Is goaltending reviewable?

[HawkRose]

I don’t want this to turn into blame the refs for loss thread. This is a simple rule discussion.

To me it seems it shouldn’t be, just like a travel isn’t reviewable. You would neve get refs to stop a game and review a goaltend that wasn’t called so I don’t see why you can review one that was. Never seen it happen before.

 

[Kurt Warner]

Very good question

 

[SoFla-Hawkeye]

To quote/paraphrase Fran, "evidently".

 

[brownd7949hawks]

There’s been numerous times where a player had grabbed the rim, put hand thru net or actually goaltended and ive never once seen it reviewed.

 

[Hawktheworld]

If this is the case, goaltending should never be called in live action. wait until change of possession or dead ball. That killed the game totally. Great job refs! I don’t mind blaming them for that bs.

 

[unoHawkeye]

I found this section of the rule book in an article from 2019. See Article 4

 

[HawkRose]

So they completely messed this up unless rule was changed

 

[Booty Maximus]

LOL, you really think they reviewed that against the rules?

 

[BlackNGoldBleeder]

I found this section of the rule book in an article from 2019. See Article 4

So, either the rule has changed or the officials reviewed the goaltending call in error.

To me, the greater issue is how a team can get whistled for seven fouls in eight minutes then not get called for a single one the final twelve. It's really unfortunate that we have to talk about incompetent officiating from one game to the next because it sounds like both teams played well and competed hard last night.

I've been done with B1G Ten basketball since the Iowa win over Minnesota. It's just not fun to watch when officiating is this egregiously bad nearly every game. I might not watch another game until the tournament.

 

[mdhertle]

Rule changed (amended is probably a better description) in 2020.

"In the last two minutes of the second period or the last two minutes of any overtime period, and only when a call/decision has been made, to determine if basket interference or goaltending has occurred. When the call/decision on the floor is reversed as a result of the review, the officials must determine if there was team possession when the call was made and award the ball to the team if in possession. Otherwise, team possession will be determined by the alternating-possession arrow."

 

[unoHawkeye]

Rule changed (amended is probably a better description) in 2020.

"In the last two minutes of the second period or the last two minutes of any overtime period, and only when a call/decision has been made, to determine if basket interference or goaltending has occurred. When the call/decision on the floor is reversed as a result of the review, the officials must determine if there was team possession when the call was made and award the ball to the team if in possession. Otherwise, team possession will be determined by the alternating-possession arrow."

Thanks for providing the updated rule. However, didn’t the refs defer to the possession arrow to give Iowa the ball back, even though we had clear possession at the time the call was made? Wieskamp had gathered the ORB and putback before the whistle blew. Pretty minor mistake there, but it hurts that they retroactively called the goaltend after letting play continue and Iowa scored

 

[denmar81]

Only in last 2 minutes. Wasn’t that call well before?

 

[unoHawkeye]

So, either the rule has changed or the officials reviewed the goaltending call in error.

To me, the greater issue is how a team can get whistled for seven fouls in eight minutes then not get called for a single one the final twelve. It's really unfortunate that we have to talk about incompetent officiating from one game to the next because it sounds like both teams played well and competed hard last night.

I've been done with B1G Ten basketball since the Iowa win over Minnesota. It's just not fun to watch when officiating is this egregiously bad nearly every game. I might not watch another game until the tournament.

You’re right, it’s long past the point where we as fans need to expect inconsistency within games from officials, and the team simply has to overcome it.

Illinois deserved the win as they played the better game last night, however Iowa played really well also. It was a tough loss, and easier to take out negative emotions on officiating versus poor play/coaching by Iowa, since I felt that both the coaching and play were good enough to put us in a position to win the game. The holier than thou on this board who insist that there is to be no emotional response and no discussion on officiating following games, when it is a factor in every game, drives me up the wall. No criticizing coaches, no criticizing players, no criticizing officials.

 

[Franisdaman]

This should be reviewable by the B!G Office!

Is this a foul?

 

[unoHawkeye]

Only in last 2 minutes. Wasn’t that call well before?

It was with about 1:15 left I think. We were down four and the points there would’ve brought it to a 2 pt game. Obviously we didn’t end up getting a score and it hurt badly

 

[Lone Clone]

This should be reviewable by the B!G Office!

Is this a foul?

View embedded media

was it called on the Illinois player? Looks like he elbowed.

 

[Franisdaman]

was it called on the Illinois player? Looks like he elbowed.

Garza was called for the foul; it was his 4th, where Fran decided to sit him

 

[hawkeyeinmo]

If the official was “smart” or “good” he would treat it like football officials do on a fumble. Instead of blowing the call dead right away they let it “play out” then review. They could have done the same here. Let it play out. No need to even blow the whistle to review here unless Illinois gets the rebound, THEN blow dead and review.

 

[OutbackBowl2017]

1:06 on the clock and I thought there should of been more time, 1:10 to 1:12. They should of let the play continue till it was completed by Iowa or Illini gain possession then blow a whistle. Review is ruining the games, football and bball. Do we need to have a review ref call down to the officials if they missed the call or got it wrong? No, but don’t kill play to review a play because they can.

 

[markfromj]

However, didn’t the refs defer to the possession arrow to give Iowa the ball back, even though we had clear possession at the time the call was made?

No. We retained the arrow.

 

[BBHawk]

Thanks for providing the updated rule. However, didn’t the refs defer to the possession arrow to give Iowa the ball back, even though we had clear possession at the time the call was made? Wieskamp had gathered the ORB and putback before the whistle blew. Pretty minor mistake there, but it hurts that they retroactively called the goaltend after letting play continue and Iowa scored

No. Iowa got the next tie up, but that was a really weak call, too, if I remember correctly.

 

[markfromj]

Officiating cannot be consistent.

The same play has never happened twice in the history of the game.

 

[HawkRose]

I think this is an awful rule amendment. What happens if they miss the call and there isn’t a stoppage until 2 possessions later. It’s not like they are going to go back and review and reverse the play. This can only take points off the board and create an awkward decision on possession

 

[Hawkfan_08]

This should be reviewable by the B!G Office!

Is this a foul?

View embedded media

Oooh! Oooh! Then show the possession right before that where Cockburn fouled 3 times.

 

[papabeef]

This should be reviewable by the B!G Office!

Is this a foul?

View embedded media

maybe maybe not

 

[papabeef]

No. Iowa got the next tie up, but that was a really weak call, too, if I remember correctly.

no they used the possession arrow , there were no more tie ups . was not a weak call , it was the right call, the timing sucked .

 

[papabeef]

No. We retained the arrow.

no we did not

 

[BBHawk]

no they used the possession arrow , there were no more tie ups . was not a weak call , it was the right call, the timing sucked .

I checked the game tracker/summary. There were no more tie ups, yes, but Iowa wad credited with the rebound after the block and retained possesion. That is what the rules said should happen and it did.

 

[papabeef]

I think this is an awful rule amendment. What happens if they miss the call and there isn’t a stoppage until 2 possessions later. It’s not like they are going to go back and review and reverse the play. This can only take points off the board and create an awkward decision on possession

that falls under the correctable error rule and i am pretty sure it would be to late to correct it .

 

[HawkDub]

I don’t want this to turn into blame the refs for loss thread. This is a simple rule discussion.

To me it seems it shouldn’t be, just like a travel isn’t reviewable. You would neve get refs to stop a game and review a goaltend that wasn’t called so I don’t see why you can review one that was. Never seen it happen before.

I agree and was shocked this was reviewable. Weiscamp rebounded the block and was going back up with it. I’m not sure how this can be reviewable given the continuation of it.

 

[joelbc1]

1:06 on the clock and I thought there should of been more time, 1:10 to 1:12. They should of let the play continue till it was completed by Iowa or Illini gain possession then blow a whistle. Review is ruining the games, football and bball. Do we need to have a review ref call down to the officials if they missed the call or got it wrong? No, but don’t kill play to review a play because they can.

This all goes back to the adage, “ Be careful what you ask for, you just might get it.” You want reviews of officials calls? You get the good and the bad. occasionally, shit happens. The refs got the call right...Iowa came out in the short end of the stick on this one.

 

[OutbackBowl2017]

This all goes back to the adage, “ Be careful what you ask for, you just might get it.” You want reviews of officials calls? You get the good and the bad. occasionally, shit happens. The refs got the call right...Iowa came out in the short end of the stick on this one.

I don’t want review, I was asking the hypothetical of do we need review. And if you are, let the play be completed by a made basket or change of possession before you blow the play dead is what I’m saying.

 

[joelbc1]

I don’t want review, I was asking the hypothetical of do we need review. And if you are, let the play be completed by a made basket or change of possession before you blow the play dead is what I’m saying.

Obviously, in the quest for “perfection” of the last decade, there is gonna be review. There is no answer to this question that will not miff someone. Peoples expectations are just flat out of kilter...and folks priorities are messed up, too.

 

[24 so far]

I don’t want review, I was asking the hypothetical of do we need review. And if you are, let the play be completed by a made basket or change of possession before you blow the play dead is what I’m saying.

That is Exactly how it should be. I can assure you there have been conversations about exactly that since this happened. Guaranteed.

The Offensive Team will always draw the short straw in this scenario because they are in position to score immediately after, including a mere tip-in potentially.

They got it right the way the rule is written, as in poorly written.

 

[joelbc1]

I don’t want review, I was asking the hypothetical of do we need review. And if you are, let the play be completed by a made basket or change of possession before you blow the play dead is what I’m saying.

When "goaltending" is called, the ball is blown dead immediately and then inbounded......You cannot "play thru" a goaltend call.

 

[24 so far]

When "goaltending" is called, the ball is blown dead immediately and then inbounded......You cannot "play thru" a goaltend call.

That's the problem, which is exactly what he is saying.

 

[joelbc1]

That's the problem, which is exactly what he is saying.

The only sensible thing is to end the play immediately....there is no way to allow playing on....Goal tending makes for a MADE basket and the ball goes out of bounds for inbounding, immediately. You cannot "unblow" a whistle! Sorry. Its a bad break but again, shit happens.

 

[hawkeyeinmo]

Anybody ever seen it the other way around? In other words the block is NOT called a goal tend and they blow a whistle to review. If like poster above says “shit happens” that’s fine with me but if the intent of review is to “get it right” then why only review when goal tend is called and not when goal tend SHOULD have been called.

 

[papabeef]

I agree and was shocked this was reviewable. Weiscamp rebounded the block and was going back up with it. I’m not sure how this can be reviewable given the continuation of it.

inside 2 minutes.

 

[papabeef]

The only sensible thing is to end the play immediately....there is no way to allow playing on....Goal tending makes for a MADE basket and the ball goes out of bounds for inbounding, immediately. You cannot "unblow" a whistle! Sorry. Its a bad break but again, shit happens.

great post