Rewatching the end. My god, that ref.

[Scooch]

Screw both the dope who made the call a mile from the play and the baseline ref for not telling him to stuff it since he had the infinitely better angle. Clown show all around.

 

[IthacaMatt]

I don't know how you miss that, he is lucky Syracuse won.

He had absolutely no business making that call. He was on the sideline, about 30 feet up the court. There was another official on the baseline who (correctly) made no call. That was BS of the highest order, right up on par with the Ohio State refs the year the Bernie Fine scandal broke. We were not going to be allowed to win that game fair and square.

 

[WoadBlue]

Although I agree that the call was heinous, I don't believe it was made by that ref to cover a bet or some other illegal activity of that nature. We were up 1 at that point and the spread was -4 for Gonzaga. Gonzaga would have needed to score 5 points in those 11 seconds without us scoring just to equal the spread. Any smart point-shaving ref would have avoided any speculation by not making that call. That ref was just a stupid moron thinking he saw something thousands of other people didn't.

Who is the ref who made the call and who is the baseline ref? Where did they grow up and attend college? Where are they from and which leagues do they ref for?

Is it possible that a pro-Big Ten ref would do something intentionally just to spite the ACC? Yes. Is it possible a ref with bleeding heart/egalitarian sympathies would assume the ACC was already far too successful in this tournament and so anybody else should win for the sake of diversity? Yes.

It is also possible that the ref is simply an ego maniac semi-competent who just had to blow the big whistle at the most important time of the game.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

I believe he made the call because he thought he could see that Cooney was out of bounds. Would have been nice if the baseline ref had been able to convince him he had it wrong, or if the sideline ref could have had the humility to ask if he got it right.

 

[HarrisonJBounel]

Although I agree that the call was heinous, I don't believe it was made by that ref to cover a bet or some other illegal activity of that nature. We were up 1 at that point and the spread was -4 for Gonzaga. Gonzaga would have needed to score 5 points in those 11 seconds without us scoring just to equal the spread. Any smart point-shaving ref would have avoided any speculation by not making that call. That ref was just a stupid moron thinking he saw something thousands of other people didn't.

Can you not make bets straight up (no points) and use odds?

 

[Cowtown]

There's my boy! That's the spelling I'm used to. Either you've had a few tonight, or you're posting quick. Either way, you're right.

I think he's got a new phone, or he's borrowing one of the kids'.

 

[CuseFaninVT]

I believe he made the call because he thought he could see that Cooney was out of bounds. Would have been nice if the baseline ref had been able to convince him he had it wrong, or if the sideline ref could have had the humility to ask if he got it right.

Except, there was no way he could have seen Cooney's feet and the line. Which is why he should have deferred to the baseline ref.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Except, there was no way he could have seen Cooney's feet and the line. Which is why he should have deferred to the baseline ref.

He believed he could see it, and as a wise man once said, it's not a lie if you believe it.

 

[Cowtown]

How can that not be reviewable? It's not a judgment call. NCAA rules committee really needs to get their heads out of their asses this offseason.

The ball going out of bounds is reviewable, as in, to see who touched it last (remember the play with about 7 minutes to go at the SU end when SU got the ball back?) But an out of bounds call, ie a player stepping on the line, is not defined as a reviewable play under that rule. Apparently when they wrote the rule the way it is, they didn't envision that kind of thing happening. Whether we like it or not, you can't invent rules on the fly like that, during a game.

 

[OrangeDW]

Like Carmelo said..."they don't want us to win!"

There's no other explanation that makes sense for why that guy made that call.

 

[CuseFaninVT]

He believed he could see it, and as a wise man once said, it's not a lie if you believe it.

You made me laugh out loud like a crazy person, again. My family thinks I'm nuts.

 

[Cowtown]

Except, there was no way he could have seen Cooney's feet and the line. Which is why he should have deferred to the baseline ref.

I guarantee you lead would have said "I couldn't see it" and they'd have gone right back to middle's call there. It's not a perfect system, but it generally works a lot better than the old two-man system.

 

[Cowtown]

You made me laugh out loud like a crazy person, again. My family thinks I'm nuts.

I'm sure it's not the first time for that ...

 

[RoysRunts]

Anyone who thinks refs are above being biased 1 way or another must live in the celestial city

 

[Cowtown]

Anyone who thinks refs are above being biased 1 way or another must live in the celestial city

Meh, every ref comes from somewhere. If you don't learn to block out partisan bias, you don't make as far as this guy has.

 

[CuseFaninVT]

I guarantee you lead would have said "I couldn't see it" and they'd have gone right back to middle's call there. It's not a perfect system, but it generally works a lot better than the old two-man system.

If you watch the video of that play in the link below, lead was doing a great job watching the end line (see the video right at the mid way point). I have no idea why he didn't overrule. Small sack I'm guessing.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebas...troversial-call-seals-victory-elite-eight-bid

 

[sutomcat]

I think he's got a new phone, or he's borrowing one of the kids'.

What is your assessment Cowtown? Should a ref 45 feet down the sideline, blocked by two bodies, try to make a call like that? Shouldn't he be focusing on the interaction between the players in front of him?

 

[orangecuse]

I guarantee you lead would have said "I couldn't see it" and they'd have gone right back to middle's call there. It's not a perfect system, but it generally works a lot better than the old two-man system.

It didn't work here at all! It was an atrocious call at an incredibly critical moment of the game where that ref had no business making it since there's no way he could have seen it accurately, let alone definitively. The fact that the rule doesn't allow that play to be reviewed speaks for itself and for the powers that be that make the rules. I'm still pissed off this morning about it and we won, I can only imagine if the Zags had gone on to hit a game winner at the end after such an irresponsible call.

 

[CuseFaninVT]

It didn't work here at all! It was an atrocious call at an incredibly critical moment of the game where that ref had no business making it since there's no way he could have seen it accurately, let alone definitively. The fact that the rule doesn't allow that play to be reviewed speaks for itself and for the powers that be that make the rules. I'm still pissed off this morning about it and we won, I can only imagine if the Zags had gone on to hit a game winner at the end after such an irresponsible call.

Honestly. The only he could have actually seen, and not anticipated, is the foul where the guy was climbing Cooney's back.

 

[orangecuse]

What is your assessment Cowtown? Should a ref 45 feet down the sideline, blocked by two bodies, try to make a call like that? Shouldn't he be focusing on the interaction between the players in front of him?

That ref has no credibility. When he went over to the TV announcers to give them the update, he prefaced it by saying one angle appeared he was in bounds, another angle, not so clear. Then he went on to say that the play wasn't reviewable anyways and that only looking for the time on the clock. He clearly knew he , but didn't have enough character to own it and tried to make it look like even if it could be reviewed, there was an angle that wasn't certain. WRONG!!!

 

[Cowtown]

Okay, a couple things: first, the ref was at the top of the three point line extended, so that puts him about 25 feet away, not 45 , no offense intended to anyone. In the three man rotation, that's roughly where he's supposed to be in that situation, because he was "middle away" when the play began. Lead and trail were both ball side as the play began, also right where they're supposed to be. The problem came as the player with the ball drove into the lane along the baseline, and crossed the face of lead as he did. NBD, happens all the time. Lead's primary responsibility there is to "stay with the players" (with his eyes) in the lane after the dish to the corner. The territory between the lane and sideline in that situation is middle's primary, anyway. It's a gap that will always occur on that play, because if lead mirrors the ball there (comes across the lane even with the ball) he'll be too close to the play to see a foul, should one occur. Remember the basket support is only a few feet off the baseline. It's a tough call because that corner will always be "uncovered" in that type of play.

Part of me wonders if perhaps the ref was reluctant to put SU on the free throw line with 12 seconds left under the "gotta be blood" principle, and making the out of bounds call was the way to avoid doing that. And I'm sure that came out in the post-game. Yes, it was potentially a game-changing mistake, but it didn't cost us. I wonder what would have happened if Lydon had fouled the shooter (he clearly got ball first, and the ensuing contact was minimal).

 

[upperdeck]

can we get some clarity on the 10 sec call.. the ball was passed beyond mid court and tipped by cooney back into the back court.. is the rule that since no change of possession takes place and offense never possessed it all thats its a 10 second violation. so someone touching it is not enough to reset that clock.

 

[Cowtown]

can we get some clarity on the 10 sec call.. the ball was passed beyond mid court and tipped by cooney back into the back court.. is the rule that since no change of possession takes place and offense never possessed it all thats its a 10 second violation. so someone touching it is not enough to reset that clock.

Ding! Ding! Ding! Ding! Ding! And I'm willing to bet Marsh01 's entire PBR budget that's on the exam next year.

 

[jncuse]

can we get some clarity on the 10 sec call.. the ball was passed beyond mid court and tipped by cooney back into the back court.. is the rule that since no change of possession takes place and offense never possessed it all thats its a 10 second violation. so someone touching it is not enough to reset that clock.

I would like to know as well... Did we get a bit of a gift or was the right call made?

 

[jncuse]

Many are saying the other ref could have reversed the call, which is simply not the case. You can reverse a call where the ball went out of bounds. But you can't reverse a call and say the ball is still in bounds (when you stopped play) Of course in this case they had the foul bailout.

Not to say the back ref was an idiot for making that call, and they made things worse going for a review of something they could not reverse... and then realizing that ", we can't reverse this" and lying about it to the announcers.