Armchair Refs: Your Opinion on Two Plays? (Villanova Game)

[JoePgh]

When I re-watched the UConn game after watching it live, there were two plays in particular where I thought that the calls were at least questionable. One of these favored UConn and the other favored Villanova.

1. At 1:42 of the second quarter, Nika made a driving layup (a "finger roll") at the end of the shot clock, which was initially allowed but which was subsequently disallowed as having failed to beat the shot clock. That resulted in the halftime score being changed from 35-30 in favor of UConn to 33-30. I have now watched the replay three or four times, and every time it looks to me as if the ball was out of her fingertips with 1 second left on the shot clock. I can understand getting this wrong in real time, but if the referees made a point to review the video later, I can't see how their view of it could be so different from mine. Do any of you have a clue as to why this field goal was disallowed?
2. At 3:48 of the fourth quarter, Aubrey drove to the basket and made contact with Lucy Olsen, and referee Bob Danaher called a blocking foul. That was Olsen's 4th foul, but it would have been Aubrey's 5th if he had called it a charge on her. This was a crucial play in the game, since the score was tied 52-52 and the call gave Aubrey a chance for a 3-point play. Olsen was clearly out of the restricted area and was not moving her feet at the point of contact. One could argue that she was moving her torso into Aubrey (both forward and to her left), but that is questionable. You could also argue that she did not plant her feet until Aubrey was into her shooting motion, but I couldn't verify that in several replays. I'm pretty sure that Joseph Vaczily (the ref in the Tennessee game) would have called a charge on that play, since he has a "high charge" strike zone on such plays. Do any of you have an insight into why a block was the correct call in this case, if in fact it was?

Just thought I would try to provoke some good discussions about our good friends the referees.

 

[sun]

When I re-watched the UConn game after watching it live, there were two plays in particular where I thought that the calls were at least questionable. One of these favored UConn and the other favored Villanova.

1. At 1:42 of the second quarter, Nika made a driving layup (a "finger roll") at the end of the shot clock, which was initially allowed but which was subsequently disallowed as having failed to beat the shot clock. That resulted in the halftime score being changed from 35-30 in favor of UConn to 33-30. I have now watched the replay three or four times, and every time it looks to me as if the ball was out of her fingertips with 1 second left on the shot clock. I can understand getting this wrong in real time, but if the referees made a point to review the video later, I can't see how their view of it could be so different from mine. Do any of you have a clue as to why this field goal was disallowed?

I think the refs can review the play by advancing it one frame at a time which most fans don't have that ability.
They may also be able to zoom in on the action to see it more clearly, and to view it using a split screen that shows the clock's corresponding time.
They may also have more than one camera angle to look at.
Of course human refs are always capable of making an error.

 

[UConnCat]

The broadcasters mentioned that the officials reviewed Nika's shot for a full 5 minutes before disallowing it as not beating the game clock. Would have been nice to see a reply by the TV folks but that didn't happen. It was deemed worthy of a 5-minute review by the officials but not a replay for the TV viewers.

I thought the correct call was made on Aubrey's drive though I agree Vaczily likely would have had a different take. Olsen did not establish position before contact was made with Aubrey.

One non-call I'd mention was the failure to call a foul on Villanova when they were trying to foul Lou with 15 seconds on the clock. Lou almost threw the ball in to the back court and was saved by a heads-up play by Dorka. That sequence could have been a disaster. The Villanova players definitely fouled Lou.

BTW, I don't think the refs hate Lou. LOL

 

[MSGRET]

I thought the refs were bad in the game against the team that wears Orange, but they were also bad in the game against Nova. Lou was being mauled almost the whole game with very few fouls being called. Then they hacked Aaliyah twice on the inbounds before they tied her up and they ignored those fouls awarded the tie up to Nova and they hit a three to get within 2. Lastly the hacking and fouling of Lou before Dorka's save, the ref she must have been deaf and blind not to hear or see the fouls.

 

[Sluconn Husky]

One non-call I'd mention was the failure to call a foul on Villanova when they were trying to foul Lou with 15 seconds on the clock. Lou almost threw the ball in to the back court and was saved by a heads-up play by Dorka. That sequence could have been a disaster. The Villanova players definitely fouled Lou.

The ref who let Lou be mauled signaled a tipped ball so it wouldn't have been a backcourt violation. That said, allowing that much contact on Lou with no call is ridiculous.

 

[Blueballer]

That shot by Nika looks like it shouldn't have even been a point of contention even in real time. How they came up with a determination that it didn't beat the buzzer is beyond me. I've looked at it over and over and I don't get it.

 

[Blueballer]

I thought the refs were bad in the game against the team that wears Orange, but they were also bad in the game against Nova. Lou was being mauled almost the whole game with very few fouls being called. Then they hacked Aaliyah twice on the inbounds before they tied her up and they ignored those fouls awarded the tie up to Nova and they hit a three to get within 2. Lastly the hacking and fouling of Lou before Dorka's save, the ref she must have been deaf and blind not to hear or see the fouls.

You are correct. Lou was really hacked on that play and I replayed the AE tie-up call at the end and she was definitely smacked on the arm prior to the supposed tie up. Geno wasn't too thrilled about it either. It really bugs me when they allow that WNBA level of physicality on defense.

 

[Ralph]

That shot by Nika looks like it shouldn't have even been a point of contention even in real time. How they came up with a determination that it didn't beat the buzzer is beyond me. I've looked at it over and over and I don't get it.

Is anyone able to post a slow motion, enlarged version of the play.

 

[MSGRET]

Do coaches still submit after game grade reviews on the refs to the Big East? Because if they do, I hope Geno gave all three refs big fat ZEROS on their scorecard, because they deserve it.

 

[UConnCat]

The broadcasters mentioned that the officials reviewed Nika's shot for a full 5 minutes before disallowing it as not beating the game clock. Would have been nice to see a reply by the TV folks but that didn't happen. It was deemed worthy of a 5-minute review by the officials but not a replay for the TV viewers.

I thought the correct call was made on Aubrey's drive though I agree Vaczily likely would have had a different take. Olsen did not establish position before contact was made with Aubrey.

One non-call I'd mention was the failure to call a foul on Villanova when they were trying to foul Lou with 15 seconds on the clock. Lou almost threw the ball in to the back court and was saved by a heads-up play by Dorka. That sequence could have been a disaster. The Villanova players definitely fouled Lou.

BTW, I don't think the refs hate Lou. LOL

My post on Nika's shot says "game" clock when it should have said "shot" clock.

 

[Kaizen]

At 3:48 of the fourth quarter, Aubrey drove to the basket and made contact with Lucy Olsen, and referee Bob Danaher called a blocking foul. That was Olsen's 4th foul, but it would have been Aubrey's 5th if he had called it a charge on her. This was a crucial play in the game, since the score was tied 52-52 and the call gave Aubrey a chance for a 3-point play. Olsen was clearly out of the restricted area and was not moving her feet at the point of contact. One could argue that she was moving her torso into Aubrey (both forward and to her left), but that is questionable. You could also argue that she did not plant her feet until Aubrey was into her shooting motion, but I couldn't verify that in several replays. I'm pretty sure that Joseph Vaczily (the ref in the Tennessee game) would have called a charge on that play, since he has a "high charge" strike zone on such plays. Do any of you have an insight into why a block was the correct call in this case, if in fact it was?
Just thought I would try to provoke some good discussions about our good friends the referees.

At 3:48 remaining in the 4Q,
Aubrey drove to the basketball, clearly Lucy Olsen raised her 2 hands for a blocking foul. If Lucy Olsen didn't raise her hand it may be different story.

 

[Ralph]

I remember a few years ago when they called a delayed foul for Katie Lou in the Miss. State semi. On any of these delayed calls, the whole game after the play at issue may have reflected the earlier call/non call. Thus in football they rush to get the next play off because once that happens it can no longer be reviewed. Hypo, score is 59-58 Villanova. Nika makes the basket to make it 60 - 59 with 5 seconds left. UConn steals on the in bound play, runs around dribbling to run out the clock because they are ahead. Can the refs now go back after the game clock says zero and reverse the bucket? Similar issue, Nika makes a 3 to put UConn ahead, they run out the clock ahead by 1. After the clock hits zero they review, foot is on the line, the game is tied, overtime.

 

[UConnCat]

Is anyone able to post a slow motion, enlarged version of the play.

That would be nice. The ball was clearly out of Nika's hands when the buzzer sounded but I know that is not definitive. The game broadcast shows the shot clock in the upper right corner of the screen but I can't tell. A slow-motion review would help.

 

[RedStickHusky]

The amount of contact Lou is forced to play through is mind boggling to me.

 

[donalddoowop]

The amount of contact Lou is forced to play through is mind boggling to me.

Just wait until Sunday. You will see even more.

 

[Ralph]

I know on my post above that the refs can call a technical after the game is over, people have said until they leave the court, until they declare it over, something. But I really dislike them going back to review a 3 or 5 minute old call, especially late in the game.

 

[JoePgh]

At 3:48 remaining in the 4Q,
Aubrey drove to the basketball, clearly Lucy Olsen raised her 2 hands for a blocking foul. If Lucy Olsen didn't raise her hand it may be different story.

I think you may have the key here. I watched the play yet another time, this time focusing on the referee Danaher rather than the two players. I noticed that he never gave the blocking signal (hands on hips), as I had assumed. Instead, he appeared to call the contact that Olsen made against the left side of Aubrey's body as she was in the air. That's not a block; it's more like a pushing foul. It also appeared that Aubrey had mostly gotten around Olsen (to Lucy's left and Aubrey's right) before contact occurred, so if it had been a block/charge issue, the block would have been correct.

OK, I'm convinced.

 

[Zarathustra]

The broadcasters mentioned that the officials reviewed Nika's shot for a full 5 minutes before disallowing it as not beating the game clock. Would have been nice to see a reply by the TV folks but that didn't happen. It was deemed worthy of a 5-minute review by the officials but not a replay for the TV viewers.

I thought the correct call was made on Aubrey's drive though I agree Vaczily likely would have had a different take. Olsen did not establish position before contact was made with Aubrey.

One non-call I'd mention was the failure to call a foul on Villanova when they were trying to foul Lou with 15 seconds on the clock. Lou almost threw the ball in to the back court and was saved by a heads-up play by Dorka. That sequence could have been a disaster. The Villanova players definitely fouled Lou.

BTW, I don't think the refs hate Lou. LOL

Well done, DORKA!

 

[Biff]

The broadcasters mentioned that the officials reviewed Nika's shot for a full 5 minutes before disallowing it as not beating the game clock. Would have been nice to see a reply by the TV folks but that didn't happen. It was deemed worthy of a 5-minute review by the officials but not a replay for the TV viewers.

Well looking at the best view I have I can see why they may have taken 5 minutes. But, based on the view I have (and will share below) I come up with a different answer. But, you can look and decide on your own.

I have 4 consecutive "frames " from the video. I got this video from MJL's download. It's possible that the refs had a better resolution to look at. We don't know what quality they get at the court-side monitor.

There are three things to observe in the video frames. Nika's hand, the ball and most importantly the shot clock in the upper right of the video frame.

So to establish a baseline, the first two frames show the ball clearly in Nika's hand. Shot clock is at 1 second. Importantly the thing to look at is the red frame around the shot clock is not illuminated.


Since I can only attach two pictures in a post I will need to continue in a second post.

Frame 1

 

[Biff]

The next two frames are the key frames. The next fram below is where the ball is leaving Nika's hand. If it could be established clearly she was no longer in contact with the ball, the shot clock has not yet counted down to zero so the shot should be allowed.

Unfortunately with the resolution we have it cannot be 100% established either way.

 

[uconnfan68]

I thought Aubrey was already in the air when Olsen established position. I ~think~ that you have to call a block for that.

 

[Biff]

This fourth and last frame shows the ball has clearly left Nika's hand and the shot clock has expired.

Based on the data above (again we don't know what other video the refs had) I don't know how you overrule the call made in the game.

 

[Littlemin]

The only explanation I can come up with on the Muhl call, and it is somewhat far fetched, was that it was a make up call over the out of bounds play right before where it appeared the ball may have been off Edwards leg. The ball appears clearly out of Muhl’s hand but who knows.
As to the Griffin call, not even close to being a charge IMO.

 

[JoePgh]

This fourth and last frame shows the ball has clearly left Nika's hand and the shot clock has expired.

View attachment 83670



Based on the data above (again we don't know what other video the refs had) I don't know how you overrule the call made in the game.

I definitely agree with your last sentence.

I assume that the shot clock that you are watching is the one in the upper right portion of the screen, above and slightly to the left of the "CBS Sports" logo. In Frame 3, that clock has an unilluminated border, but in Frame 4, it is illuminated. However, the border of the backboard is not illuminated even in Frame 4. Does that only light up at the end of a quarter, or does it also light up at the end of the shot clock? If the latter, I don't understand why the shot clock in the upper right could be lit while the backboard border is dark.