Could someone explain to me that out of bounds review?

[gordontrue]

NCAA Officiating Head: Refs Never Saw Best Angle Of Controversial Play

This was my first guess.

Viewers assume that the refs are seeing the same thing as them but that's not always the case.

 

[TrollyMcTroller]

This was my first guess.

Viewers assume that the refs are seeing the same thing as them but that's not always the case.

It's not a crazy assumption to make. Even the ref in the article says that's how it's supposed to work. Just so happens that time they didn't.

The question to me is, how often does that happen? (not seeing every relevant angle)

 

[Cyder]

First of all, congrats Duke. Great season. You beat us twice. I do not want to sound like I am blaming the refs. I mean, obviously, I will forever believe the refs cost us that game in my heart, but my head tells me I am just a huge homer (which I am).

But could someone please explain to me how that review works? I remember a key out of bounds review last year against Arizona in the Elite 8, where Wisconsin was given the ball, but after review they gave it to Arizona. In that review, I remember they did not even have a shot of the Wisconsin player's hand touching the ball, they just used the fact that the ball's rotation changed slightly to call it out on Wisconsin.

So, how in the world does Duke get to keep the ball when there are TWO angles that show a Duke player's finger on the ball? How the hell does this happen? And no, I do not think the refs were "payed off" or "bias". Maybe incompetent, but not payed off.

Also, please don't let this devolve into a thread just blaming the refs and talking about their ever missed call. I just want to figure out how this particular call went the way it did, because if the refs aren't getting all the camera angles or something, that needs to change immediately.

Seriously guys, lets try to be adults here.

Thanks, and again, congrats Duke (you bastards).

I was pulling for your boys (For no other reason than Duke won a couple of years back, I haven nothing against them either) but I didn't think the evidence was there to over turn. Do I think he touched it? Yes, but when they did super slo mo I thought another finger blocked the finger that touched the ball so I couldn't quite see it touch the ball.

 

[Ron G]

Here is a solution. Have a replay ref, especially in the final four if not earlier. That way the ref on the floor won't be accused of favoritism one way or the other. Also, the concept of replay is flawed. As I understand it they can review the out of bounds only in the last two minutes. So a play at 2:01 is not as important as one at 1:59.
So either use the replay on any close call or not at all.

 

[SJ76]

Fixed

 

[podsox]

This was my first guess.

Viewers assume that the refs are seeing the same thing as them but that's not always the case.

according to the ncaa, they have availability to all camera angles that the tv crew has with the ability to slow up and blow up images. they might not have seen that replay but it was at their disposal. the ncaa replay system has needed changes for 2 seasons and they are in no hurry to fix the problem. they seem to get more replay calls wrong than they do right.

 

[cwerph]

The head of officiating was sitting near the scorer's table. After they made the call, he actually considered running to the table to have them come back and take a look at the angle they had not seen which showed Duke touching the ball last but decided not to.

Inexcusable.

 

[TrollyMcTroller]

The head of officiating was sitting near the scorer's table. After they made the call, he actually considered running to the table to have them come back and take a look at the angle they had not seen which showed Duke touching the ball last but decided not to.

Inexcusable.

It's a no-win situation.

If he got up and ran over to do that, there would be just as much outrage (possibly more) because that's not how it's supposed to work and all of the conspiracy nuts (including many in this thread) would be making a stink about it, and other's that just love to feign outrage (including many in this thread) would be crying "But the head of officials shouldn't have to run over there to get the call right!"

Mistakes happen, people. Knee-jerk reactions to relatively minor problems is typically how things get worse not better. It's an imperfect system, and we're never going to eliminate human error no matter how inexcusable you may think it is.

 

[kramer1]

It's a no-win situation.

If he got up and ran over to do that, there would be just as much outrage (possibly more) because that's not how it's supposed to work and all of the conspiracy nuts (including many in this thread) would be making a stink about it, and other's that just love to feign outrage (including many in this thread) would be crying "But the head of officials shouldn't have to run over there to get the call right!"

Mistakes happen, people. Knee-jerk reactions to relatively minor problems is typically how things get worse not better. It's an imperfect system, and we're never going to eliminate human error no matter how inexcusable you may think it is.

Relatively minor? Might as well not even play the game then. Might as well not keep score at the very least.

 

[TrollyMcTroller]

Relatively minor? Might as well not even play the game then. Might as well not keep score at the very least.

There are tens of thousands of things that happen over the course of the game. That one was relatively insignificant. If your expectations are perfectly officiated games, then yeah, we might as well not even play them.

 

[kramer1]

There are tens of thousands of things that happen over the course of the game. That one was relatively insignificant. If your expectations are perfectly officiated games, then yeah, we might as well not even play them.

It was the most important call of the game, actually. The evidence was clear. There was no dispute. They just said "fuck it." I TRULY believe they got word from on high to give that ball to Duke.

 

[TrollyMcTroller]

It was the most important call of the game, actually. The evidence was clear. There was no dispute. They just said "fuck it." I TRULY believe they got word from on high to give that ball to Duke.

Believe whatever you want. In a close game every call is important. You're assigning a higher significance to that particular call because you believe they got it wrong. Literally thousands of other calls that they got right had just as much impact on the outcome of the game.

 

[cwerph]

There are tens of thousands of things that happen over the course of the game. That one was relatively insignificant. If your expectations are perfectly officiated games, then yeah, we might as well not even play them.

I guess we disagree. Not everything that happens on the court is review-able. This is one of the situations that is. If they could have made the right call but did not that is inexcusable, no matter how they got there. Insignificant?

A possession changed in the 2 final minutes of a game decided by less than 2 possessions. Not sure how that could be considered insignificant.

 

[kramer1]

Believe whatever you want. In a close game every call is important. You're assigning a higher significance to that particular call because you believe they got it wrong. Literally thousands of other calls that they got right had just as much impact on the outcome of the game.

You're wrong. I'm not gonna call you names, though. That's your schtick.

 

[TrollyMcTroller]

You're wrong. I'm not gonna call you names, though. That's your schtick.

Logic is my schtick, Fuckface.

Sorry you don't keep that club in the bag.

 

[kramer1]

Logic is my schtick, Fuckface.

Sorry you don't keep that club in the bag.

There's no reason for the name calling.

 

[TrollyMcTroller]

There's no reason for the name calling.

You acting like a knuckle-dragging idiot is all the reason I need.

 

[gordontrue]

I bet there are plenty of times in the course of a season where someone steps out of bounds but it doesn't get caught by the refs or the cameras (at least not live) and no one ever notices it.

 

[redseat]

I guess we disagree. Not everything that happens on the court is review-able. This is one of the situations that is. If they could have made the right call but did not that is inexcusable, no matter how they got there. Insignificant?

A possession changed in the 2 final minutes of a game decided by less than 2 possessions. Not sure how that could be considered insignificant.

technically possession never was changed since the initial call was Duke ball to begin with. I get what you are saying though

 

[redseat]

I bet there are plenty of times in the course of a season where someone steps out of bounds but it doesn't get caught by the refs or the cameras (at least not live) and no one ever notices it.

hell, there are plenty of times when an official IS on the line, sees it and doesn't call it.