Out of Bounds

[richthedentist]

I guess everyone is so tired from the OSU debacle that no one even can post how we got screwed again by a missed out of bounds call. This has to be changed and be a reviewable call.
The problem is not only did they miss that one but it also happened in the first half when a Seton Hall player was out of bounds and came back in and got the rebound only problem was he was the first one to touch the ball again cost us 2 points there

 

[Shell21]

we would have missed the next shot anyways but your point is taken. I don’t get how they can review out of bounds with a minute and fifty left and not with two seconds left. The rules make absolutely no sense. None whatsoever.

 

[RUfromNJ]

Another missed call, for sure. I’ve given up on expecting RU to get a fair shake in big moments. But this feels completely different from Thurs. Does anyone believe we wouldn’t have turned it over or forced up a turnaround, fadeaway that clanked out tonight?

 

[RU848789]

we would have missed the next shot anyways but your point is taken. I don’t get how they can review out of bounds with a minute and fifty left and not with two seconds left. The rules make absolutely no sense. None whatsoever.

It's the exact same thing as OSU with regard to reviewability. If the whistle isn't blown for out of bounds (of the player or the player touching the ball after being out of bounds voluntarily), out of bounds can't later be reviewed, i.e,. the clock has to stop for a review to be possible. Clearly, one would think the review rules are going to be changed, but it doesn't help us. Would love to see the replay they showed on the jumbotron - just watched the end of game sequence on DVR and they didn't have that angle to show (no idea why), but they did remark upon seeing it on the jumbotron too. Maybe it'll show up on Twitter.

 

[Shell21]

It's the exact same thing as OSU with regard to reviewability. If the whistle isn't blown for out of bounds (of the player or the player touching the ball after being out of bounds voluntarily), out of bounds can't later be reviewed, i.e,. the clock has to stop for a review to be possible. Clearly, one would think the review rules are going to be changed, but it doesn't help us. Would love to see the replay they showed on the jumbotron - just watched the end of game sequence on DVR and they didn't have that angle to show (no idea why), but they did remark upon seeing it on the jumbotron too. Maybe it'll show up on Twitter.

it’s the dumbest rule ever. Why does the clock have to stop.? It’s under two minute. It seems like they are just making arbitrary rules in. There was a foul after the play so just review the play and reset the clock if you have to. Under two minutes everything should be reviewed no matter what. It’s not like they stopped a fast break and the play was live

 

[RUJMM78]

The Rutgers turnover on a inbound pass was a killer near the end of the game.That failure can't be blamed on the refs.

 

[FrankZ_RU93]

Well I flagged the out of bounds in the game thread but left it at that. We would have missed the next shot anyway (maybe a missed dunk this time).

 

[RutgersDom]

we would have missed the next shot anyways but your point is taken. I don’t get how they can review out of bounds with a minute and fifty left and not with two seconds left. The rules make absolutely no sense. None whatsoever.

Rule needs to be fn changed. Ridiculous

 

[Shell21]

Rule needs to be fn changed. Ridiculous

there is no rhyme or reason to any of the review rules. None. Makes absolutely no sense. Just make everything in the last two minutes reviewable. Not fouls obviously but out of bounds. They go to the video a million times during the game but can’t in the last five seconds for out of bounds. It’s honestly comical.

 

[GORU2014]

A challenge system where you lose a timeout or maybe get a technical if it’s wrong would be a good fix

 

[Corycord1]

OSU game he was out of bounds. If they call it game over we win.
This game he was out of bounds we get another shot, chances are we miss it like the rest of game.
Two completely different scenarios

 

[RU848789]

OSU game he was out of bounds. If they call it game over we win.
This game he was out of bounds we get another shot, chances are we miss it like the rest of game.
Two completely different scenarios

They're the exact same scenarios with regard to the rules and reviewability; of course the outcomes if they had been called properly would have been different.

 

[richthedentist]

It's the exact same thing as OSU with regard to reviewability. If the whistle isn't blown for out of bounds (of the player or the player touching the ball after being out of bounds voluntarily), out of bounds can't later be reviewed, i.e,. the clock has to stop for a review to be possible. Clearly, one would think the review rules are going to be changed, but it doesn't help us. Would love to see the replay they showed on the jumbotron - just watched the end of game sequence on DVR and they didn't have that angle to show (no idea why), but they did remark upon seeing it on the jumbotron too. Maybe it'll show up on Twitter.

Was shocked they showed it but this one was way more obvious than Thornton being out of bounds but something has to be done about the piss poor reffing in these games. They are not following proper protocol as the ref on the baseline is supposed to be watching this and obviously again not watched or seen!!!

 

[AZBlues]

The photo in the game thread shows his right foot appearing to be out of bounds, but I think the foot may actually be in the air moving toward the sideline with his body momentum as he lands on his left foot just prior to making the pass, so I'm not so sure that his right foot was definitely out of bounds. To me it looks like it's just slightly above the floor, based on viewing the video of the play in slow motion. Hard to tell for sure though if it touched the floor or not, but he's definitely not standing on his right foot in the freeze frame photo... I'm not saying that he never went out of bounds, just that I don't think the photo from the game thread is proof.

Edit- Watch the last few seconds of the game in the video, preferably selecting the 0.25 playback speed in the video settings... I could be wrong, but I'm not sure that his right foot is definitely out of bounds as he tries to save the ball.

 

[bac2therac]

Rutgers could have had a 100 more chances to win this game and they would have missed them all

 

[AZBlues]

As I mentioned, I'm not sure if the SHU player actually stepped out of bounds or not, but if he did, how did the baseline ref miss it? He couldn't have had a better view of it..

 

[BigRnj]

It looked pretty clear on the video at the RAC. In fact it looked like 2 consecutive steps were on the line. Refs can’t be missing that.

 

[80RU]

As I mentioned, I'm not sure if the SHU player actually stepped out of bounds or not, but if he did, how did the baseline ref miss it? He couldn't have had a better view of it..

The same way the trailing referee missed the Thorton (Initial) out of bounds in the Ohio State game when he had an unobstructed view a couple of feet away. Sometimes they just miss.

 

[richthedentist]

As I mentioned, I'm not sure if the SHU player actually stepped out of bounds or not, but if he did, how did the baseline ref miss it? He couldn't have had a better view of it..

Your picture is inaccurate he stepped out of bounds two steps before the picture you are showing the ref was obviously not looking then

 

[RUMike]

NCAA basketball needs to have a video review process. Even FIFA soccer, an organization that is completely averse to change, has video replay.

Pat Hobbs was right on the baseline where SHU went out of bounds and then saw the replay on the big screen. He needs to speak with the Big Ten and the Big Ten needs to discuss this with the NCAA to get a process in place.

 

[PatrickRU92]

once (if) the rule is changed I guarantee we'll lose a game because of it.

 

[RutgersDom]

I guess everyone is so tired from the OSU debacle that no one even can post how we got screwed again by a missed out of bounds call. This has to be changed and be a reviewable call.
The problem is not only did they miss that one but it also happened in the first half when a Seton Hall player was out of bounds and came back in and got the rebound only problem was he was the first one to touch the ball again cost us 2 points there

Does anyone have a video of the replay they showed at the RAC? Was discussing it with my cousin who was watching on TV and wanted to show him what the RAC played... Certainly not an excuse as we really didn't deserve to win yesterday but interesting nonetheless...

 

[AZBlues]

Your picture is inaccurate he stepped out of bounds two steps before the picture you are showing the ref was obviously not looking then

The baseline ref trained his eyes on the baseline as soon as the ball started moving in that direction. First pic below is prior to the SHU player reaching the ball to touch it. Second pic is just as the SHU player first makes contact with the ball in his attempt to save it. It should be noted that a player can touch the baseline prior to touching the ball in an attempt to save the ball, as long as he's back in bounds when he first makes contact with the ball... I'm not saying it definitely wasn't a violation, but just that there's a chance that it may not have been as egregious a missed call as some people are making it out to be, if it was a missed call at all. I'd really like to see the video of the play that they showed at the RAC though.

 

[zebnatto]

A challenge system where you lose a timeout or maybe get a technical if it’s wrong would be a good fix

Yeah, but it would have to be super quick acting. No between play stoppage as with football or baseball.

 

[G- RUnit]

Does anyone have a video of the replay they showed at the RAC? Was discussing it with my cousin who was watching on TV and wanted to show him what the RAC played... Certainly not an excuse as we really didn't deserve to win yesterday but interesting nonetheless...

I hate that comment! Why didn’t we deserve it? It was a one possession game where we held SHU to 45 points. We deserved to win it just as much as SHU. It was a superb defensive effort. Certainly one more possession could have made all the difference in the world. Did you not just watch the OSU game? Did we not deserve to win that game too? SMH. The stupid cliches drive me nuts. Maybe a prayer goes in?

 

[AreYouNUTS]

Another instance where I have to ask: WHY wasn't Pikes INSISTANT upon a review of the play? He's GOT to be assertive there and make sure it happens!!!!

 

[80RU]

Another instance where I have to ask: WHY wasn't Pikes INSISTANT upon a review of the play? He's GOT to be assertive there and make sure it happens!!!!

It should be pretty clear by now, via several posts, that if the whistle does not blow on the baseline play, it is not reviewable. If the whistle had blown, and the play actually was not out of bounds, then the play is reviewable. Just like the Ohio State final play. Brings back memories of the failure to call the Steve Slayton fumble that cost the football team an outright big east championship. It was not reviewable. If it had been called a fumble on the field, and he was actually already down, that would have been reviewable. It is odd how we always seem to be on the wrong side of what is reviewable and what is not.

 

[AreYouNUTS]

It should be pretty clear by now, via several posts, that if the whistle does not blow on the baseline play, it is not reviewable. If the whistle had blown, and the play actually was not out of bounds, then the play is reviewable. Just like the Ohio State final play. Brings back memories of the failure to call the Steve Slayton fumble that cost the football team an outright big east championship. It was not reviewable. If it had been called a fumble on the field, and he was actually already down, that would have been reviewable. It is odd how we always seem to be on the wrong side of what is reviewable and what is not.

I thought once the whistle does blow that anything in the final 2 minutes CAN be reviewed?

 

[richthedentist]

Another instance where I have to ask: WHY wasn't Pikes INSISTANT upon a review of the play? He's GOT to be assertive there and make sure it happens!!!!

Because you can't review that play same as the OSU game just a ridiculous rule

 

[richthedentist]

I thought once the whistle does blow that anything in the final 2 minutes CAN be reviewed?

NOPE the only thing is the clock and who the ball went out of bounds on; Rule has to be changed for next year

 

[RU848789]

I thought once the whistle does blow that anything in the final 2 minutes CAN be reviewed?

The whistle didn't blow at all at OSU and blew well after the point in question yesterday. The only reviewable plays, generally, are those where a whistle blew (clock stops being the key here), i.e., if the ball goes out of bounds or the ref thinks a player stepped out of bounds or if the ref calls goaltending (and they can review possession and adjust the clock if needed). The one exception to this is on any gamewinning shot at the buzzer they can review the clock and whether it's a 2 or 3, but not the in-bounds part of it, which occurs before the shot. They can also review a 2 vs. a 3 at the next stoppage, at any time, as it isn't considered to affect the game outcome at that point.

Many think that any gamewinning shot ought to be reviewable for any element associated with it, like stepping out of bounds or going out of bounds and coming back in (which does happen all the time on baseline plays). For other issues where a whistle doesn't blow, but could have been blown on some infraction, the complexity becomes much greater, since further play elapses from the point of the missed whistle and then one gets into NFL-style review from the next stoppage (which could be much later in hoops) - and how does one initiate that? Via a TO and challenge? It sucks that we lost, but we already review too many plays IMO, which kills game flow. I am ok with the reviewing any game winning basket, though (although does that only mean buzzer beaters or even shots with 5 seconds left?).

 

[AreYouNUTS]

Uhm….didn’t SHU ask for an out-of-bounds review, and get it, during the final 2 minutes of play?

Also, #’s, the “whistle blew” moments after the out of bounds plater/final shot. Literally the FINAL “WHISTLE.” That’s a reviewable play. It was an ILLEGAL play as well so how on Earth is that not reviewable following the APPARENT game-winning shot?

 

[richthedentist]

Uhm….didn’t SHU ask for an out-of-bounds review, and get it, during the final 2 minutes of play?

Also, #’s, the “whistle blew” moments after the out of bounds plater/final shot. Literally the FINAL “WHISTLE.” That’s a reviewable play. It was an ILLEGAL play as well so how on Earth is that not reviewable following the APPARENT game-winning shot?

Yes you can review who the ball last touched in the last 2 minutes

 

[RU848789]

Uhm….didn’t SHU ask for an out-of-bounds review, and get it, during the final 2 minutes of play?

Also, #’s, the “whistle blew” moments after the out of bounds plater/final shot. Literally the FINAL “WHISTLE.” That’s a reviewable play. It was an ILLEGAL play as well so how on Earth is that not reviewable following the APPARENT game-winning shot?

You're missing the point completely. The whistle didn't blow for the possible out of bounds, meaning the possible out of bounds play can't be reviewed. Same is true for any OOB (person or ball) in the last 2 minutes (or goaltending). If there's no whistle, they don't want to let other things happen and then have to roll the clock back, potentially negating play from where the whistle should've been. Doesn't matter if the play beyond where the whistle could've blown is 1-2 seconds or 20 seconds later.

 

[richthedentist]

You're missing the point completely. The whistle didn't blow for the possible out of bounds, meaning the possible out of bounds play can't be reviewed. Same is true for any OOB (person or ball) in the last 2 minutes (or goaltending). If there's no whistle, they don't want to let other things happen and then have to roll the clock back, potentially negating play from where the whistle should've been. Doesn't matter if the play beyond where the whistle could've blown is 1-2 seconds or 20 seconds later.

You cannot review out of bounds-meaning whether a player stepped out of bounds; In the last two minutes(only the second half and OT) not the first half you can review goal tending(basket interference) and who the ball went out on not if the player stepped out of bounds

 

[wheezer]

Rule needs to be fn changed. Ridiculous

Posted elsewhere that reviews should be similar to football reviews

With football, they can look at many things all at once. Did the ball carrier step out of bounds, did his knee touch , did he cross the goal, and how much time on the clock after the play etc

With bb, the refs are paralyzed

They could obviously see that the OSU guy was out of bounds immediate before, but can’t call it. ?

 

[richthedentist]

Posted elsewhere that reviews should be similar to football reviews

With football, they can look at many things all at once. Did the ball carrier step out of bounds, did his knee touch , did he cross the goal, and how much time on the clock after the play etc

With bb, the refs are paralyzed

They could obviously see that the OSU guy was out of bounds immediate before, but can’t call it. ?

Yeah we posted this and discussed in other threads they have to do a review of anything that can affect the outcome of the game in the last two minutes but the only problem with that that I would hate to see is them going to the monitor every 10 seconds and making the last 2 minutes last forever almost like in the first half of the Indiana game where they reviewed three things and it killed the flow of the game and took like 10 minutes

 

[wheezer]

Yeah we posted this and discussed in other threads they have to do a review of anything that can affect the outcome of the game in the last two minutes but the only problem with that that I would hate to see is them going to the monitor every 10 seconds and making the last 2 minutes last forever almost like in the first half of the Indiana game where they reviewed three things and it killed the flow of the game and took like 10 minutes

I hated all the Indiana stoppages and their fans thought it was excessive also

Yet look how we got screwed against OSU

They have to assume that most games can be played without the end part going to continual replays. Make a stoppage and review involve the entire sequence

You should not have what happened to us

Final thought. Îf they were required to make sure the final shot by OSU was in time, they already had a stoppage right there, technically, so make the violation call that preceded it