Columbus Dispatch: “He jumped inbounds”
- Thread starter SBP
- Start date
Exactly - but as soon as a pass was made to someone else Holden could’ve rejoined play. The trouble was there was only 2.7 seconds on the game clock when he stepped out so there really wasn’t time for more than one pass to get a shot off. That’s what is so bad about this missed call.
I am curious if the ref position is that they didn’t see the player step out at all. It’s not as simple as - if they did they would’ve blown the whistle at that point because there’s no whistle to blow at 2.7 seconds. The time for the whistle to blow was at 1.1 second when Holden first received the pass. But I can understand it taking a second for the ref to process and recall that the shooter was an ineligible receiver. That’s why the no review is baffling in this situation. There wasn’t really time for the whistle to blow as it should’ve real time until after the shot.
Correct. He cannot be the first to get the ball once he re establishes position.
Correct!
Leaving the Court Has Consequences - Referee.com
What happens if a player leaves the court during live play depends on several factors.
See below for refs thought process regarding these two rules:
1. A player who steps out of bounds by the player’s own volition and then becomes the first player to touch the ball after returning to the playing court has committed a violation.
Ref: Oh sh:t, the guy who is catching the ball for the game winning shot, which I can't miss, if I'm at all even watching the game, just jumped in from out of bounds. He can't be the first to touch. Oh well, I'll swallow my whistle, he probably won't make it anyway.
2. . A player whose momentum causes that player to go out of bounds may be the first to touch the ball inbounds if that player reestablishes one foot inbounds prior to touching the ball.
Ref: Oh f@ck, I guess I should have blown my whistle, then the play could have been reviewed in all fairness. Looking at final shot to check that it got off, not only is it obvious that the player was not forced out of bounds, but he failed to reestablish himself. Technically this is not reviewable, and I'm not about to discuss this to break any bad news to this home crowd. It's Miller Time.
anyhow, I forgot to call a cylinder violation on the Rutgers player.
1. A player who steps out of bounds by the player’s own volition and then becomes the first player to touch the ball after returning to the playing court has committed a violation.
Ref: Oh sh:t, the guy who is catching the ball for the game winning shot, which I can't miss, if I'm at all even watching the game, just jumped in from out of bounds. He can't be the first to touch. Oh well, I'll swallow my whistle, he probably won't make it anyway.
2. . A player whose momentum causes that player to go out of bounds may be the first to touch the ball inbounds if that player reestablishes one foot inbounds prior to touching the ball.
Ref: Oh f@ck, I guess I should have blown my whistle, then the play could have been reviewed in all fairness. Looking at final shot to check that it got off, not only is it obvious that the player was not forced out of bounds, but he failed to reestablish himself. Technically this is not reviewable, and I'm not about to discuss this to break any bad news to this home crowd. It's Miller Time.
anyhow, I forgot to call a cylinder violation on the Rutgers player.
This terrible miss by the officials that just cost us the game is a perfect example of why in the last 2 minutes of a game either coach should be able to request a review and even if they don't, the officials should be forced to review it on their own.
I've been reading a lot of those that don't understand the rule. If a player is out of bound on his own accord, he CANNOT be the first to touch the ball. Even if that were so, when Holden received the ball, one of his feet was still out of bounds. The only "legal" justification of going out of bounds and receiving the ball in bounds is if the player is pushed out of bound by the defender. Holden went out on his own and came back in. To touch the ball first is a violation and the play should have been overruled and Rutgers should have won the game. Period.
I've been reading a lot of those that don't understand the rule. If a player is out of bound on his own accord, he CANNOT be the first to touch the ball. Even if that were so, when Holden received the ball, one of his feet was still out of bounds. The only "legal" justification of going out of bounds and receiving the ball in bounds is if the player is pushed out of bound by the defender. Holden went out on his own and came back in. To touch the ball first is a violation and the play should have been overruled and Rutgers should have won the game. Period.
And Fran Fraschilla retweeted Tom Crean's breakdown from ESPN, so it's pretty much consensus we got screwed.
