Closer look at foot out of bounds
- Thread starter MadRU
- Start date
A
anon_xekqhstck0ygt
Guest
I yelled at my poor wife he was OOB on that play...
Caleb played it perfectly thank goodness.
Caleb played it perfectly thank goodness.
He's probably more focused on Caleb getting ready to call a foul.
That shot, while wild, was not off by much.
Unbelievable how poor the officiating is. I can tolerate subjective things like block/charge calls, but things this black and white (this game and OSU) are simple incompetence.
Unbelievable how poor the officiating is. I can tolerate subjective things like block/charge calls, but things this black and white (this game and OSU) are simple incompetence.
There are even better pictures of it; I also yelled to my daughter he is out of bounds!!
Thankfully not a reprise of OSU. This one can slip into the who-cares bin with the W.
I couldn't tell live, but wondered because it definitely looked very close.
People aren't going to like this, but refs are human and they can and do easily miss all kinds of stuff. It looks easy to us fans watching on TV. But it's not easy at all.
I think when it's really close like that, the rules should permit reviewing the play in the final minute or two of the game. That would've righted the OSU screwup, and would've handed us the ball at the end of the PSU game.
It probably would work against us sometimes too. But at least the calls would be more accurate, assisted by slow-motion replay. Alternatively, maybe they can put sensors into the floor under the lines or something, like they've started doing with soccer.
People aren't going to like this, but refs are human and they can and do easily miss all kinds of stuff. It looks easy to us fans watching on TV. But it's not easy at all.
I think when it's really close like that, the rules should permit reviewing the play in the final minute or two of the game. That would've righted the OSU screwup, and would've handed us the ball at the end of the PSU game.
It probably would work against us sometimes too. But at least the calls would be more accurate, assisted by slow-motion replay. Alternatively, maybe they can put sensors into the floor under the lines or something, like they've started doing with soccer.
Yeah but that OSU screw up turns out to be so consequential. We should have 19 wins and be 11-7. A tremendous difference with Minnesota coming up.
But they were quick to call Caleb out when grazed the line in that VERY SAME SPOT earlier
I would love to see these changes. Especially the floor sensors.
Thank God that shot didn't go in, or they didn't call a foul on Cam's strip.
Imagine being robbed that egregiously of TWO wins by referees.
Imagine being robbed that egregiously of TWO wins by referees.
How about a rule where a continuous play in the last 30 seconds of the game can be reviewed after the fact whether a player stepped out of bounds? They review whether a player's foot was on the 3 point line, so you'd have the same type of review. Then if it is overruled, you would pick up the game with the other team having the ball with time left on the clock.
Now that I would not sign up for.NCAA should Put chips into the players which activate when they step out of bounds.
I could see this screwing someone too if they always reviewed it. Say a sideline ref buzzed down last night to say Funk was out, give RU the ball with X seconds left. Inbounds gets stolen, or we miss the front end FT again, and we lose in OT. Could you write a rule that would let the team on the wrong side of the call decide if they want what happened, or to go back from the point of the missed call?
Funny, I thought the same thing. They can review whether his foot was on the 3 point line or not, but can't review if his foot was in bounds or out on the shot.
They can review who last touched a ball when it goes out of bounds, but can't review if a player is actually out of bounds when shooting.
Which seems a little haphazard or random, rule-wise, to me. I think they should maybe review it a bit after the season.
Unfortunately, in hoops There's really no way to review a play unless a whistle is blown. Let's say Funk misses that shot, but Lundy doesn't get stripped and hits his. Where do you draw the line - do you still go back and change it to OOB on Funk? But then what if there was a (hypothetical) foul by RU on the catch on the inbounds, is that reviewable? It never ends.
This is why football and baseball are the only sports where replay really works right, because there's a stop and start to each play.
This is why football and baseball are the only sports where replay really works right, because there's a stop and start to each play.
along the same lines--Woolfolk's non steal. I have not gone back and looked at it but I know I screamed like hell at my TV at the time.
Anyone look closer at that? It was a HUGE play at the time IIRC.
Anyone look closer at that? It was a HUGE play at the time IIRC.
On a 2/3 under 2 minutes, they blow the play dead immediately after the made basket to review it. You need the clear stopping point.
Same thing with the last touch OOB calls, if they don't blow the play dead cause they don't think his foot was on the line, but then on review he was - its just impossible to do it this way.
If that were true, why wouldn't they have reviewed, and subsequently overturned, the OSU final shot?
I thought the "reasoning" was that the officials had already left the court when Pikes tried to chase them down?
I'll never get that. They review contested rebounds to see who touched it last and the position of the feet in relation to the end line comes into play with the decision. Focus should just be on getting it right.
My understanding, which I've not verified, was that the OOB thing wasn't reviewable. I think that, if it was reviewable, the league could've overturned the result.
They're not going to overturn stuff like foul calls or other judgement-calls. But something like that, if it was reviewable, and there was clear objective evidence of a mistake (which there was), and a procedural error was made where it could've been reviewed but wasn't, I would think they could and would overturn it.
I'm too lazy to look up the rules about it.
Thank God this doesn’t matter.
The chances of one team getting screwed like that twice in one season have to
Be 1 in 600,000.
The chances that if it did happen….that the victim team would be us are about 98%.
The chances of one team getting screwed like that twice in one season have to
Be 1 in 600,000.
The chances that if it did happen….that the victim team would be us are about 98%.
my post in the other thread where I'm getting called out for Defending PSU lol.
if you look at it live it confirms (IMO) what you see above. His heal never touched the floor. He pivoted on the insole. You can see the gap..as small as it is.
THIS time I have to agree with the call as much as we've been screwed and are owed "just a few".
Now if you're suggesting they should have reviewed this had the shot made good...1000% !!
I will also add when you see how far away the ref was (vs. the close-up) it sure as hell does look on the line. So the call should have been out of bounds but then reviewed for being inbounds. But doing that stops play right there and if wrong kills the chance. You almost HAVE to let it play out and then review.
if you look at it live it confirms (IMO) what you see above. His heal never touched the floor. He pivoted on the insole. You can see the gap..as small as it is.
THIS time I have to agree with the call as much as we've been screwed and are owed "just a few".
Now if you're suggesting they should have reviewed this had the shot made good...1000% !!
I will also add when you see how far away the ref was (vs. the close-up) it sure as hell does look on the line. So the call should have been out of bounds but then reviewed for being inbounds. But doing that stops play right there and if wrong kills the chance. You almost HAVE to let it play out and then review.
I'll take it one further... (and I think I'm right, but not positive)
So if that shot went up with .01 on the clock and went in, they would review the shot to verify the time on the closk AND whether his foot was on the 3 point line.... but not if he was in bounds or out of bounds.
So if that shot went up with .01 on the clock and went in, they would review the shot to verify the time on the closk AND whether his foot was on the 3 point line.... but not if he was in bounds or out of bounds.
Refs LOVE to anticipate a foul call on big guys on plays like that.
Hopefully Wolf gets a GOOD reputation as someone who can do that without fouling as he seems good at it.
A
anon_xekqhstck0ygt
Guest
this is the second time he's made a steal like that and got whistled for a foul...
nope osu play was not reviewable (I quoted the rule back then...on phone now so no time to look) and yesterday wouldn't have been either