Ref's Gave the Game to Memphis

#26
#26
Mullet Vol said:
I couldn't understand how the announcers kept saying 1.1 seconds was wrong. It's almost like people believe that when the ball crosses the plane of the out of bounds line then it is dead.
Click to expand...

Yeah. It was a judgment call, but :01-ish was reasonable.
 
#28
#28
All Vol! said:
but the ball has to touch a player before the clock is to start, right? I mean, I'm assuming it did.
Click to expand...

A Memphis player deflected the ball which should have started the clock. Either way, I don't get what the big deal is. We're talking about giving the A&M player an extra dribble which would have meant a wild 25 footer instead of a wild 35 footer. Either way it's an incredibly low percentage shot.
 
#29
#29
Mullet Vol said:
Yeah, the Memphis guy touched it. That's why A&M got the ball back after almost throwing it out of bounds.
Click to expand...


right, I understand this...it's just that the post I was responding to sounded as though it was suggesting that it was the ball hitting the court that put it in play
 
#31
#31
All Vol! said:
right, I understand this...it's just that the post I was responding to sounded as though it was suggesting that it was the ball hitting the court that put it in play
Click to expand...

What I meant was the ball was deflected and didn't immediately hit out of bounds. It bounced once and then hit out of bounds. Thus they took 1.1 off the clock.
 
#32
#32
Although the ball may have hit inbouds first. I can't tell how the refs could see that from the replays shown. There was no indisputable visual evidence that the ball hit inbounds first. So to take off 1.1 seconds instead of .2 I think is a little extreme. Let the players determine the outcome not the refs.:no:
 
#33
#33
GAVol said:
What I meant was the ball was deflected and didn't immediately hit out of bounds. It bounced once and then hit out of bounds. Thus they took 1.1 off the clock.
Click to expand...

gotcha GAVol...I prob could've seen that's what you meant if I had looked a little closer...sorry. :thumbsup:
 
#35
#35
Bottom Line it was the clock operator's fault...they put them in that situation...if they start the clock like they are suppose to it never happens...i also think it is a little more than coinsidence that the game happened to be in Texas...
 
#36
#36
VOLinthaATL said:
Bottom Line it was the clock operator's fault...they put them in that situation...if they start the clock they are suppose to it never happens...i also think it is a little mor ethan coinsidence that the game happened to be in Texas...
Click to expand...

OR, perhaps the clock operator, from his vantage point, couldn't tell if the ball touched a player to begin with.
 
#38
#38
All Vol! said:
OR, perhaps the clock operator, from his vantage point, couldn't tell if the ball touched a player to begin with.
Click to expand...

That has to be what happened. It was tough to see on the replays, so it had to be tough to see from down low in live action.
 
#43
#43
ttrogvol said:
Although the ball may have hit inbouds first. I can't tell how the refs could see that from the replays shown. There was no indisputable visual evidence that the ball hit inbounds first. So to take off 1.1 seconds instead of .2 I think is a little extreme. Let the players determine the outcome not the refs.:no:
Click to expand...

Maybe one of them saw that it hit inbounds but they had to watch the replay for clock puposes.
 
#44
#44
Vol67 said:
.2 would have been the correct call anything else is bull and show a lack of basketball knowledge
Click to expand...

The replay just showed the ball clearly bouncing inbounds and then bouncing up a full 6 feet in the air before landing on the scorers table. They got the call right.

Even those that lack your command of basketball knowledge can clearly see that they got the call right.
 
#46
#46
GAVol said:
The replay just showed the ball clearly bouncing inbounds and then bouncing up a full 6 feet in the air before landing on the scorers table. They got the call right.

Even those that lack your command of basketball knowledge can clearly see that they got the call right.
Click to expand...

absolutely, if one does not realize that a ball is not out of bounds until it touches something AFTER crossing the line, one apparently does not know as much about basketball as one thinks.
 
#47
#47
I thought the clock stopped when the whistle blew. And if you watch the replays, it blew when it bounced on the court (inbounds or not). Clock should have been dead at that point. Horrible call by the refs and I hope they never work another tourney game. Turned that one into a disgrace. A 10 minute break to figure out the clock? Are you kidding me?
 
#48
#48
DrRosenRosen said:
I thought the clock stopped when the whistle blew. And if you watch the replays, it blew when it bounced on the court (inbounds or not). Clock should have been dead at that point. Horrible call by the refs and I hope they never work another tourney game. Turned that one into a disgrace. A 10 minute break to figure out the clock? Are you kidding me?
Click to expand...

If there was anyone that could have tried to save the ball but they blew the whistle, then I see some problems. But they are allowed to review the play and adjust the clock..the ball wasn't out of bounds until it had taken a long bounce. Unfortunate bounce for TAMU...but fair (I understand your point about the whistle and maybe players not playing through because of the whistle if there was anyone who could have saved it...but I think that only player around was a TAMU player who would have been afraid to touch it.) Just a bad bounce.
 
#49
#49
Yeah, I agree it hit in bounds and all, but I was just thinking the whistle stops the clock and play.

Regardless of the call, the way it happened and length of time it took to get there was just horrible. I would still send that ref crew home for the season.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top