The fact that Chris Beaver (clearly a below average official) missed both the TO request AND the foot out of bounds is perplexing. However, the fact that they wouldn't even review any part of the call after the fact makes you go hmmmmmmm. Was that sequence reviewable?
That Whole Jump Ball Sequence Makes you Wonder.......
- Thread starter dbleagle1
- Start date
A
anon_i8nzeu2gbf0ba
Guest
Then the next question is, Why the hell not? Review has been sold on the notion of "getting it right." So then why can't you review ANY play in the last minute of a game? Do we wanna get it right or don't we? That BS at the end last night cost Iowa the game, not to mention the HIGHLY questionable two points gifted to the Gophers at the end of the first half--with great enthusiasm by the official, I might add.
They can throw the entire system of video review out the window now in every sport and the world would be a better place.
They can throw the entire system of video review out the window now in every sport and the world would be a better place.
While I was as mad about that terrible jump ball call as you, throwing out the video reviews would be way worse.
The problem is the way the review rules are written. They allow for reviewing if a ball is deflected out of bounds and they need to determine which team should get possession. However, they don't allow for reviewing to see if someone stepped on a sideline/baseline/halfcourt during a live ball situation.
A
anon_i8nzeu2gbf0ba
Guest
I respectfully disagree Fivecardstud14. Sports were played for well over a century before video review. And for every review that corrects something, something else is "not reviewable," or is reviewed for five minutes and the wrong call is STILL made.
Was his knee down three inches before the goal line? BS
Get rid of replay. Make officials meet the press after games just as players and coaches do, and make officials publicly accountable, just as players and coaches are.
Was his knee down three inches before the goal line? BS
Get rid of replay. Make officials meet the press after games just as players and coaches do, and make officials publicly accountable, just as players and coaches are.
Every bit of this^^^^^^. Never take the game off the field, court, what-have-you.
He was too busy trying to make the "look at me! Look at me!" call for the home crowd instead of getting it right.
I don't like the way review is implemented in the NFL and MLB. In both cases I'd prefer they review everything that looks close, outside of penalties in football. And, review them without requiring one team to throw a hanky on the field requesting a review, look at it automatically. In both football and baseball, you have plenty of built in time to make a review possible. If it's close and you need extra time, halt the game. Once you determine a call was wrong, you only have to fix that one play.
Basketball is a completely different animal. The nature of the continuous action makes complete review nearly impossible. Want to review any possible stepping on the sideline or baseline, ok, do that. However, what are you going to do when that possibly happened on a fast break and a dead ball doesn't happen for four more possessions and 4 scores. They can't review during the live ball time and if they review and find a player did step on a sideline during the first scoring play, how do they handle the next 90 seconds of game time that saw 7 more points scored? Wipe it all out and start the clock over?
What is and isn't reviewable and how it's ruled on definitely need tweaked. Getting rid of it at the highest level, like the P5 conferences, the post season tourneys, the NBA is a bad idea. The first time a player hits a shot that's obviously after a shot clock or with :00, everyone, including people in this thread, will complain to high heaven that it should have been reviewed and overruled.
Basketball is a completely different animal. The nature of the continuous action makes complete review nearly impossible. Want to review any possible stepping on the sideline or baseline, ok, do that. However, what are you going to do when that possibly happened on a fast break and a dead ball doesn't happen for four more possessions and 4 scores. They can't review during the live ball time and if they review and find a player did step on a sideline during the first scoring play, how do they handle the next 90 seconds of game time that saw 7 more points scored? Wipe it all out and start the clock over?
What is and isn't reviewable and how it's ruled on definitely need tweaked. Getting rid of it at the highest level, like the P5 conferences, the post season tourneys, the NBA is a bad idea. The first time a player hits a shot that's obviously after a shot clock or with :00, everyone, including people in this thread, will complain to high heaven that it should have been reviewed and overruled.
What's funny, I'm pretty sure the ruling that had Iowa fans screaming for Jim Bain's head was reviewable because they would need to determine who was fouled and who to charge a foul to. Now, if they saw the review and noticed no foul was committed, they couldn't fix that. But, they would have seen that Kevin Boyle didn't commit the foul.
I'd rather have the replay. Heck, as many HS games as are streamed, I'd be ok with checking on the stream too, to see if a correction can be made.
Using available technology is always a good thing.
I am under the notion that they use replay to "get it right" but last night they did not use it.
I would be in favor of instituting a coaches challenge into the game. Give coaches a chance to "challenge" a ruling if they feel they were incorrect (not fouls though). Any other situation they can use it. They then go to replay and see. IF a coach is correct then they keep their challenge. IF they are wrong the coach loses his ability to challenge the rest of the game. Also under 1 minute any "questionable" play can be reviewed by someone in the media truck or 3rd official, and over turned if necessary.
I mean they use it for clock errors, last touch, first touch in terms of clock starting. Why can't a simple play like last night be reviewed? I just do not understand the use of technology in todays game and we still rely on Chris Beaver and Larry freaking scorotto to make the final decisions. Wow.
I would be in favor of instituting a coaches challenge into the game. Give coaches a chance to "challenge" a ruling if they feel they were incorrect (not fouls though). Any other situation they can use it. They then go to replay and see. IF a coach is correct then they keep their challenge. IF they are wrong the coach loses his ability to challenge the rest of the game. Also under 1 minute any "questionable" play can be reviewed by someone in the media truck or 3rd official, and over turned if necessary.
I mean they use it for clock errors, last touch, first touch in terms of clock starting. Why can't a simple play like last night be reviewed? I just do not understand the use of technology in todays game and we still rely on Chris Beaver and Larry freaking scorotto to make the final decisions. Wow.
But if either JoBo or BE hits a questionable 3 pointer, they go back and review to make sure it was a 3 pointer. But not if a defenders foot was out of bounds. Both line calls.
,
please provide the authority for your conclusion.....rule #, para #. pg #, whatever citation you're relying on.
I know that the asking/granting for timeout wouldn't be reviewable, but wouldn't the foot being out of bounds be reviewable, thus negating the jump ball?
As I said, had there been an out of bounds call, they could review to determine whole the ball went off of, or (in this case) had they ruled that both players stepped out of bounds, they could review to see who stepped out first. Since there was no call, hence no violation, they can't review to determine if there was a violation.
http://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/BR17.pdf
Rule 11 covers Instant Replay. Sect 1, Article 4 states - The officials shall not use such available equipment for judgment
calls such as:
a: Determine whether a foul occurred (Exceptions: A flagrant 2 foul.)
b: Determine whether basket interference or goaltending occurred
c: Determine whether a violation occurred except in 11-2.1.e and 11-3.1.a.2.
11-2.1.e states - Violations.
In the last two minutes of the second period and any extra period(s), to determine which team caused the ball to go out of bounds when there is a deflection involving two or more players. In the case of last night's game, there was no out of bounds call and no deflection.
11-3.1.a.2 covers shot clock violations, which doesn't apply.
The Gopher stepping on the baseline is not reviewable per Rule 11-1.4.c.
Thank you. I believe I will look a little closer to determine if there is any reference from/to other sections or subsections.
I also intend to attempt to contact Mr Boyages to become enlightened as to the league's review of officials, contacts with known boosters, method of accountability, etc.
I also may attempt to contact the NCAA to determine various questions I have been curious about over the past few years.
Depending on lack of adequate responses I also may use some contacts to see if there is any interest in reviewing non compliance with tax laws.
I've been called a lot of things in my life.... some not so complimentary. Bottom line is I have a long fuse. But when it burns out I become a bit of a bulldog....not saying I believe in a conspiracy, just remember Robert Knight mentioning on more than one occasion that officials connections with gambling should be a priority in the process, that he believed it would.... not may...resolve a lot of problems.
There is zero accountability for the officials.
Until this changes, they will officiate to their desired outcome.
Saw it in football Northwestern @ Iowa. Blatant officiating to a desired outcome.
Saw it over at Nebraska in basketball.
A good amount of officials that do Big Ten games hate Fran and they F him over to get even.
On the contrary the home cooking favoritism given to Wisconsin year in year out for Bo Ryan kept them in the top 4 every year.
Until this changes, they will officiate to their desired outcome.
Saw it in football Northwestern @ Iowa. Blatant officiating to a desired outcome.
Saw it over at Nebraska in basketball.
A good amount of officials that do Big Ten games hate Fran and they F him over to get even.
On the contrary the home cooking favoritism given to Wisconsin year in year out for Bo Ryan kept them in the top 4 every year.
The official was looking directly at the play...his eyes were targeted on that play. His facial expression looks more attentive and he makes no call until Minnesota (their player also fouled). This was a slow, virtually stopped play so the guy can't claim the split second excuse, which often explains missed and bad calls....the TV slows the game a little and the boys are big and moving very fast at times.
It was not a mistake, it was probably gambling. But it was not a mistake made in good faith and the replay clearly shows that focus.
It was not a mistake, it was probably gambling. But it was not a mistake made in good faith and the replay clearly shows that focus.
Well, if there is a call, they'll charge it to someone, even if they can't identify the crime or the accused.
Again going back to the play, if BE just dribble forward and tries to force the action I am about 95% sure he gets a foul called. But I was talking to a guy who refs small college ball and he said it is very rare to see a player get a jump ball w/out fouling. Says there is always grabbing and slapping before they tie the ball up.
He said actually that the baseline official was in his area, the other official who would of been near Minny's bench should of stayed and helped out as well. Instead BOTH officials (Scirotto & Wymer) took off and they were no where near the action. So while it was beaver who missed the call, those other two officials "hung" him out to dry.
So all 3 officials were at fault. I just hate to see a game like that be decided by 3 guys in stripes. And again every year it seems about this time we start to see these "missed" calls more often. These refs works something like 60-70 games in a season and now this is the point where they are starting to get "fatigued" or worn out. I mean in the Nebbie game an official went down with an injury. Some of these guys are pushing 50+ and working games every night has to take a toll on their bodies (especially with working a 40min game and then travel).
The NCAA needs to look at maybe restricting these guys to 1-2 games a week. I especially liked the "double" foul last night in the PU vs IU game. Wow.
He said actually that the baseline official was in his area, the other official who would of been near Minny's bench should of stayed and helped out as well. Instead BOTH officials (Scirotto & Wymer) took off and they were no where near the action. So while it was beaver who missed the call, those other two officials "hung" him out to dry.
So all 3 officials were at fault. I just hate to see a game like that be decided by 3 guys in stripes. And again every year it seems about this time we start to see these "missed" calls more often. These refs works something like 60-70 games in a season and now this is the point where they are starting to get "fatigued" or worn out. I mean in the Nebbie game an official went down with an injury. Some of these guys are pushing 50+ and working games every night has to take a toll on their bodies (especially with working a 40min game and then travel).
The NCAA needs to look at maybe restricting these guys to 1-2 games a week. I especially liked the "double" foul last night in the PU vs IU game. Wow.
the play would have been reveiwable in this instant because with the foot being OB minnesota is considered to have made the ball out of bounds, the problem is nobody saw the foot being OB .had one of them suspected the foot was OB they could have reveiwed it under this circumstance.
Umm It gave the ball back to Minnesota and they were able to tie it up. If the officials are in place, we get the TO and at least have a shot. Instead the officials took it away from Iowa.
We also missed some FT's, but that is such a lame @ss excuse. When its under 1 minute and you have the ball "taken" away from you by the refs, that does cost you a game.
18 turnovers and Iowa still won the game. Oh wait, they didn't because they were completely robbed and screwed by the officials. It was a horse shit call. I could hear the timeout called in my living room.
This game and this loss just still has me infuriated. I usually get over a loss pretty quick, especially when Iowa is outplayed and beaten by a better team. That was not the case in this game. That game was decided on that call. Or, at least it made Iowa chances that much lower. How can you possibly say that game didn't cost Iowa?
Profoundly esoteric. It( your post) is so clearly thought out before you typed your repartee.
... just because you like to point all things Iowa did or does wrong...and at the same time ignore the come back...ignore the mid court traps that created Minny turnovers....doesn't make you any smarter than anyone else.
I fully understand your MO..but calling another poster not very bright is uncalled.
Actually I am, you just somehow believe that because we turned the ball over 18 times we should automatically lose. So against Sparty when we get that 18th turnover should they just stop the game and hand the ball to Sparty and walk off?
Iowa did tons of things horrible in Wednesdays night game, but with 20.3 seconds they had the lead and the ball. The ref choose to call a jump ball when 2 things (Ellingson was calling for a TO and the player who tied Ellingson up was OUT OF BOUNDS). So in those two things, the REF was out of position and his partners were out of position as well. These guys are paid 1-2K for each game and they give that type of performance is pathetic. You could put a JH ref out there and I am sure he wouldn't mess that up.
Fran and company had even communicated to the game officials if Iowa got the ball back (after a make or missed shot) they wanted a Time-out. Officials did not grant it, which is very strange.
But if you have to stoop to name calling it only shows your true character.
I agree with so much of this. It used to be, you watched a football game and you would recognize an obvious fumble catch or TD. Now, you just never know what the call will be until they get done fritzing around and even then, they get calls wrong.
replay didnt' change any of that, its the way they change the "definitions" of the game. It used to be a catch when you came down with the ball and got up and handed it to the ref. Now they changed it to did he possess it while having the proper feet in bounds and if he goes to the ground does it move at all. I have witnessed some of the oddest "catches" recently in both pro and college. It amazes me that they consider a "trap" a catch now a days. I mean if it hits the ground, its incomplete in my book.
That's the problem, not replay. They keep changing the definition that now most people don't know what is or what isn't a catch anymore. Its also like the goalie. It used to be you had to have the ball "inside the pylon" now they say the goal line is extended and blah blah blah.
here you can see Brady verbally calling a timeout...
as well motioning with his hand for a timeout.
When I reffed intramural basketball in college a couple years ago, I called fouls on whoever I didn't like. Take it for what it's worth.
Similar threads
