|
Replies: 9
| visibility 1
|
All-In [27363]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 31820
Joined: 8/19/03
|
Perhaps this has been answered tonight
Dec 16, 2017, 9:04 PM
|
|
I had to attend a holiday gathering immediately after the game and missed everyone’s comments. My question is this... the call that nullified the free throw by Thomas was made because it was a ‘correctable official error’ . How would the correction have been made if Thomas missed the shot and Florida scored and won the game? What would have happened if they scored? Would points be taken off the board when it was determined a mistake? Was it only correctable at the time of the initial free throw? I suspect that is the case.
Nevertheless a great win for the Tigers but a miserably called game by the zebras. College basketball deserves better than that.
Go Tigers. Beat the chickens
|
|
|
|
 |
Orange Blooded [4142]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4935
Joined: 3/30/03
|
Re: Perhaps this has been answered tonight
Dec 16, 2017, 9:59 PM
|
|
Dandy Don Munson would agree with you . He seemed to be pissed at the officials most of the afternoon .
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2845]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3292
Joined: 6/20/00
|
I also just finished watching the game. This crew shouldn't
Dec 16, 2017, 10:07 PM
|
|
be allowed to work rec ball pee wee league. What was the deal giving the ball to Fla when Devoe accidentally kicked the ball when we had possession? I have never seen that called. If the defense kicks it, yes, but not the offense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [27366]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 26233
Joined: 9/19/11
|
Funny, when Duke was given two extra seconds to beat us
Dec 16, 2017, 10:49 PM
|
|
it seemed often correctable too.
Basketball rules are made for the cheaters.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1238]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1219
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Perhaps this has been answered tonight
Dec 16, 2017, 11:13 PM
|
|
the error must be "corrected" , in referee language.. BEFORE the ball becomes live AFTER the next dead ball.
so in this case, Eli is shooting. the ball becomes "live" when either he misses a shot and someone rebounds or the ball is in-bounded after a make. the next "dead ball" can be many things.. a foul, a TO, a violation, etc. The error would have to be corrected before play resumes . In theory, there could be a period of several minutes of game time elapsed and an error still be "correctable".
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-Pro [679]
TigerPulse: 95%
Posts: 757
Joined: 1/25/05
|
Re: Perhaps this has been answered tonight
Dec 16, 2017, 11:51 PM
|
|
I saw about 15 seconds of the game in a bar after the shrine bowl and knew immediately the refs sucked. just thankful the good guys won.
good days to be a tiger!
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-Pro [679]
TigerPulse: 95%
Posts: 757
Joined: 1/25/05
|
Re: Perhaps this has been answered tonight
Dec 16, 2017, 11:53 PM
|
|
Maskedtiger, it is past your bedtime. Amirite!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissioner [963]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 828
Joined: 10/31/16
|
Re: Perhaps this has been answered tonight
Dec 17, 2017, 12:39 AM
[ in reply to Re: Perhaps this has been answered tonight ] |
|
This is exactly correct. And to follow up to the original poster's question...
Had Thomas missed and play had continued, if they discovered the correctable error within the amount of time within the game in which they are allowed to make corrections, they would put Reed on the free throw line for his two shots, with nobody on the free throw lane, and allow him to shoot his two shots. Unfortunately, one thing that the correctable error rule does not allow in this hypothetical would be the reverting of time back to what it was when the free throws SHOULD have been taken. It would essentially be (1) stop play, (2) Reed shoots two, (3) resume play from the point of interruption.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10901]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12986
Joined: 8/4/14
|
Hard for me to believe this was done correctly. Why wouldn't
Dec 19, 2017, 12:04 AM
|
|
they count the first free throw by Thomas, since he did make it, then let Marcquise shoot the second one. Luckily, it worked out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissioner [963]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 828
Joined: 10/31/16
|
Re: Hard for me to believe this was done correctly. Why wouldn't
Dec 19, 2017, 10:13 AM
|
|
Because one of the five correctable errors is a made free throw by an invalid shooter, and the correction, by rule, for that situation is to take the free throw off the board and have the correct shooter shoot two. Think of it the other way around...had Marcquise gone to the line and made a shot when it was supposed to be Thomas shooting, it wouldn't be fair to allow Reed's made free throw to count. The rule has to apply to all situations...thus the result is Thomas' throw comes off the board and Reed shoots both as the valid shooter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 9
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
