fairest thing would have been to give UConn the 2 points and just turn the teams around so that they were going in the right direction from that point forward. That's what the rule apparently says, too.
But Ollie had it right, it was just a weird start to the OT, a bad call like any other. Suppose for example the overtime started with everyone going in the right direction but no goaltending was called. That would have been a bad call, but not an egregiously bad call. The result would have been the same (except MU would still have the possession arrow) and no one would be talking about it now.
Quote from: CTWarrior on January 04, 2013, 10:53:33 AM
The centers were facing the wrong way on the tip. Based on the direction of the participants, UConn went the right way when they gathered in the tip. I also think that the shot had begun its downward arc when it was blocked. To me, the fairest thing would have been to give UConn the 2 points and just turn the teams around so that they were going in the right direction from that point forward. That's what the rule apparently says, too.
But Ollie had it right, it was just a weird start to the OT, a bad call like any other. Suppose for example the overtime started with everyone going in the right direction but no goaltending was called. That would have been a bad call, but not an egregiously bad call. The result would have been the same (except MU would still have the possession arrow) and no one would be talking about it now.
It would have been tough to give UConn the points because the official nearest the scorer's table blew his whistle and began gesturing at about the same time that the goaltend was called, possibly before. At the game, several of us thought he was calling traveling. Also, MU coaches were supposedly urging the players to let them score, assuming it would be 2 points for MU. There was a ton of confusion on the court at the time so making the goaltend call would have been tough to justify given the other factors involved.
God, I am getting sick of this whole "cost UCONN a bucket thing" everywhere.
I have it on good authority from Benny Z that in his parallel universe where the officials lined up the players correctly at the start of OT, MU actually won the tip and on on the ensuing possession, Napier and Boatwright collided on a botched defensive switch sending both players to the floor. Boatwright left the game with a major concussion and is basically done for the year and Napier is out indefinitely with a fractured clavicle.
So UCONN should be damn happy that the officials screwed up.