http://youtube.com/watch?v=6qplYM3KrPM

 

Watch this at about the 1:20 mark. He steps OOB and THEN the official raises his hand to stop play.

 

Bad example. Bad video and I couldnt even see him step out.

That's a bad view, look at the link I posted... his hand is moving BEFORE the step out of bounds, but forward instead of up. The foul is called before he steps out.

 

OK. Watched your link and I don't see where his hand was moving before the step OOB. I watched the video all the way through and don't see what you're talking about. Even when they amplify the foot on the line the official's arm is still down and then it goes straight up. What am I missing?

OK. Watched your link and I don't see where his hand was moving before the step OOB. I watched the video all the way through and don't see what you're talking about. Even when they amplify the foot on the line the official's arm is still down and then it goes straight up. What am I missing?

 

I hadn't watched that far into the video, so I thought you were contesting a different moment, but I have to say that from the blownup angle I don't even think the foot's out of bounds at that point. :lol:

I hadn't watched that far into the video, so I thought you were contesting a different moment, but I have to say that from the blownup angle I don't even think the foot's out of bounds at that point. :lol:

 

:thumb:

I hadn't watched that far into the video, so I thought you were contesting a different moment, but I have to say that from the blownup angle I don't even think the foot's out of bounds at that point. :lol:

 

While you may be right, its irrelevant. The official didn't make the call until he saw that foot hit.

Which brings up an annoying tendency of Big East refs to begin with... not calling shooting fouls til after they see if the ball went in. It's been driving me up a wall lately.

I'm late to the thread and didn't see the game. I'm with IMOM on this one. The contact caused the kid to go out of bounds. You can't ignore it simply based on the time left. You don't ignore and THEN give the ball back to the offending team. You also don't say "well I let someone else get bumped earlier and didn't call it even though I should have." The rule is clear. The bump caused him to go OOB from the angle I saw so it has to be a foul.

 

Nova fans should be crying about the lack of intelligence of the defender getting that close and making contact 70 feet from the basket.

 

I didn't see the game so I can't comment on the lack of consistency. That may be a valid criticism but it doesn't make the last call wrong - just inconsistent.

 

Villanova was in the double bonus for the last 8 minutes or so of the second half and many of those were on Georgetown for contact on the dribble. They were clearly calling it all second half. So, to not call it on Georgetown on the final play (twice) was inconsistent. If you say, "Let the players decide the game", fine. Don't call the contact on the drive but then don't call it 5 seconds later 80 feet from the basket.

Also, they don't HAVE to call that just because he stepped out of bounds. And another thing, you know that the whistle gets swallowed late in the game so, yes, they do ignore things simply because of the time on the clock.

Villanova was in the double bonus for the last 8 minutes or so of the second half and many of those were on Georgetown for contact on the dribble. They were clearly calling it all second half. So, to not call it on Georgetown on the final play (twice) was inconsistent. If you say, "Let the players decide the game", fine. Don't call the contact on the drive but then don't call it 5 seconds later 80 feet from the basket.

Also, they don't HAVE to call that just because he stepped out of bounds. And another thing, you know that the whistle gets swallowed late in the game so, yes, they do ignore things simply because of the time on the clock.

 

So you're telling the other coach "sorry, coach, I swallow my whistle at the end of the game. Now step back while I let the other team get one last attempt because I swallowed my whistle."

If you didn't see the game, and see that entire sequence, it's just not possible for you to understand the situation. Given the circumstances of that entire sequence, it was a HORRIBLE call, that cost 'Nova the game. Simple as that.

If you didn't see the game, and see that entire sequence, it's just not possible for you to understand the situation. Given the circumstances of that entire sequence, it was a HORRIBLE call, that cost 'Nova the game. Simple as that.

 

I saw the last minute. I saw Reynolds get cut off on the baseline by good defense. I saw him turn it over. I saw contact that forced the guy out of bounds.

 

If you're saying they were inconsistent for the entire game, fine. I'm just saying that if the ref saw the guy go out of bounds, he had little choice but to call the foul.

So you're telling the other coach "sorry, coach, I swallow my whistle at the end of the game. Now step back while I let the other team get one last attempt because I swallowed my whistle."

 

Are you seriously trying to tell me that refs don't "swallow the whistle" at the end of games? In fact, some fans want them to. Either way, that's not even my point. The call was inconsistent by either, 1) not calling the contact on the drive which had been called all second half, or 2) call the last foul which wasn't called 5 seconds earlier.

Are you seriously trying to tell me that refs don't "swallow the whistle" at the end of games? In fact, some fans want them to. Either way, that's not even my point. The call was inconsistent by either, 1) not calling the contact on the drive which had been called all second half, or 2) call the last foul which wasn't called 5 seconds earlier.

 

I've seen them swallow on contact on a shot in the lane at buzzer. I've never seen them just let a guy get knocked out of bounds and act like it didn't happen. Once the guy went out of bounds, a call had to be made. What call would you have made?

I saw the last minute. I saw Reynolds get cut off on the baseline by good defense. I saw him turn it over. I saw contact that forced the guy out of bounds.

 

If you're saying they were inconsistent for the entire game, fine. I'm just saying that if the ref saw the guy go out of bounds, he had little choice but to call the foul.

 

And if you're telling me that the bump on Reynolds wasn't a more legitimate spot for a foul than the phantom bump on the sideline, I'll suggest you check your lenses...Reynolds was actually knocked out of bounds, while Wallace more or less stepped out trying to go around the defender...

I've seen them swallow on contact on a shot in the lane at buzzer. I've never seen them just let a guy get knocked out of bounds and act like it didn't happen. Once the guy went out of bounds, a call had to be made. What call would you have made?

 

Why does he HAVE to make a call? You see it all the time--a defender contacting the ball-handler and the offense stepping out of bounds and the official calling them out of bounds (especially when attempting to cut off the baseline).

What call would I have made? I would have called the contact on the wing and had Villanova shooting 2 shots with 6 or 8 seconds left. OR, if I'm "letting them play" on the last possession I don't call the contact on the drive and I don't call the contact on the step out of bounds and Villanova has the ball on the side with .1 seconds left and virtually no chance to score and we go to overtime. Either way, the players would have decided the game.

And if you're telling me that the bump on Reynolds wasn't a more legitimate spot for a foul than the phantom bump on the sideline, I'll suggest you check your lenses...Reynolds was actually knocked out of bounds, while Wallace more or less stepped out trying to go around the defender...

:thumb: