Smu got hosed

[bpo57]

Verdict from the CBS studio - bad call.

 

[STEVEHOLT]

Anybody who watches Scotty's replay above and thinks that the ball was over the rim or about to touch the rim needs to get themselves down to Lens Crafters asap. I hear they have a special going on til 9 pm tonight.

The replay that is not being shown is the overhead behind the backboard where you can see the ball about to hit the rim. This is now getting to Zapruder film levels.

 

[STEVEHOLT]

Verdict from the CBS studio - bad call.

Those guys are always right.

 

[CuseFaninVT]

https://vine.co/v/OYz6zd0nWUA

 

[Orangezoo]

It was not an obvious goaltend. It was close and by the exact rule you can argue it was a goaltend as contact was at the same level as the rim. With that said you just do not make that call in that situation... ever. Not when it has no chance of going in.

 

[CuseFaninVT]

I think we need a ruling here. NCAA rulebook says the ball has to have a chance of going in to be called goaltending. Basket interference only applies if it was on the rim.

 

[CuseFaninVT]

It was not an obvious goaltend. It was close and by the exact rule you can argue it was a goaltend as contact was at the same level as the rim. With that said you just do not make that call in that situation... ever. Not when it has no chance of going in.

Why did he go up and do that though? That's such a stupid play. You can't do that.

 

[Orangezoo]

Why did he go up and do that though? That's such a stupid play. You can't do that.

Agreed but he also was trying to prevent the easy putback by UCLA. If anything just bad timing. Ball came down at a weird angle I could see how he read it wrong.

 

[CuseFaninVT]

Agreed but he also was trying to prevent the easy putback by UCLA. If anything just bad timing. Ball came down at a weird angle I could see how he read it wrong.

Then he should have concentrated on boxing out. He knows he cost the game. Just saw his comments from the presser. Awful way to end his career.

 

[Briancuse]

That ball was not going in.

 

[Orangezoo]

Then he should have concentrated on boxing out. He knows he cost the game. Just saw his comments from the presser. Awful way to end his career.

Yeah I am with you. I just think the officials need to not make that call as it truly did change the outcome.

 

[bpo57]

Why did he go up and do that though? That's such a stupid play. You can't do that.

I disagree. he had a guy from UCLA right on his hip. If the SMU player doesn't go after the ball then it could very well be hello Lorenzo Charles except with a lay-in and not a dunk.

 

[CuseFaninVT]

Art. 3. Goaltending.

a. Goaltending occurs when a defensive player touches the ball during a fieldgoal

try and each of the following conditions is met: (Exceptions: Rule

10-4.1.i)

1. The ball is on its downward flight; and

2. The ball is above the level of the ring and has the possibility, while in

flight, of entering the basket and is not touching the cylinder.

b. It is goaltending to touch the ball outside the cylinder during a free throw,

regardless of whether the free throw is on its upward or downward flight.

c. When the ball contacts the backboard and any part of the ball is above the

rim during a field goal attempt, it is considered to be on its downward flight.

In such a case, it is goaltending when the ball is touched by a player as

long as it has a possibility of entering the basket.

 

[bpo57]

Those guys are always right.

Especially when they have the head of officials there. It was 5-0 consensus.

 

[CuseFaninVT]

I disagree. he had a guy from UCLA right on his hip. If the SMU player doesn't go after the ball then it could very well be hello Lorenzo Charles except with a lay-in and not a dunk.

There is no possible way, unless you are manute bol, to simultaneously box out properly and get a goal tend. He screwed up.

 

[orange79]

Not in the cylinder but above the rim off line. Should have been reviewed.

I don't think you can review goal-tending.

 

[bpo57]

Art. 3. Goaltending.

a. Goaltending occurs when a defensive player touches the ball during a fieldgoal

try and each of the following conditions is met: (Exceptions: Rule

10-4.1.i)

1. The ball is on its downward flight; and

2. The ball is above the level of the ring and has the possibility, while in

flight, of entering the basket and is not touching the cylinder.

b. It is goaltending to touch the ball outside the cylinder during a free throw,

regardless of whether the free throw is on its upward or downward flight.

c. When the ball contacts the backboard and any part of the ball is above the

rim during a field goal attempt, it is considered to be on its downward flight.

In such a case, it is goaltending when the ball is touched by a player as

long as it has a possibility of entering the basket.

doesn't meet any of those conditions.

 

[STEVEHOLT]

Especially when they have the head of officials there. It was 5-0 consensus.

former head of officials that comes on FOX during NFL games disagrees with half the replay calls. My point is just because a panel of talking heads says something, does not make it true.

 

[scottynguyen]

Not that official's call imo, he doesn't have the best look at the trajectory of that shot.

bang-bang play, goaltends are very tough calls wherever the occur. from what I understand goaltend rules have some leeway in terms of interpretation, does the ball actually have a chance of going in.

Feel bad for that kid, read on twitter he broke down during his interview in the locker room.

 

[bpo57]

There is no possible way, unless you are manute bol, to simultaneously box out properly and get a goal tend. He screwed up.

The only one who screwed up more was the out of position ref that made that horrible call.

 

[STEVEHOLT]

doesn't meet any of those conditions.

condition two is met. the ball had a possibility, not a probability, but a possibility of going in. You cant for 100 percent know that it doesn't take some crazy bounce of the rim and bounce in. you can say you are 99 percent sure..but the key word here is POSSIBLE...

 

[bpo57]

former head of officials that comes on FOX during NFL games disagrees with half the replay calls. My point is just because a panel of talking heads says something, does not make it true.

Steve are you serious? Watch the vine above and tell me that the ball was in the cylinder or about to hit the rim.

 

[bpo57]

condition two is met. the ball had a possibility, not a probability, but a possibility of going in. You cant for 100 percent know that it doesn't take some crazy bounce of the rim and bounce in. you can say you are 99 percent sure..but the key word here is POSSIBLE...

Steve- Lens Crafters is open. Either that or get a seeing eye dog.

 

[CuseFaninVT]

I don't think you can review goal-tending.

It is a reversible call.


Section 12. Correctable Errors


Art. 1. The correctable errors are as follows:

a. Failing to award a merited free throw.

b. Awarding an unmerited free throw.

c. Permitting a wrong player to attempt a free throw.

d. Permitting a player to attempt a free throw at the wrong basket.

e. Erroneously counting or canceling a score.

Note: In order for this to be a correctable error, the official must have

erred in counting or canceling a successful try for goal according to a

rule (i.e., after basket interference or goaltending, incorrectly counting or

Rule 2 / Officials and Their Duties 39

failing to cancel a score or counting a three-point goal instead of a twopoint

goal). A correctable error does not involve an error in judgment.

 

[dasher]

Not in the cylinder but above the rim off line. Should have been reviewed.

There is no review for goal tending.