Illinois Post Game Thread | Page 16 | The Boneyard
.-.

Illinois Post Game Thread

Interesting… so the rabbit hole goes deeper. Love the picture. How do we go from 30 (when it should have been 20) on the clock at 2:32 to 19 at 2:29? If you measure it from this moment in time then it never would have been a shot clock violation at all, but they still did initially reset the shot clock upon Reibe’s possession of the rebound at 2:32.
I just put a stopwatch to when the ball was secured by Reibe to when Malachi was fouled. 21.5 seconds. The foul and made shot were not in time at least according to actual time and not factoring in clock reset errors.
 
Last edited:
I just put a stopwatch to when the ball was secured by Reibe to when Malachi was fouled. 21.5 seconds. The foul and made shot were not in time at least according to actual time and not factoring in clock reset errors.
I agree with that, but the whole reset to 30 seconds followed by a countdown from 20 appears to be standard when preparing for a defensive rebound while the ball hasn’t been secured yet. The clock operator reset to 20 on the shot clock a second or two after Reibe already secured it. So the actual time elapsed was 21.5, like you said, but per the sloppy clock operation it was under 20 (is what I’ve gathered, anyway). The whole thing was a mess.
 
I just put a stopwatch to when the ball was secured by Reibe to when Malachi was fouled. 21.5 seconds. The foul and made shot were not in time at least according to actual time and not factoring in clock reset errors.
Love the depth and creative analysis the BY will go to on any single incident. This is becoming an all time epic BY commentary subject. Imagine if the call had gone the other way.
 
Love the depth and creative analysis the BY will go to on any single incident. This is becoming an all time epic BY commentary subject. Imagine if the call had gone the other way.
That was my primary motivation trying to get to the bottom of it. If UConn were down by 7 with some momentum with over two minutes left, I’d have faith they could win a game like that. I would’ve been irate if that happened in reversed roles and the explanation was so poor.
 
That was my primary motivation trying to get to the bottom of it. If UConn were down by 7 with some momentum with over two minutes left, I’d have faith they could win a game like that. I would’ve been irate if that happened in reversed roles and the explanation was so poor.
I was grumpy yesterday. Don’t mind me. Was going to DM you. Decided to do it in the open instead. I was being a d o u c h e. Salute to you . Go Huskies
 
.-.
I was grumpy yesterday. Don’t mind me. Was going to DM you. Decided to do it in the open instead. I was being a d o u c h e. Salute to you . Go Huskies
That is really healthy accountability right there. Too much trypotphan?
 
I was grumpy yesterday. Don’t mind me. Was going to DM you. Decided to do it in the open instead. I was being a d o u c h e. Salute to you . Go Huskies
No worries bro I promise I understand your passion. Go Huskies
 
I just put a stopwatch to when the ball was secured by Reibe to when Malachi was fouled. 21.5 seconds. The foul and made shot were not in time at least according to actual time and not factoring in clock reset errors.
I was hoping they'd give us the ball out of bounds with 2 seconds. Pleasantly surprised they counted it, and would be upset if I was an Illinois fan for sure. There is some human reaction time setting the shot clock, especially now that it's either 20 or 30 depending on who gets it, but if the refs were to go to a stopwatch, they'd probably have to eliminate that element.

Reibe also probably fouled on the rebound reaching over the top of a guy, and that could have cut it to 5 - and then things are getting a little hairy. We'll get better at not playing with our food - just needed to hit some of the open looks we were getting to finish them off. That was what we did down the stretch against Purdue - milked the shot clock, and finished the play. Even while Edey was going off with Clingan in foul trouble, we matched them basket for basket and it never got below 13.
 
Sounds like the name of a law firm. And they will be bringing their law to the paint this year.
The way you phrase it sounds like a 70s weekly drama.
 
.-.
hurley was pretty clear that he was not 100% and pretty much the only reason he played was to give reibe a break.

If hurley wasn't happy with his focus,he would have said so.
My comment was more particularly about him being engaged or as you would say focus. I did mention his injuries that seem to set him back. Now he is able to run but not at full strength and we hardly threw the ball down low to him in the 1st half. He tends to get down on himself when this happens even when he is healthy. I don't think at this point Hurley would mention his lack of focus when he/Tarris has other obstacles to get over. Once his conditioning gets better he will get the ball much more and you should see a much more engaged Tarris Reed. It would not be a good motivating comment if Hurley had mentioned the "focus".
 

Online statistics

Members online
363
Guests online
9,828
Total visitors
10,191

Forum statistics

Threads
165,431
Messages
4,437,766
Members
10,298
Latest member
Lapdog


Top Bottom