why is the offensive team always in position? i am willing to bet this senario happens 2 or 3 times out of every 1000 possessions . it just happened to be us .
Is goaltending reviewable?
- Thread starter HawkRose
- Start date
Why do you think goaltending was “invented”? It used to be legal to reject a shit from the cylinder of the basket..
I’m sorry, I don’t understand your point. Didn’t think I intimated goaltending should be scrubbed or never called. What I DID intimate is to make it non-reviewable. If you’re NEVER going to review for a missed goal tend call, why review to wipe a goal tend call off. Just like you said make it a “shit happens” if they call a goal tend that should not have been. Make it just like fouls, travels, double dribbles, etc. non-reviewable.
My point being, “ goal tending” was made a violation only after intentional goal tending was a defensive stratgy....that would a why the rule was made.
We are becoming victims of our own search for fairness and perfection. and why shouldn’t goaltending not be reviewable? If it comes down to whiners claiming “ we got screwed..the fix was in” or stopping play and getting the call right...gimme the latter every damn time. Iowa caught a bad break the other night..Life is not always fair. Get over it. Remember...a goaltending call, if it stood, would have been unfair to Illinois, too. It was not goaltending.
You contradict yourself. You are the one that said “shit happens” . You evidently are not intelligent enough to get my point.
Then go ahead and explain to me why Iowa didn't get two points for a "made basket". Pretty sure that didn't happen with all the "sensible things" going on.
You do realize that rules change all the time right? And sometimes they get changed because of unintended consequences that weren't foreseen until they actually happened. Not sure how they couldn't foresee a put back or a tip-in after a blocked shot/goaltend, but whatever.
The problem here is that now it's reviewable at this stage of the game (pretty sure someone showed its a 2 minute mark thing, but could be mistaken). So you either don't allow review or you change the way the rule is written so the Offensive Team isn't punished like it clearly was in this instance.
So Iowa (in this instance it's Iowa, it could happen to anybody) not only gets points taken off the board, now they get to attempt to score again, inbound the ball, and run time off the clock.
I would be absolutely stunned if this rule isn't being looked at to be "tweaked".
Because the refs called “goaltending” and the ball goes out of bounds..jeeeebus keeeerist...why is this such a difficult concept to grasp? Then, upon review it was determined there was no goaltending so Iowa got the ball out of bounds. That is how the official’s error was corrected. It’s not perfect..,but what is? Scream all you want that Iowa got screwed...so what? Again...life ain’t fair! You can write the rules however you want, but rest assured there will be a situation arise sometime that will result in someone getting screwed. It’s a phuquin’ game!
Good luck with making goaltending non- reviewable. With players of today, goaltending will become commonplace..and sophisticated, too. I think folks are making a mountain out of a mole hill here..
Maybe Iowa will be placed in a special “ we got screwed” bracket in the NCAAs this year...they will be joined by about 300 other teams. Waaaaa!
Again...the goaltending call preceded the put back...the goaltending call automatically STOPS play, so the “put back” never happened...the error in the call, was acknowledged..and the correction of the error was to give Iowa the ball out of bounds. Pretty goddamned simple. Mistakes are always going to be made..and correcting obvious mistakes I’d preferrable to “ make up calls” further down the road.
I’m really not crying about the call. I’m wondering if there is a “better way”. Isn’t the purpose of review to not penalize teams with “bad calls”? I guess when there were bad calls before “review” started and someone said “hey let’s make that reviewable” you said Waaaaaaaa! I see crying about a blown call here and there as petty but no doubt here the “goal” of review backfired. So, is there a better way? Maybe not. Review started because it was meant to be a “better way”. Would doing a “delayed dead ball” work like in baseball? If a fielder interferes with a runner the umpire holds his arm out that after the play is done he can then award bases................. I think the goaltending call is more often missed when it should have been called than this situation where it was called and should not have been. Yet, I’ve never seen a review for a missed goal tend.
There is always “ a better way” until the next time it happens. As far as replays of “missed goaltending”...it really isn’t that uncommon..but usually goaltending is pretty obvious. It think Friday night, the official might have “ anticipated” goaltending..there were more than once an official “ anticipated” a call that just didn’t happen. Once for sure, it really screwed Ilinois. Again, shit happens..,
I’d have to admit that I thought the goaltending call was correct when I saw it in “real time”. And will even say I think the refs procedurally did it the right way. Don’t think it’s crying to discuss if there is a better way than “shit happens”. Ironically review was put in place to minimize “shit happens”
Why should it only be reviewable at the 2 minute mark then?
And the next time it could benefit us, and it would be wrong then too. That's the point.
And it has reduced “ shit happens” but the reality of life is that regardless of what you or I do to mitigate it...”shit happens” will always be with us. And really...what is wrong with a little “ shit happens”? Shouldn’t’t life have some mysteries?,
That's probably true, and sometimes there isn't a viable solution. In this case I think there is.
You play on until there is a change of possession or other stoppage like a foul, etc. Then review and reset from there. Hell we have 5 minute stoppages to put .3 seconds back on the clock all the time, and that has nothing to do with points, which are pretty important when you're keeping score.
Well honestly, what you or I think makes no difference. There were 3 folks who had a voice in this one...hindsight is always 20/20...no one is perfect...to expect perfection all the time is just not reasonable. Sucks to be the Hawks, I guess.
Like I said earlier..regardless of what protocol is adopted, sometime down the road, someone is gonna get screwed. Life ain’t fair.
I would imagine the awarding of points would make it something you' want to get right
Technically I don't think they can even touch the net without goal tending being called.
Hmm, I guess Leistikow agrees with my football fumble analogy.
Thanks. I was going to point out some similar rules in regards to other sports, just didn't want to type more! It's a good example though, IMO.
Frankly I think it's a no-brainer that it be amended (which I may or may not have eluded to numerous times already..........).
Life ain't fair, we can agree on that. The hindsight however can be addressed, and should be. (stay tuned is what I would say)
There was a continuation of play prior to the whistle resulting in a put back. The ball is considered to be live until the whistle blows as there was no motion by the referee to wave off the put back. Thus the goaltending becomes moot.
The whistle controls when the ball is i. Play and when it is not. This was snextremelylate whistle as Joe W had the time to land,gather himself, jump again, gain control of the ball and shoot.
What really happened here was that the ref wasn't going to call a goaltending. Only after the reaction of the Iowa bench did he make the call and both were wrong.
Should have been 2 points on the follow as the whistle,
.
I believe goaltending rules, at both ends of the court, were put in place directly due to Wilt Chamberlain.
not quite....the whistle stops play, it is not however the determining factor on a subsequent review. Since, by rule goal tending in the last 2 min of an NCAAm game is reviewable, they are then allowed to go back and review at that pt in time. Once a declaration is made then the ball is returned to the POI pt of interruption and in this case the ball was possessed by Iowa thus they got the ball with the shot clock set at where it was when the alleged GT happened NOT when the whistle sounded and the alt possession arrow was NOT used in this case as the game announcers incorrectly reported
While I don't want every play reviewed.... It is interesting that only the last 2 minutes are "important enough" to review some plays.
ah , no . that might be what you want to happen but they did it correctly . it sucks .
