February 13, 201016 yr Great game...sadly, the Big East officials have changed the outcome of another game, though...
February 13, 201016 yr Author Great game...sadly, the Big East officials have changed the outcome of another game, though... Sounds like someone lookng for a reason not to like watching the best conference in the land...
February 13, 201016 yr Sounds like someone lookng for a reason not to like watching the best conference in the land... I enjoy Big East basketball but officials are paid money to get it halfway right. They have really been bad this season. I felt like the Pitt player clearly stepped on the line... PS - my buddy stayed online for almost an hour exactly earlier :ohbrother::ohbrother::ohbrother:
February 13, 201016 yr Author I enjoy Big East basketball but officials are paid money to get it halfway right. They have really been bad this season. I felt like the Pitt player clearly stepped on the line... PS - my buddy stayed online for almost an hour exactly earlier :ohbrother::ohbrother::ohbrother: I would loved to have seen a shot with exactly what the official saw there. You couldn't possibly be in better position to make that call, and after 10 years working in TV you learn that what a camera angle or two make look like reality is only an illusion. I thought his toe was on the line as well, but there wasn't one single camera angle even close to the view the stripe had on that play. Plus I thought there were just as many very questionable calls on Pitt late in regulation and in OT that more than evened it out...
February 13, 201016 yr The guy's foot looked like it was out of bounds by a couple of inches. The ref was looking directly at it and it appeared he was ready to make the call, and then just froze. WV got the game deciding call against them this time, unlike the one that went in their favor for the Louisvile game.
February 13, 201016 yr I would loved to have seen a shot with exactly what the official saw there. You couldn't possibly be in better position to make that call, and after 10 years working in TV you learn that what a camera angle or two make look like reality is only an illusion. I thought his toe was on the line as well, but there wasn't one single camera angle even close to the view the stripe had on that play. Plus I thought there were just as many very questionable calls on Pitt late in regulation and in OT that more than evened it out... I agree with you, but why would they not go to the monitor for confirmation?
February 13, 201016 yr The guy's foot looked like it was out of bounds by a couple of inches. The ref was looking directly at it and it appeared he was ready to make the call, and then just froze. WV got the game deciding call against them this time, unlike the one that went in their favor for the Louisvile game. The ref said later that he felt the player didn't have possession of the ball or was touching it when his foot was on the line. Thats what the announcers relayed a few minutes later.
February 13, 201016 yr Author I agree with you, but why would they not go to the monitor for confirmation? A foot on the line isn't a reviewable call...
February 13, 201016 yr I agree with you, but why would they not go to the monitor for confirmation? Probably because the whistle was never blown that he was out of bounds and it didn't appear as though WVU tried to dispute the no call.
February 13, 201016 yr A foot on the line isn't a reviewable call... That's what I was thinking but just wasn't sure. It's reviewable for whether or not a shot was a 3 though but not out of bounds, especially when it was never really questioned other than by the people watching on TV including the announcers.
February 13, 201016 yr Awesome game. Lot of clutch shots. Predicting WVU will not make too much noise come March. Too bad of a free throw shotting team. They should have had that game in bubble wrap at the end of regulation.
February 13, 201016 yr GT come on man. I don't care what angle the ref saw he was clearly out of bounds. While the BE is clearly the best league there's no doubt at all that the refs have missed a ton of calls late in extremely close games.
February 13, 201016 yr The ref said later that he felt the player didn't have possession of the ball or was touching it when his foot was on the line. Thats what the announcers relayed a few minutes later. It appeared to me like the ref was looking directly at the players foot on the line. He couldn't have seen whether he had possession or not, his eyes were on the feet, not the hands. He can't see two different things in two different directions at the same time. His explanation is a copout IMO.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.