What is reviewable

[kwyjibos13]

There are a lot of things that are reviewable.

For those on the national board complaining, a shot actually being a violation (or vice versa) can be reviewable. In fact, I statted a college basketball game this season where they called a shot good, reviewed it, and ruled it a violation. That is a change from 2015 (remember when St. John hit a big three that actually should have been a shot clock violation in K's 1k win in 2015?).

And yes, a coach can call for a review and say a person who took a charge was actually in the circle. If wrong, it costs the coach who asked a timeout.

 

[skysdad]

There are a lot of things that are reviewable.

For those on the national board complaining, a shot actually being a violation (or vice versa) can be reviewable. In fact, I statted a college basketball game this season where they called a shot good, reviewed it, and ruled it a violation. That is a change from 2015 (remember when St. John hit a big three that actually should have been a shot clock violation in K's 1k win in 2015?).

And yes, a coach can call for a review and say a person who took a charge was actually in the circle. If wrong, it costs the coach who asked a timeout.

Non Duke fans are looking for all sorts of reason as why Duke pulled this one off. OFC

 

[HuffyJB]

Both calls last night were 100% undeniably right under the rules as they stand.

I would not at all argue with the notion that a basket interference should be a reviewable play. I would think that is something they will revisit. You would assume, just like with the Cam block/charge, you would want to get things right as often as possible.

 

[SwatX1]

So, was that goal tending or not??

 

[QC Dukie]

So, was that goal tending or not??

Seeing that it went against uk, I’m gonna say no.

 

[SwatX1]

Seeing that it went against uk, I’m gonna say no.

Good enough for me!

 

[DukeRulesBasketball]

Seeing that it went against uk, I’m gonna say no.

Lol right on QC. Could care less if they or the holes lost on a controversial call. They sure as heck would be relishing in our loss even if it was controversial!

 

[QC Dukie]

Lol right on QC. Could care less if they or the holes lost on a controversial call. They sure as heck would be relishing in our loss even if it was controversial!

I actually like it when they lose on controversial calls. Makes it that much sweeter.

 

[GAAP_rivals]

I actually like it when they lose on controversial calls. Makes it that much sweeter.

Not controversial. Basket interference on EJ Montgomery prior to offensive goaltending. LSU wins.

 

[DeepColor]

Basket was moving when ball entered cylinder enough to call it. Easy to see on replay.

 

[kwyjibos13]

Ball was still over cylinder when touched, so technically it should have been. But, I think the ball was clearly bouncing away and had no shot of going in. So I think a good no call.

 

[GAAP_rivals]

Ball was still over cylinder when touched...

But it was AFTER the basket interference by Kensucky

 

[dukephysics]

But it was AFTER the basket interference by Kensucky

It wasn't basket interference by Kentucky. You are allowed to touch the rim before the ball does. So Montgomery's actions were not interference.

 

[GAAP_rivals]

It wasn't basket interference by Kentucky. You are allowed to touch the rim before the ball does. So Montgomery's actions were not interference.

Not when the ball's in the air. That's a difference between goaltending and basket interference.

 

[DiehardDukeFan4Life]

Can the charge/block inside the restricted area only be reviewed in the final 2 minutes of the first half and the final 2 minutes of the game? I’m watching the NC State/Syracuse game and a Syracuse player drew a charge but it looked like his feet were in the restricted area. One of the announcers even said that it looked like he was in the restricted area

 

[df64]

Well, I'd recommend the last 9 + minutes of last night's game as opposed to the first 30 minutes.

 

[dukephysics]

Not when the ball's in the air. That's a difference between goaltending and basket interference.

Below are the rules for basket interference taken from this link:
https://ncaambb.arbitersports.com/Groups/104883/Library/files/BR15.pdf
These rules for the 14-15 season, so feel free to post updated rules that support your claim. Please point to the specific part in these rules that the UK player violated to commit basket interference.
Montgomery clearly contacted the rim. But since the ball had not yet hit the rim, this is fine. It happens all the time. This was not basket interference.
I am no Kentucky fan, but they have a legit gripe here. If EVERYTHING could be reviewed, the call would have gone in their favor.

Art. 2.
Basket interference
a.Basket interference occurs when a player:
1.Touches the ball or any part of the basket while the ball is on or within
the basket;
2.Touches the ball while any part of it is within the cylinder that has the
ring as its lower base;
3.Reaches through the basket
from below and touches the ball before it
enters the cylinder; or
4.Pulls down a movable ring so that it contacts the ball before the ring
returns to its original position.
5.Causes the basket or backboard to vibrate when the ball is on or within
the basket or the backboard and/or is on or in the cylinder.
b.The cylinder is the imaginary geometric figure that has the ring as its base
and is formed by the upward extension of that ring.
c.The ball shall be considered to be within the basket when any part of the ball is below the cylinder and the level of the ring.
d.A player may have a hand legally in contact with the ball, when this contact
continues after the ball enters the cylinder or when, during such action, the
player touches or grabs the basket.

 

[Shatterthesky22]

I actually like it when they lose on controversial calls. Makes it that much sweeter.

Eh, I prefer they just get drilled by 30 every game. Hurts their seeding too.

 

[QC Dukie]

Eh, I prefer they just get drilled by 30 every game. Hurts their seeding too.

Or maybe by 34??

 

[GAAP_rivals]

Below are the rules for basket interference taken from this link:
https://ncaambb.arbitersports.com/Groups/104883/Library/files/BR15.pdf
These rules for the 14-15 season, so feel free to post updated rules that support your claim. Please point to the specific part in these rules that the UK player violated to commit basket interference.
Montgomery clearly contacted the rim. But since the ball had not yet hit the rim, this is fine. It happens all the time. This was not basket interference.
I am no Kentucky fan, but they have a legit gripe here. If EVERYTHING could be reviewed, the call would have gone in their favor.

Art. 2.
Basket interference
a.Basket interference occurs when a player:
1.Touches the ball or any part of the basket while the ball is on or within
the basket;
2.Touches the ball while any part of it is within the cylinder that has the
ring as its lower base;
3.Reaches through the basket
from below and touches the ball before it
enters the cylinder; or
4.Pulls down a movable ring so that it contacts the ball before the ring
returns to its original position.
5.Causes the basket or backboard to vibrate when the ball is on or within
the basket or the backboard and/or is on or in the cylinder.
b.The cylinder is the imaginary geometric figure that has the ring as its base
and is formed by the upward extension of that ring.
c.The ball shall be considered to be within the basket when any part of the ball is below the cylinder and the level of the ring.
d.A player may have a hand legally in contact with the ball, when this contact
continues after the ball enters the cylinder or when, during such action, the
player touches or grabs the basket.

a4. Montgomery caused rim to vibrate. Rim did not return to original position before initial shot hit rim. Don’t see where it says anything about being in cylinder. That’s my final ruling. LSU wins.

 

[dukephysics]

a4. Montgomery caused rim to vibrate. Rim did not return to original position before initial shot hit rim. Don’t see where it says anything about being in cylinder. That’s my final ruling. LSU wins.

I think that's quite a stretch to say the rim hasn't returned to original position. We'll have to agree to disagree. My final ruling.

 

[GAAP_rivals]

I think that's quite a stretch to say the rim hasn't returned to original position. We'll have to agree to disagree. My final ruling.

I think it’s unfair to allow one team to pick a call to reverse without allowing the other team to reverse one of their choosing.

 

[kwyjibos13]

Here is the deal. A ref has the authority to not call goaltending on the defense if they feel the ball had no shot to go in. Is it (it should be) the same thinking for offensive basket interference? The ball was over the cylinder but had no chance to go in at that point...