SEC says refs made correct call before half in UK game

[bmj4life]

This is the response I received from the SEC office when inquiring about the bizarre call just before halftime of the UK game:

"The refs made the correct call as stated in Rule 4, Section 73, Articles 3 & 4 of the NCAA Basketball Rule Book. The 2013 Men's and Women's Basketball Case Book, Approved Ruling 141 on page 48 gives a very thorough explanation."

This is the articles referenced from the rulebook:

"Art. 3. The try shall start when the player begins the motion that habitually precedes the release of the ball on a try. The ball does not need to leave the player’s hand. The arm might be held so that the player cannot throw; however, he or she may be making an attempt.

Art. 4. A try shall end when the throw is successful, when it is certain the throw is unsuccessful, when the thrown ball touches the floor or when the ball becomes dead.

A.R. 141. A1 is in possession of the ball and in the act of shooting when:

(1) B2 fouls A2 before the release of the ball; or

(2) A2 fouls B2 before the release of the ball.

RULING: (1) Assess B2 with the foul committed against A2. A1’s try for goal shall count when successful. Administer the bonus free throw or award the ball to Team A at a designated spot nearest to where the foul occurred.

(2) Assess A2 with the foul committed against B2. A1’s try for field goal shall not count when successful, since the ball became dead before A1’s release. Award the ball to Team B at a designated spot nearest to where the foul occurred."

It appears to me that they are saying that the second girl was in the act of shooting when the foul on Graves was called (not the case if you watch the replay). Also, if the goal counts as I read this ruling, "THE bonus free throw" is awarded. No mention of counting the goal and two free throws.

As usual, it appears the SEC is trying to find rules to justify the bad calls instead of admitting they made a mistake, as the foul clearly occurred before the other player was in the act of shooting.

 

[Vols4life]

They'll always back their refs its just how it is....no matter how bad a call it was

 

[LieutenantNeyland]

Basketball officiating is the most frustrating thing to watch, no matter if you have a dog in the fight.

 

[JonWard]

The ambiguity in these rules leave so much for interpretation, but not enough to excuse the call.

 

[T_man]

There's only one thing that is more disgusting than seeing that call made and that is listening to someone try to justify the call. We are basketball fans. We are not idiots.

 

[Vols4us]

There's only one thing that is more disgusting than seeing that call made and that is listening to someone try to justify the call. We are basketball fans. We are not idiots.

Well stated. Pure deception.

 

[Orange Maniac]

Anybody that's ever watched BB very much knows what the call should have been. They can tell us that it was correct until the cows come home and it doesn't make the call correct. If the KY player had enough time to dish the ball and the other player had enough time to catch it and begin the motion of shooting, the first player must have been in the air longer than Dr. J. On top of that, Graves was set the whole time. Those officials and the league are full of c--p on this one.

 

[Vols4us]

To add to this, can you imagine this same crew making that call in TBA? Nope. They would be concerned for their safety and the outcry. Which is why the league office decided to double down on this one since it was at UK. POS move IMO.

 

[SamRebel35]

What are we talking about? I need some context.

 

[Orange Maniac]

What are we talking about? I need some context.

Last play of the first half against Kentucky. A KY player drove the lane and plowed into Graves while passing the ball to another player. The other player made the shot and then they called a blocking foul on Graves and gave the player making the pass a one and one. The blocking foul was bogus and they said the player shooting started making the shot before contact was made with Graves so the shot counted and Graves got a blocking call. It all stinks to high heavens and even more so because Graves was planted in the lane forever. Saying it was the correct call just adds insult to injury. They think we are stupid.

 

[RollerVol]

They'll always back their refs its just how it is....no matter how bad a call it was

Seriously, the worst-called women's game that I've seen all year. It looked more like a hockey game and the Lady Vols' sticks were taken away from them.:loco:
GO VOLS!

 

[marvin]

I am suprised they even tried to cover it up since it was so evident that it was a bad, bad, bad call that anyone over the age of 6 that has seen a bb game could see it was wrong!!!

Go Lady Vols!!!

 

[Voluble2]

Well, that is certainly absurd.

They are saying that the KY girl who charged into Graves passed the ball, waited for the person she passed it to to be in the act of shooting and only then ran into Graves during the shot. That did not happen.

I would have to see the replay but IIRC the KY player with the ball leapt into the air to get space to pass the ball over our player and came down with a knee in Graves' chest. That had to be a hell of a pass, shot and leap for the receiving player to have time to catch and shoot the ball before the first girl came down.

I am also just now realizing how dirty that play was if she lead with her knee.

But regardless, you never see this play called this way and you will likely never see it again. It is like the Gaffney phantom TD. There had been thousands of plays just like it, none of which were called TD's in the past but the SEC office suddenly decided that the rules demanded it be called a TD in that one case.

Then they went out and added a rule to clarify that it should not have been a catch when it had never been called a catch except in that one instance. That was truly a gold medal performance in butt covering.

Incompetent SOB's the lot of them.

 

[pasadenavol]

The absolute worst call I've seen watching basketball in my lifetime, but to be expected with SEC officials, especially when it benefits the home team...

 

[ukvols]

"Bonus free throw" sounds like a very poorly written explanation of shooting the bonus (1+1 or 2 shots).

But, the shot should not have counted. The blocking foul they called was on the pass. Simple as that. I don't care if the other girl caught the ball and turned towards the goal before the colliding players landed, or whatever it is they're claiming. Common sense says the foul was on the pass. And, the announcers looked really bad for not questioning the call at all. They didn't comment either way to question or explain it.

 

[Convoluted]

In looking at that play in slo-mo, Graves was moving and did commit the foul. However, the pass arrived at the shooter slightly after Graves fouled, so the shot should not have been counted. It was very close however. The shooter caught the ball at her waist and she shot it immediately. According to the rule, it appears the ref could have considered the shot to have started when the pass arrived. In slo-mo it is apparent the pass was slightly late, but it wasn't a terrible call because it was so close. At full speed, it did look like the call was worse than it actually was.

 

[Slydell]

Once foul called on Graves, end of play.