Controversial ending: Bunnies/Gophers

[NoDakSt]

SDSU beat the Gophers on a buzzer beater in WIlliams Arena. Considerable debate after the play by the refs before calling the shot good. Here's video on final minutes. Also, you can catch at the end of the clip, what Gopher fans are calling a cheap shot delivered by Megan Vogel when the teams were going to congratualte one another. It appears she shoulder checks Roysland. It doule have been exuberence.

http://www.gophersports.com/onDemand...=8400&KEY=

[2006gwfcchamps]

HA!!

Yeah, it looked like she got a free one to me.


It was probably payback for a rough game under the boards or something. You wouldn't believe how rough the game can be when you're playing but it doesn't show up on camera.

[89rabbit]

Thread started yesterday:

http://www400.pair.com/bisonvil/cgi-...num=1168812372


Go State!

[sambini]

It was good by a sliver.

[NDSUguy]

It was good by a sliver.

Very interesting ending. Is the game over when the backboard goes "red" or when the clock reads 00:00???

[JacksFan06]

The official ruling is that the ref is to go by the LED ring around the backboard unless the shotclock has a tenth of a second digit. ( 00.0 )
The U of M shotclock did have a three digit shotclock and it was 00.0 and the ball was still in the hand of the player so technically it shouldn't have counted. But I'm sure glad that it did.

[BTownJack]

Here is a post from our board that explains the contradiction in the rule:

Link to the thread: http://www.sdsufans.com/cgi-bin/yabb...848807/120#120

What they need to do at the appeal is figure out what the rule is saying

The rule :
Section 7, Art. 2. Each period shall end when the red light or LED lights has become activated. When the light fails to operate or is not visible, each period shall end with the sounding of the game-clock horn.
b. In games with a 10th of a second game display and where an official courtside monitor is used, the reading of 0.00 on the game clock is to be used to determine whether a try for goal occurred before or after the expiration of time in any period. When the game clock is not visible, the officials shall verify the original call with the use of the red/LED light(s). When the red/LED light(s) are not visible, the sounding of the game-clock horn shall be utilized. When definitive information is unattainable with the use of the monitor, the orginal call stands.

According to this photo, Williams Arena only goes to 00.0 not 0.00 so the LED lights would be correct by lighting 0.09 seconds after the 0.0 on the shot clock.

The thing about the rule is that 0.00 is not a 10th of a second, so the rule conflects it's self. *So if you read the rule quickly and see the 0.00, and then using the LEDs, then it was correct. *If you go by the 10th of a second, 0.0, then the ruling was incorrect. *If we go by the assumption that the ball was not out of her hand at the 0.0 on the clock and it was out before the LED came on. Being the rule is unclear then the original call stands. *

But I'm guessing that the ruling shoud state 0.0 because they also misspelled original, and who ever typed it up thought 0.01 was a 10th of a second, not 0.1.

[Hammersmith]

Yep, it's almost assuredly a typo in the rule book that's causing all of this trouble. The decimal point was probably put in the wrong place and no one caught it.

00.0 vs. 0.00

The former makes sense in the context of the rule, the latter does not.

Bottom line: by the spirit of rule 7.2(b), the final call was incorrect. But since the rule is in error with itself, you need to use rule 7.2 which makes the final call correct. Hopefully this draws attention to the error in the rulebook and the appropriate NCAA sub-committee fixes it.

[jackrabbit1979]

Another thing to note, it has been mentioned on our board already, is that a reading of 00.0 on the game clock would actually mean that there are 9 one/hundreths of a second left, as the clock only reads to the tenth of a second. After watching the game, it seemed as if the red lights came on shortly after the clock hit 00.0, possibly taking into account the extra one/hundreths of a second. It seems inconceivable that the shot could be that close, but the lead referee said it was easily the closest call he ever had seen. I would say that the rule book should state that only the LED red lights signal the end of the game in order to count all possible time. In this matter it may be that the ball was in her hand when the clock read 00.0, but left her hand before the last 9 one/hundreths of a second ticked off.

Either way, glad we got the win

[BisonBud]

I heard today that the Ref's association's governing body stated that the call was incorrect. It was on the radio, but they didn't give anymore info.