mcpapa Posted March 19, 2015 Posted March 19, 2015 May be the first time I've ever seen the game-winner scored on a goaltended three.
DragonFire Posted March 19, 2015 Posted March 19, 2015 I think that's a terrible call. At the very least it was against the spirit of the rule. I hate that Alford got bailed out on that.
nkuclubbaseball19 Posted March 19, 2015 Posted March 19, 2015 Listened to last few seconds in car before heading into house so I didn't miss anything. Was the ball beneath the rim like the announcers made it sound?
DragonFire Posted March 19, 2015 Posted March 19, 2015 It's really tough to see. It was at most level with the rim off to the side of it. It wasn't going in. At all.
newarkcatholicfan Posted March 19, 2015 Posted March 19, 2015 I missed this one too. Thought it was a very good call.
DragonFire Posted March 19, 2015 Posted March 19, 2015 If that's goaltending then as far as I'm concerned Lorenzo Charles did as well.
tcjkbt Posted March 19, 2015 Posted March 19, 2015 The question I have is, Was the ball above or below the rim when the SMU player made contact with it? I really couldn't tell from the replays on the telecast. What did Alford shoot today on 3's------------something like 9 of 11?
nkuclubbaseball19 Posted March 19, 2015 Posted March 19, 2015 I just saw the call, terrible in my opinion. Well off the mark.
00Rocket28 Posted March 19, 2015 Posted March 19, 2015 Anyone who thinks that was a good call huffs paint.
BigVMan23 Posted March 19, 2015 Posted March 19, 2015 Ball was never "over the cylinder" the way I saw it, was off to the front, or else he wouldn't have been able to touch the ball from where he went up. bad call IMO, and IF it does meet the letter of the goaltending law and the refs had no choice but to call it, then that needs to be looked at being changed.
DragonFire Posted March 19, 2015 Posted March 19, 2015 Director of officials said they made the call because they deemed the ball had a "chance to go in". Never. It's physically impossible. Let Sport Science do a feature in it. There is no way a ball on that trajectory can go in.
BigVMan23 Posted March 19, 2015 Posted March 19, 2015 Director of officials said they made the call because they deemed the ball had a "chance to go in". Never. It's physically impossible. Let Sport Science do a feature in it. There is no way a ball on that trajectory can go in. There is an old saying...remain quiet and let others think you are a fool, rather than open your mouth and remove all doubt. The Director of officials should have heeded this old proverb and kept his mouth closed, cause if he thought that thing even had a PRAYER of going in...:no:
Clyde Posted March 19, 2015 Posted March 19, 2015 The 2nd video on this link shows it a little better. UCLA Beats SMU on Controversial Goaltending Call | The Big Lead The "chance of going in" would be tough to defend on review. Official who made the call was bench side so we're not seeing his angle. Tough all to make.
.png.ffa34568722b20f38e3c3ecfcb9a2cd2.png)
Recommended Posts