Armchair Refs: Your Opinion on Two Plays? (Villanova Game)

[my2cents]

There were numerous plays where our players arms were hit during shots, especially against AE and Lou. It was the worst officiated game I have ever seen.

 

[Redux]

This fourth and last frame shows the ball has clearly left Nika's hand and the shot clock has expired

There is clearly NOT evidence to over-rule a call on the floor (I'm assuming the rules about over-ruling clock calls are the same as any other call: clear evidence).

I think you could make a case that in frame #3 her hand is still in contact with the ball. It's not a great case and I certainly wouldn't call it conclusive but at least it's close.

In frame #4 the ball is gone, not close. So look at the sequence of #2,3 and 4 and you can easily interpolate (assuming your frames are of equal interval - about 1/25 of a second I'd guess) exactly where the ball would be halfway between frames 3 and 4. Clearly out of her hand. Interpolate from that, backward: STILL out of her hand. We're now in the neighborhood of 1/100 of a second and it's unreasonable to expect human refs to make those kinds of judgements. So you don't make those judgements on a monitor: the floor call stands.

Now you could object that "interpolate" is not evidence. Yet that's exactly what they had to do to make an incorrect over-rule decision, since no matter what equipment they had or resolution of the monitor, no single frame (or moment if their sources are cruder than frame-by-frame) was conclusive. There is zero evidence that her hand was on the ball when the clock ran out.

I can't believe in another game of a hundred or so memorable moments, including Nika sinking another key three, I'm still thinking about this call. I assume you folks all know that fan is short for fanatic.

 

[Zorro]

On two occasions, Maddy, while shooting, jumped into a Husky defender who was standing motionless with arms that were up and stayed up. Both times she drew fouls. What am I missing here? One, as I recall, was against Lou and the other Aubrey.

 

[topogigio]

When they announced the points were negated at halftime, I was incredulous. The network never showed the replay so there was nothing to confirm the shot was after the clock expired. I played the replay ad nauseum, and for the life of me, I don't see it. The ball was clearly out of Nika's hand before the buzzer, before the shot clock expired, plus no red light on the backboard. Given that the same refs needed another five minutes to review the ball out of bounds under Villanova's basket in the closing minute of the game, in which a blind man can see that a Villanova player hit it out, I question their competence!

 

[Skeets]

The shot clock on the CBSSN ticker tape at the bottom was a second or so behind the official clock. See the attached screenshot which shows the official clock behind the basket at zero with the red outline lit up while the clock at the bottom still shows 1 second left. View attachment 83673

I'm not disputing that there were all kinds of issues with the clocks. I thought, based on everything I was paying attention to in real time, that the shot was good.

@Biff, ok, I thought the backboard lights up with the end of the shot clock, but maybe not. Certainly the horn sounds at the expiration of the shot clock. I didn't hear that either before the ball left Nika's hands. I guess that doesn't mean the shot clock was working correctly. Like I said, there were clock issues...

 

[stamfordhusky]

Apparently the make similar calls in the NFL. Did you happen to watch the Chiefs-Bengals game last night? The refs called a “do-over”, you know like when we kids. No harm done though. The Chiefs ended up punting on fifth down.

That’s a bit misleading. On the play in question, the clock was improperly running and the referee clearly stepped in to try to stop the play before the ball was snapped. As soon as he did this, by rule the play is dead and anything that happens after that does not count. What they did was exactly right.

 

[LwrcasefaN]

The refs should be given two minutes max to review a call. If it takes longer, it suggests that irrefutable evidence is approaching NIL or very slim. Move on. These calls? Aubrey's call could have been a no call, but I saw these touch calls going both ways. Not a fan of them. Nika's shot? Not sure.

 

[stamfordhusky]

On two occasions, Maddy, while shooting, jumped into a Husky defender who was standing motionless with arms that were up and stayed up. Both times she drew fouls. What am I missing here? One, as I recall, was against Lou and the other Aubrey.

I suggest you look at these plays again. I looked at both several times and in both cases, the UConn defender had her arms extended at perhaps a 30 degree angle. Thus when there was contact, it was a clear foul.

In many of these fouls, the defender , after the foul call, stands with her arms straight up to try to convince the refs that they were in that position when she fouled. However, that is very rarely the case.

 

[HuskyNan]

Is this a foul?

 

[Bone Dog]

You could also argue that she did not plant her feet until Aubrey was into her shooting motion,

This is how it looked to me. Aubrey was already committed to her leap when Olsen set her feet. She’d already picked up the ball and taken her final step before leaping for the rim.

It also seemed like Olsen was not square to the play, though this is not necessary to get a charge. But it is often indicative of a late slide into position.

 

[Bigboote]

The thing with reviews is that to overturn the call the video must be conclusive. If there is any doubt the original call must stand. There is no way a five minute review could have offered conclusive proof. The time taken alone is counter-intuitive to the outcome.

I was gonna say the same thing. If it’s conclusive, it shouldn’t take long.