That call decided the game and shouldn't have been called.

 

If he hadn't made the call wouldn't that have decided the game as well?

 

In the interest of full disclosure I did not see the game, I have not seen the play in question and therefore I have no opinion at all if there was a foul or not. That said if the official felt he saw a foul and swallowed his whistle how would the non-call not decide the outcome while the call did?

Awful call . Even if you do call out of bounds no ones hurt they cant get a shot it .1 seconds. Go to OT let the players decide the outcome not the zebras. Rediculous call

 

So then a few years ago the officials shouldn't have made the call that gave UK the game at Freedom Hall?

 

If not then where do you draw the line at calling a foul in the final seconds of a game?

It happened...it's over and it's one game. Maybe the 'Nova player shouldn't have put himself in that situation when the G'town player was 75 feet from the basket with a second to play. Just a thought...

What? Who says you can't get a shot off with .1 seconds left? They would have had the ball out foul line extended on their own end. How hard is it to throw a lob at the rim and hope for a tip or a foul? You can't give a team that opportunity simply because you want to ignore a call.

 

If you ignored the call 5 seconds before that, why not ignore that one?

 

As I said on the game thread, unless you watched the second half you can't get a full appreciation of how bad this call was. Villanova shot around 20 FT in the second half--many because of the contact by the defense on the ball-handler in the open floor.

So, this call was inconsistent either way you look at it. They should have called the contact on the wing (which happened twice) with 8 or 6 seconds left, given 'Nova 2 FTs, and G'town would have had the chance to tie or win it. OR, you go with the "let them play" theory and you don't call those two bumps (which is fine) but you don't call the minimal contact on the sideline. If you didn't call the bump 6 seconds earlier, then, no, you don't call it there. Call him out of bounds. Either way, you let the players decide the game.

BTW, when was the last time you saw anyone take the ball out of bounds--with less than the .3 seconds required to catch and shoot--and actually score? I honestly can't remember a time when it happened. Add to that the fact that a 7'2" center would have been at the basket and there's no way they score with .1 second left.

If he hadn't made the call wouldn't that have decided the game as well?

 

In the interest of full disclosure I did not see the game, I have not seen the play in question and therefore I have no opinion at all if there was a foul or not. That said if the official felt he saw a foul and swallowed his whistle how would the non-call not decide the outcome while the call did?

 

I agree with you first statement but this call was beyond bad. It would have not been a foul if it was in the 1st minute of the game.

If you ignored the call 5 seconds before that, why not ignore that one?[\QUOTE]

 

If you're talking about where Reynolds lost the ball, that wasn't a foul. The contact was initiated by Reynolds and Rivers was in a legal defensive position and did not lean in. How would you penalize Rivers?

 

BTW, when was the last time you saw anyone take the ball out of bounds--with less than the .3 seconds required to catch and shoot--and actually score? I honestly can't remember a time when it happened. Add to that the fact that a 7'2" center would have been at the basket and there's no way they score with .1 second left.

 

If you're an offical, that's irrelevant. What if the big man, while reaching to swat the ball, goes over the back and fouls? What if....

 

You can't assume anything.

If you're talking about where Reynolds lost the ball, that wasn't a foul. The contact was initiated by Reynolds and Rivers was in a legal defensive position and did not lean in. How would you penalize Rivers?

 

The fact that you think the bump on the baseline wasn't a foul and the "bump" on the sideline was blows my mind...IF there was any contact at all on the sideline, it was minimal, at best, and far less obvious the contact on the baseline...

The fact that you think the bump on the baseline wasn't a foul and the "bump" on the sideline was blows my mind...IF there was any contact at all on the sideline, it was minimal, at best, and far less obvious the contact on the baseline...

 

Tell me what you saw that would make you call a foul on Rivers.

 

Remember, contact in an of itself is not a foul. The theory of advantage/disadvantage has to be factored it. While the contact on the sideline was not "significant" it was enough to cause the dribbler to go out of bounds. How in the world would that not be a foul?

Tell me what you saw that would make you call a foul on Rivers.

 

Remember, contact in an of itself is not a foul. The theory of advantage/disadvantage has to be factored it. While the contact on the sideline was not "significant" it was enough to cause the dribbler to go out of bounds. How in the world would that not be a foul?

 

You mean other than the fact that the dribbler forced himself around the defender that had his hands up in air?

You mean other than the fact that the dribbler forced himself around the defender that had his hands up in air?

 

Deuce, if you don't like the call, fine. Don't look foolish, though, by acting like a defender can't foul if his hands are in the air. The dribbler "forced himself around the defender..." You act like that's illegal or something. Should he have gone through him?

If you ignored the call 5 seconds before that, why not ignore that one?[\QUOTE]

 

If you're talking about where Reynolds lost the ball, that wasn't a foul. The contact was initiated by Reynolds and Rivers was in a legal defensive position and did not lean in. How would you penalize Rivers?

 

 

 

If you're an offical, that's irrelevant. What if the big man, while reaching to swat the ball, goes over the back and fouls? What if....

 

You can't assume anything.

 

I'm trying to be as specific as possible but I guess you're not on the same page as I am. I'm not talking about the bump on the baseline, I'm talking about the two bumps on the wing with about 8 and 6 seconds left. If you watched the second half, that was a foul all half long. It was an inconsistent call no matter how you look at it--whether in the context of the entire half or just within the last play.

As far as the .1 seconds left, I didn't say it was irrelevant or that you can assume anything, I just pointed out that it would be nearly impossible to score in that situation--probably 100 times LESS likely than making a free throw.

It doesn't matter. If the ref judges that he went out of bounds as a result of the "bump" its a foul.

 

So if you didn't want him to call the foul, you are then saying you would reward the defense for the bump by giving them the ball. Does that seem right? You can't simply ignore the fact that he stepped out of bounds.

 

At least someone on here has a sense of the game.

Deuce, if you don't like the call, fine. Don't look foolish, though, by acting like a defender can't foul if his hands are in the air. The dribbler "forced himself around the defender..." You act like that's illegal or something. Should he have gone through him?

 

You CAN NOT (or should not) call a foul on a defender who has position...That defender had position on the sideline, Wallace tried to go around him....

You CAN NOT (or should not) call a foul on a defender who has position...That defender had position on the sideline, Wallace tried to go around him....

 

He did not have position. He was moving into him and clipped him with his lower leg. That's not "position."

We obviously aren't going to see eye to eye on this issue, I'll just leave it at this. You said you only watched the last minute of the game, not the whole game. Without having done so, you don't know what the "mood" was like as far as the officiating goes, what they called or didn't call. As several others have said, the foul they DIDN'T call on Reynolds was being called all night, and for some reason they swallowed their whistle on his last drive to the basket. If you don't call that foul, you don't call the one on the sideline, bottom line. It was a bad call.