The officials did the right thing. It was excellent defense, an excellent trap...the ball-handler was out of control and trapped...so he flopped in desperation hoping for a foul call. Or he simply fell because he was trapped so well. He lost control of the ball right at the half-court line, so it wasn't a backcourt violation.
NCAA March Madness
- Thread starter Charlie Marlow_rivals363743
- Start date
the following is a list of in-arguable facts:
B1G underperformed expectations only slightly in the tourney so far, losing 3 games as favorites (rutgers, iowa (LOL) and wisc (LOL!))
conversely, B1G has won just a single game as an underdog - michigan (b1g's best tourney team historically) knocked off tenn, bringing Rick Barnes's tourney record against the spread to an astonishing 2-12-1. in other words, there wasn't a more predictable upset all tournament.
I and several others expected just 2 (or less) of B1G's 9 teams to make it past the first weekend. Vegas agreed - favoring just 2 B1G teams in their round of 32 matchups (purdue/wisc).
bottom line - if you view the B1G as anything other than an average (at best) power hoops conference, that's on you. there haven't really been any surprises so far for those of us who view the conference accurately when compared to its peers.
B1G underperformed expectations only slightly in the tourney so far, losing 3 games as favorites (rutgers, iowa (LOL) and wisc (LOL!))
conversely, B1G has won just a single game as an underdog - michigan (b1g's best tourney team historically) knocked off tenn, bringing Rick Barnes's tourney record against the spread to an astonishing 2-12-1. in other words, there wasn't a more predictable upset all tournament.
I and several others expected just 2 (or less) of B1G's 9 teams to make it past the first weekend. Vegas agreed - favoring just 2 B1G teams in their round of 32 matchups (purdue/wisc).
bottom line - if you view the B1G as anything other than an average (at best) power hoops conference, that's on you. there haven't really been any surprises so far for those of us who view the conference accurately when compared to its peers.
If you watch the replay, Miles is still dribbling when he steps on the half-court line, and then he dribbles once on the half-court line. That's where the play should have stopped, given that no foul was called.
As for the foul, I'm kind of 50/50 on that. It looks like Terry fouls Miles, then Miles flops when he realizes a whistle isn't coming. Probably enough contact to justify a foul call, but as I said before it would have bailed TCU out on an absolutely horrible, butt-ugly possession.
accurate assumption. I just finally got a break from counting my winnings after this weekend's very predictable B1G performance!
I'm for letting the players and justice (simply the right thing) decide the game in the last second. If it's super super close (you can argue that his last dribble wasn't under control) then there's no need for the refs to jump in and blow the whistle. The spirit of the backcourt violation rule isn't to prevent plays like this from happening. And a foul call would hand TCU the game on a play in which they had ZERO chance to score.
No conference did great. It's pretty even, like I said. Any P6 conference can play well at a given time, like I said.
I disagree with those who prop up one conference and trash another.
So what if he steps on half-court line, then passes to a teammate who buries a three to win it? Is that justice for Arizona?
There's no "spirit" of the backcourt violation - he either stepped on the line or he didn't. As usual, you were dead wrong and now you're backpedaling into utter nonsense.
Refs were right not bailing TCU with an iffy foul call at half court when TCU was making no move toward the basket with a few ticks left on the clock. But was clearly an over and back. He steps on the line and also has ball in his hand when he lands on that side of the line. Actually turned out to be fortunate for TCU that it wasn’t called. Would have given AZ the ball at half court with chance to setup a play for a last shot. Of course a split second short of ending it right there
Foul or no foul .. I will say that was some awfully aggressive defense being played 40 ft from the basket in a tie game with under 5 seconds to play
you are gambling in a one and done tourney as a 1 seed that the refs are going to swallow their whistles in that situation
I'm used to watching Arizona with Pac-12 officials in the house, so I wasn't really expecting a foul to he called. Vern Harris probably would have called a charge.
Of course if Bear Down Vern had been officiating, Arizona would have been up by 20.
Get your best player the ball and clear out at the end of the game. If they double it's a guaranteed wide open shot unless you run the pick and roll which is stupid at the end of a game.
It's not rocket science.
B1G deserves all it gets
from being completely and utterly non-competitive at a national level in every major men’s sport to faculty molesting every 3rd student, the B1G made its bed
I am not surprised softies like you love it so, what with all the wooden buckets and statues of fairy tales to take your mind off the reality of the above
f*ck this conference & every one of its non-Nebraska members + fans now and forever
I just watched the linked replay dozens of times on my phone and seriously could not see his foot clearly on the line. It doesn't matter what his intent was, where he was going, whether he was trying to get rid of the ball anyway he could. He was pinned between the D and the backcourt line and no where to go. To me, he there was clearly contact before he got close to the line.
No matter which way they call that one, someone is ticked. Refs are always hesitant to make that call with so much going on so quickly but seriously, who couldn't find 10 calls in that game with less contact that was called?
You say that everything I say is nonsense. But if someone else in here says something similar, you agree with it.
The game ended up being decided in overtime. Which is a very good thing. I certainly wouldn't have blown the whistle.
if you can argue a single point I made, feel free.
otherwise, carry on Sandusky-ing @DarkHorse93 or whatever you B1G fans do
Last edited:
Who else here was dimwitted enough to argue that a backcourt violation should not be called because it wouldn't have been within "the spirit" of the rule?
I said the spirit of the rule and justice should prevail....when it's a super super close call. You conveniently left that 2nd part out in order to rip me.
I think the ball-handler lost control before a backcourt violation occurred. And I'd err on the side of letting them play.
OK, I watched the replay on my a bigger screen over and over and stopped it multiple times. No way did I see a back court violation. He planted his foot and jumped to pass and I believe he was fouled big time but that is another issue. So NO, a back court call should not have been made. And further, would that have been reviewable?
If you stop the clip that's pasted above (and that's circulating all over the place) at :04 (of the clip, not the game clock) his foot is on the half-court while he's dribbling. And the very next dribble hits the half-court line. Either that, or I along with everyone else who said it was a backcourt violation is completely blind and you're the only one with a good view of the play.
Maybe these will help:
Last edited:
“I said…”
“I think..”
Two things a total moron should never start sentences with.
I watched the clip over and over multiple times. These pics you attached show nothing. Is his foot close to or on the line in the first one? In the second the ball is clearly obstructing the view and on top of that he is getting mauled both lower and upper body.If you stop the clip that's pasted above (and that's circulating all over the place) at :04 (of the clip, not the game clock) his foot is on the half-court while he's dribbling. And the very next dribble hits the half-court line. Either that, or I along with everyone else who said it was a backcourt violation is completely blind and you're the only one with a good view of the play.
Maybe these will help:
And I am the only one huh? Of course, besides the refs who were standing right there.
I really don't care either way - I think the guy got fouled first, clearly a lot less contact gets called. But to state beyond a doubt he was backcourt, my eyes and nothing I have seen that is definitive states it. Have some officials come out and stated it was a back court violation? Why no review then and give time to Zona? Ended up a no call, gets it off the officials I guess.
Miles dribbles the ball right onto the freaking half-court line. If you want to contend that he was being fouled as that happened, or before that happend, I won't argue with you. But dribbling the ball onto the half-court line, with the ball completely untouched by a defender, is the very definition of a backcourt violation.
#InMyLittleEchoChamberI'mNEVERWrong
Where? I have seen zero evidence he touched the line. ZERO. Some blurry pictures that make you use your imagination, nothing linked here. Where is it?
You're right - I totally faked the photo where he's dribbling the ball directly onto the half-court line. The only other explanation is that you were wrong, and we all know that's an absolute impossibility.
Do I have to stay late now, and clap erasers?
Find a video that isn’t blurry. There are several on you tube. Doesn’t matter at all if he stepped on the line or dribbled on the line, BECAUSE HE FREAKING FALLS TO THE GROUND IN THE BACK COURT WITH THE BALL IN HIS HAND BEFORE ANYONE FROM AZ TOUCHES THE BALL. Please watch it all the way to where he loses the ball and then come argue he didn’t go across the line. He is On the ground in the backcourt touching the ball. Again, argue all you want whether it should have been a foul. I grant that was iffy other than probably 95% of refs simply aren’t going to bail out the player in that situation. But, you just look stupid trying to argue there was no back court violation.
Here is the best youtube I could find and put it on my biggest monitor.
The question was did he step on the line and I still don't see it. If that is overwhelming evidence then he refs missed it all and I sure would hate to be convicted of something with that evidence.
Did he have the ball when he went over the line falling back? That would be backcourt for certain but if that wasn't a foul first, then I don't know what one looks like but it wasn't called.
I am on a FB site where refs and umps relay strange calls they run into from time to time and it is amazing to me the multiple interpretations that come from everyone seeing the same thing or how it was described.
You guys can be right if you want, he went backcourt although I think he had help getting there.
The question was did he step on the line and I still don't see it. If that is overwhelming evidence then he refs missed it all and I sure would hate to be convicted of something with that evidence.
Did he have the ball when he went over the line falling back? That would be backcourt for certain but if that wasn't a foul first, then I don't know what one looks like but it wasn't called.
I am on a FB site where refs and umps relay strange calls they run into from time to time and it is amazing to me the multiple interpretations that come from everyone seeing the same thing or how it was described.
You guys can be right if you want, he went backcourt although I think he had help getting there.
Dear Lord. The second photo shows the ball bouncing on the freaking line. Again, the argument is that it was either a foul or a backcourt violation. If there is no foul then it was a backcourt, if there was a foul then there was no backcourt. Neither was called.
You seem to be arguing that it wasn't a backcourt violation because it was a foul. I am fine with that, but it is literally impossible to have not called one of the two, yet that is what happened.
at the 1:23 mark of the video you posted you can freeze the video when the dribbled ball hits the ground. At that exact moment, you cannot see the mid court line. That means the ball is covering the line. Again, that makes it a backcourt violation. If he was pushed, over the line, then it was a foul. But under no circumstances should that play have been a play on.
Uh, yeah. I never said he wasn’t fouled. I was not surprised no foul was called due to the situation, but there was more than enough contact to justify a foul call. Said that from the beginning.
Absent a foul call, there was a backcourt violation. You’re ever so close to admitting you were wrong, tortured route though it may be. And don’t worry - the world might not even come to an end.
“You guys can be right if you want.” Good Lord.
thanks for coming out, michigan (+5)
in other news, Arkansas (+10) so far indeed giving Gonzaga everything they can handle, as expected
in other news, Arkansas (+10) so far indeed giving Gonzaga everything they can handle, as expected