OSU shot clock violation

[Big boy stan]

Can anyone explain why the refs let their shot clock violation stand after the review at 17:39 left in the 2nd half? Pretty sure the ball hit the rim on the initial shot but Key pushed the ball back up and definitely hit the bottom of the rim before the clock expired.

Does the bottom of the run not count? Or perhaps the shot clock was not reviewable?

 

[RUisB1Gtime]

No clue.. that was a head scratcher. Ball hit rim..twice

 

[GORU2014]

Can anyone explain why the refs let their shot clock violation stand after the review at 17:39 left in the 2nd half?

They’re bad

 

[RU848789]

Can anyone explain why the refs let their shot clock violation stand after the review at 17:39 left in the 2nd half? Pretty sure the ball hit the rim on the initial shot but Key pushed the ball back up and definitely hit the bottom of the rim before the clock expired.

Does the bottom of the run not count? Or perhaps the shot clock was not reviewable?

Just like in the MD game, a shot clock violation is not subject to voluntary review (i.e., outside of shots at the very end of periods) unless the shot went in, so whether or not the shot hit the rim is not reviewable. That said, I have zero idea what they were reviewing. Also, I recall there was a review in the 2019 tourney game between Duke and UCF in the last 2 minutes of whether a shot had hit the rim, so perhaps they changed that rule since then, no longer allowing such reviews.

https://larrybrownsports.com/college-basketball/referees-ucf-basket-stand-rim-review/488969

Section 2. Instant Replay—Voluntary Use (Except Where Noted) Art 1. Officials may use such available equipment only in the following situations (page 106 in the rule book in the link below):

b. Scoring. 4. Determine if the ball was released on a try for goal before the sounding of the shot clock horn when the try is successful. The officials must recognize the potential mistake and signal to the scorer that an instant replay review is required prior to the ball next becoming live. When the try is unsuccessful, a review is not permissible.

https://www.quickscores.com/downloads/ftmeadesports_20222023_Mens_NCAA_Basketball_Rulebook.pdf

 

[anon_xekqhstck0ygt]

Loved how BTN and Byington brought that up at the very end to make an excuse for OSU. BS move.

 

[biazza38]

I don’t think it ended up being a shot clock violation.
Cam Spencer stripped the ball from the OSU player and had possession as the clock went off.
Absolute horrid job by BTN not pointing that out.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but the telecast crew is not courtside. So they probably never got the correct ruling from the refs. That being said, they should have mentioned Spencer stripping the ball

 

[Big boy stan]

Except that section 2 c. 2 says;

2. Determine whether the shot clock malfunctioned or a timing mistake
occurred in failing to properly start, stop, set or reset the shot clock.
The malfunction or mistake may only be corrected in the shot clock
period in which it occurred.

 

[RU05]

I don’t think it ended up being a shot clock violation.
Cam Spencer stripped the ball from the OSU player and had possession as the clock went off.
Absolute horrid job by BTN not pointing that out.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but the telecast crew is not courtside. So they probably never got the correct ruling from the refs. That being said, they should have mentioned Spencer stripping the ball

I thought Spencer was called for the foul, but the shot clock violation negated the foul,

 

[Big boy stan]

I don’t think it ended up being a shot clock violation.
Cam Spencer stripped the ball from the OSU player and had possession as the clock went off.
Absolute horrid job by BTN not pointing that out.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but the telecast crew is not courtside. So they probably never got the correct ruling from the refs. That being said, they should have mentioned Spencer stripping the ball

Spencer strips (or fouls) after the clock expires. When the clock hits zero, Key still has the ball.

 

[cm_13]

I thought Spencer was called for the foul, but the shot clock violation negated the foul,

It was this. They couldn’t review the shot clock violation, but they did review if the foul on Cam occurred before or after the shot clock violation.

 

[Scarlet CCS]

We’ve def been screwed by the refs before and although I hate complaining about fouls (many of which are subjective imo), that one was a head scratcher. Should have been OSU ball the way I understand the rules.

 

[RU05]

We’ve def been screwed by the refs before and although I hate complaining about fouls (many of which are subjective imo), that one was a head scratcher. Should have been OSU ball the way I understand the rules.

See above, they missed the ball hitting the rim, but called everything correctly afterward.

 

[ScarletDave]

Should have been out ball anyway because OSU guy was out of bounds and tipped it in before the shots went up. Case closed the refs missed that call first regardless of what happened in the 3 seconds after

 

[RU848789]

I don’t think it ended up being a shot clock violation.
Cam Spencer stripped the ball from the OSU player and had possession as the clock went off.
Absolute horrid job by BTN not pointing that out.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but the telecast crew is not courtside. So they probably never got the correct ruling from the refs. That being said, they should have mentioned Spencer stripping the ball

No, Spencer was called for a foul, which was waived off, since it occurred after the shot clock violation, which clearly was the call, even though the call was clearly wrong as OSU hit the rim twice before the end of the shot clock. Should've simply been a foul on Cam (even though I thought he got a clean steal).

 

[GoodOl'Rutgers]

Can anyone explain why the refs let their shot clock violation stand after the review at 17:39 left in the 2nd half? Pretty sure the ball hit the rim on the initial shot but Key pushed the ball back up and definitely hit the bottom of the rim before the clock expired.

Does the bottom of the run not count? Or perhaps the shot clock was not reviewable?

My guess is that the refs DID NOT let the shot clock violation stand and that the TV announcer got it wrong... as possibly did the RAC announcer.

What happened was that the call that the shot clock had expired happened while Rutgers had the ball. So Rutgers got the ball.

They did mention a foul call.. but I think that whistle was in support of the guy underneath who whistled the shot-clock.. meaning the ref moving his arm to call a foul was actually just supporting what he thought was a foul call by the other guy.

There were many other ref issues in that game.. some of which favored Rutgers. Like an OSU pass along the endline that actually bounced IN and was called OUT. That call meant nothing though as the pass recipient muffed it OOB anyway.

There were many OBVIOUS travels by OSU not called. And I don't mean the little ones. I mean actually carrying the ball WHEN DEFENDED. And then SUEING.. his McHale moves.. and a big shot when Mag bounced away from him. Watch a replay.. his pivot foot starts inside the lane and end about 1.5 feet OUTSIDE the lane. I mean.. holy ****.. how hard is it to NOT call that?

The physical pushes and stuff??.. well.. in this game.. we seem to have actually adjusted to what the refs were allowing at halftime and in the second half.. we got very physical and I saw many things we did that should have been called (if the refs were using the whole rulebook).. but they let OSU get away with that too.

 

[biazza38]

I’m 90% sure there wasn’t a foul called against Spencer and that was the BTN crew getting the call wrong. I think they had it wrong from start to finish that’s why the confusion. Officiating is bad, but it can’t be that bad.
Spencer all stripped it as the clock expired. I don’t think the OSU player still had the ball.
If anything, Spencer had a clear path when the clock went off

 

[Scangg]

In another thread someone said that a loose ball hitting the rim does not count if it is not a shot attempt was the explanation from the ref. If that is in fact the rule, it's an interesting point that most are probably unaware of and would make it the right call it would seem. I need to rewatch to see what exactly happened