PDA

View Full Version : Why no review on Stockton 3-pointer?



Zag 77
02-13-2014, 08:59 PM
For those of you not watching on TV, Stockton made a late 3 pointer that TV replay showed clearly beat the shot clock. Yet the refs did not review even though there was a dead ball situation.

It made no big difference in the game, but what is the rule on this situation?

Ekrub
02-13-2014, 09:05 PM
I think because the ref blew the whistle before THe shot clock went off

exclusivelee
02-13-2014, 09:23 PM
Conspiracies. WCC Zebras are out to get us.

ZagaZags
02-13-2014, 09:37 PM
For those of you not watching on TV, Stockton made a late 3 pointer that TV replay showed clearly beat the shot clock. Yet the refs did not review even though there was a dead ball situation.

It made no big difference in the game, but what is the rule on this situation?

The ref had the under on the game.;)

Zagineer
02-13-2014, 09:44 PM
Conspiracies. WCC Zebras are out to get us.

Yup. They're practicing for when it will make a difference.

Seriously though, Zag 77, I think Ekrup is correct in his post. But the question I have is, why did they blow the whistle? I can't recall... if it was in error, did we get the following possession?

Anyway,..... it doesn't matter..... for at least this game.

.

ZagMania
02-14-2014, 06:00 AM
The no calls for Coleman and Nunez were really bad, especially Coleman's.

Reborn
02-14-2014, 07:03 AM
I hope they get reprimanded for it. It's their job to take a look at that shot. These guys were really lazy, and once more show how poor WCC refs are. It has nothing to do with this or that. It's simply their job to take a look at that shot. Just to get the call right. That's their job. When refs refuse to do their job the way it's designed to be done, it truly does lower ones opinion of refs, especially in the WCC (and mine is pretty low).

willandi
02-14-2014, 07:05 AM
I hope they get reprimanded for it. It's their job to take a look at that shot. These guys were really lazy, and once more show how poor WCC refs are. It has nothing to do with this or that. It's simply their job to take a look at that shot. Just to get the call right. That's their job. When refs refuse to do their job the way it's designed to be done, it truly does lower ones opinion of refs, especially in the WCC (and mine is pretty low).

I agree. And if they blew the whistle stopping play before the play was over, that should be reprimanded as well.

jazzdelmar
02-14-2014, 07:07 AM
Few was being a gentleman. In a tighter game he'd be on them.

Zagdawg
02-14-2014, 07:09 AM
Ok-- who has Jazzs login..........

Look at you Jazz,,,,,saying something positive about Few......;)

jazzdelmar
02-14-2014, 07:11 AM
Ok-- who has Jazzs login..........

Look at you Jazz,,,,,saying something positive about Few......;)

C'mon, man. I recognize Few's many positive attributes. Many coaches would probably be all over the refs in that situation. How many WCC ones would?

gamagin
02-14-2014, 07:25 AM
It seems over the past several games the other guy's game plan is to just plow into our middle and bounce off Shem (1st choice) or anyone while the refs, apparently listen for the collision and whistle PK or whomever for a foul. Lord knows the refs cannot be watching. To watch 2 out of 3 times, it's a setup that requires complicity on the refs. It's obvious.

This while PK stands there, arms STRAIGHT up, trying desperately not to even twitch much less move.

And the foul is called on PK. Because of the way the charging player bounces off him, I guess. It's obvious and blatant, but it works. I'd say pepp got at least 10-20 points at the line vs. us. Maybe 1/3 rd were legit. But MOST of them by just playing a fullback driving to the goal. Ridiculous.

Zags11
02-14-2014, 07:33 AM
The no calls for Coleman and Nunez were really bad, especially Coleman's.

Heister got upset on that one. Fox played it off but greg wasnt happy.

dnj116
02-14-2014, 08:15 AM
I hope they get reprimanded for it. It's their job to take a look at that shot. These guys were really lazy, and once more show how poor WCC refs are. It has nothing to do with this or that. It's simply their job to take a look at that shot. Just to get the call right. That's their job. When refs refuse to do their job the way it's designed to be done, it truly does lower ones opinion of refs, especially in the WCC (and mine is pretty low).

I completely agree! What if the shot HAD mattered?!?

Poor showing by the refs, and I hope this is something that will be prevented or at least revised in the future.

WBM
02-14-2014, 01:53 PM
To me it wasn't about whether the shot mattered for the game's outcome. Stockton doesn't get a ton of opportunity to score 20+, and I think Heister in his brief indignity was saying that it would have tied Stockton's previous career high. Given that he ended up with 18, he could have had 21, which would match what I can find as his career high.

flytiezag
02-14-2014, 03:35 PM
No scoreboard light a judgement call. review would probably confirmed call to close to change.That said David got robbed!!!

Blackbeard
02-15-2014, 04:51 AM
I didn't watch the last five minutes of the game i don't know why you guys are in such a uproar over this. The better question that should be asked is why your beloved Stockton is still playing when the zags have a locked win. If he is such a valuable asset, he shouldn't be playing. Again I didn't watch it so I can't comment on the play but would love to.

jazzdelmar
02-15-2014, 05:51 AM
I didn't watch the last five minutes of the game i don't know why you guys are in such a uproar over this. The better question that should be asked is why your beloved Stockton is still playing when the zags have a locked win. If he is such a valuable asset, he shouldn't be playing. Again I didn't watch it so I can't comment on the play but would love to.

Moments after this, if it matters, Few cleared his bench with maybe 40 secs. left (but, ouch, Nunez stayed in)......I wonder if the end of the bench could be integrated into a more regular lineup a little sooner in an already-decided game, rather than the wholesale, land rush subbing that is so common?

JPtheBeasta
02-15-2014, 07:29 AM
I didn't watch the last five minutes of the game i don't know why you guys are in such a uproar over this. The better question that should be asked is why your beloved Stockton is still playing when the zags have a locked win. If he is such a valuable asset, he shouldn't be playing. Again I didn't watch it so I can't comment on the play but would love to.

We'll all have to make a concerted effort to check with you first before having concerns about something.

Do you think the 5 minute mark is perhaps a little early to pull your starters? They outscored us in the final five with our starters in. It would be a pretty silly way to lose a 20 point lead, no? I might also be a good coaching moment- after watching his team choke down the stretch in the previous game, perhaps he wanted his players to work on closing out the game.

Also, as a sports fan, have you ever seen a player kept in a game in order to achieve a milestone, personal record, or other record? If so, were you ever happy as a fan when this happened?

ZagSports
02-15-2014, 10:13 AM
I believe rule change (this is the 1st year) states you can only review shot clock violations under 2 minutes