March 11, 200719 yr That doesn't make sense though. If the clock should've started earlier, there shouldn't have been any time on the clock. The refs are lucky Akron didn't miraculously score with the .6 they added to the clock. Makes you wonder if they would have had to reverse the decision after the tape was reviewed.
March 11, 200719 yr Author Everything about the ending after they made the shot sucked. Seriously, am I off base here in my obsession about this? Help me out. The ball hits the rim and comes off, ball is touched, clock does not start on time. Clock starts as player tracks the ball down in the corner. They run it up the court, let go of a shot with around 1.5 seconds left. Ball banks in at .1 or .0 seconds remaining. How does any of that mean you add more time? If the clock didn't start on time as it should have, that just means there is less time when the player released the ball. There was just about zero left when the ball went through, and in fact it would have hit zero while the ball was in the air. No way any time should have been added or as the announcer wanted, a technical foul because the fans rushed before the end of regulation. It's like the Duke/Clemson scenario. The clock didn't start when he caught the ball and as such they put more time on the clock than they should have. There was actually LESS time on the clock than what they showed in that game. You know what, you're right. I never even thought of it that way...
March 11, 200719 yr You know what, you're right. I never even thought of it that way... Gt, I was thinking the same thing at first. Then I thought about it and realized that Akron was getting a bonus possession at the end...crazy.
March 11, 200719 yr I heard on the radio this morning that if Miami(OH) happened to win the game that they would have the worst record(18-14) of all teams in the NCAA.
March 11, 200719 yr Who the heck is this guy?????? "They should call a technical." Oh my God, are you a Zip? Yeah that made me laugh too. Here's the question: With 26 wins, will Akron get the MAC a rare at-large bid?
March 11, 200719 yr Author Yeah that made me laugh too. Here's the question: With 26 wins, will Akron get the MAC a rare at-large bid? No chance...
March 11, 200719 yr Yeah that made me laugh too. Here's the question: With 26 wins, will Akron get the MAC a rare at-large bid? Nope.....It should be interesting to see where Miami is seeded....I'm inclined to believe they go in as a 14.
March 11, 200719 yr The play began with a defensive rebound on a FT and the clock started late.They ruled it was 0.6 added to the clock and Akron had the ball... Did it take 14 minutes for the officials to figure it out?
March 11, 200719 yr Yeah that made me laugh too. Here's the question: With 26 wins, will Akron get the MAC a rare at-large bid? Obviously these refs weren't playing by the "definition of the rules." :lol:
March 11, 200719 yr Did it take 14 minutes for the officials to figure it out? To review it, decide to put .6 back on the clock, Akron calls timeout, run the play.
March 11, 200719 yr Author I didnt believe so either. Miami will be a 13 or 14 seed, IMO. Akron played 15 games against teams over the 200 RPI mark. Easy to get a boatload of wins in that fashion...
March 11, 200719 yr I am very glad Miami won this game. Whether the clock started late or not, there is still no justifiable reason as to why you would add more time onto the clock because it started late, how does that make sense at all? We flipped to the game with about one minute left and we were glad that Miami banked in that three but just couldn't understand why they were adding time on. And if you had the volume up, Steve Lavin was trying to say that Miami should be charged a technical foul for rushing the court when the game wasn't over. I think it was all ridiculous and I'm glad that Akron turned it over because if some miracle happen and they scored, there would have been a lot of explaining by someone.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.