ADVERTISEMENT

Rutgers Must Contest

A game will literally never have the result altered because of something like this. Sometimes you lose on some bullshit.
Why is that? if they reviewed it on the spot, it would have been overturned. So you do it now with league officials and call make it right. 2 horrible missed calls on that play that should be reversed
 
Why is that? Like I if they reviewed it on the spot, it would have been overturned. So you do it now with league officials and call make it right. 2 horrible missed calls on that play that should be reversed
I mean logically yes you are correct. And logically Armando Galarraga should have a perfect game in the MLB record books, but he doesn't. That's sports, that's life.
 
It cannot be overturned now because there would be 1 second on the clock and our inbound, who’s to say OSU doesn’t intercept the pass and make another 3. Can’t call the players back to the court. It’s in the books as a loss and a total screw job
 
Reading general basketball rules, a player can go out of bounds and then reestablish themselves in bounds and touch the ball
legally
If that is our beef I think we are not right here
 
Shooter stepped out of bounds. He can't be first to touch ball. It's a bad call
I think a player can step out of bounds, go back in bounds and receive a pass
This is the rule that I read
 
Reading general basketball rules, a player can go out of bounds and then reestablish themselves in bounds and touch the ball
legally
If that is our beef I think we are not right here
That's the rule. He never reestablished position he only had one foot down when he caught the pass

Indisputable video evidence. All experts are agreeing we got screwed

 
He didn’t re-establish prior to catching the pass
I think THAT may be really close. To me the ball doesn't hit his hands until just after his feet land back inbounds and thus would be clean but I haven't seen all the angles that may clarify that.

Regardless of the OOB rule confusion, it's the PG stepping on the sideline before mid court that should have been the TO call that blows the play dead and waives off the basket anyway.

ETA: now have seen another angle on the shooter and the sequence of receiving the pass and his hands do touch the ball before his feet land. So it's correct that he did NOT re-establish first.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: GORU2014
Here's the deal as I see it.

Is the step out of bounds during the dribble up court reviewable?
Is the failure to establish himself inbounds on the pass receiver reviewable?

If either of these are true AND the Refs were not available to review the play then the game should be protested, the protest should be won, the next time the two teams play Rutgers ball up 2 at the location of the turnover.

Inbound, foul, hit a free throw RU wins.

UNLESS there is explicit rules officially disallowing the protest for some reason.
 
I think THAT may be really close. To me the ball doesn't hit his hands until just after his feet land back inbounds and thus would be clean but I haven't seen all the angles that may clarify that.

Regardless of the OOB rule confusion, it's the PG stepping on the sideline before mid court that should have been the TO call that blows the play dead and waives off the basket anyway.
The refs choked, leaned way too hard into the “let them play” mantra. I thought they could have called the foul on Caleb (but was glad they didn’t at the time), should have called OOB on the dribble, and should have called the OOB on the pass. Calling none of them? That’s just crazy
 
It cannot be overturned now because there would be 1 second on the clock and our inbound, who’s to say OSU doesn’t intercept the pass and make another 3. Can’t call the players back to the court. It’s in the books as a loss and a total screw job

Replay the game from the point of the turnover next time they meet.
 
The refs choked, leaned way too hard into the “let them play” mantra. I thought they could have called the foul on Caleb (but was glad they didn’t at the time), should have called OOB on the dribble, and should have called the OOB on the pass. Calling none of them? That’s just crazy
I was honestly expecting a foul on Caleb. He was complete DPI on the ball handler
 
All this about out of bounds and never mind the guy also traveled, took a step, then 2 feet on a jump stop, then jumped again. So traveled twice also
 
Seeing rhe clear evidence we were SCREWED makes me feel better about the outcome than if they deserved to beat us. I don't expect the official result to be overturned no matter what we do (although we NEED TO COMPLAIN OFFICIALLY TO THE LEAGUE). But the entire basketball world KNOWS that Ohio State did not deserve the shot that beat us tonight. This should be considered as good as a road win by the committee at tournament time, as long as Rutgers doesn't let it be brushed aside in the near term and again in March.
 
The refs choked, leaned way too hard into the “let them play” mantra. I thought they could have called the foul on Caleb (but was glad they didn’t at the time), should have called OOB on the dribble, and should have called the OOB on the pass. Calling none of them? That’s just crazy
I've appended my earlier post. After further review, it's now clear that the shooter did not re-establish before touching the ball.
 
We are not allowed to beat Ohio State or Michigan! What don't you guys understand?
 
I've appended my earlier post. After further review, it's now clear that the shooter did not re-establish before touching the ball.
You should have just run off the court and refused to consider appending your post
 
  • Haha
Reactions: RUnTeX
It cannot be overturned now because there would be 1 second on the clock and our inbound, who’s to say OSU doesn’t intercept the pass and make another 3. Can’t call the players back to the court. It’s in the books as a loss and a total screw j
I think a player can step out of bounds, go back in bounds and receive a pass
This is the rule that I read
No
 
I've appended my earlier post. After further review, it's now clear that the shooter did not re-establish before touching the ball.
It's irrelevant. He went out of bounds of his own volition and cannot be the first person to touch the ball. The rule has been posted and confirmed

If he was forced out or his momentum carried him out he could reestablish (which he didn't anyway)
 
contesting is meaningless

Pikiell has a job to do and that is focusing on Seton Hall and keeping out distractions. He needs to praise his team for their work in this game but you cannot dwell on it.

There will never be an overturn as if there ever has been
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rokodesh
Why is that? if they reviewed it on the spot, it would have been overturned. So you do it now with league officials and call make it right. 2 horrible missed calls on that play that should be reversed

They didn’t review it. They couldn’t review it,

What they reviewed is if the shot was off on time. Only reviewable part of the play, unfortunately
 
  • Like
Reactions: wheezer
If this was any sort of judgment call, I would understand the thinking that it's impossible to have overturned. By rule, play was dead instant he touched ball. That was with what, about 0.6 left? Rutgers ball up 3. Game over. This should be contested and reversed.
 
How does an out of bounds player reestablish then?
He didn’t go out of bounds with the ball or touch it out of bounds
It was passed to him when he came back in inbounds I believe
 
If this was any sort of judgment call, I would understand the thinking that it's impossible to have overturned. By rule, play was dead instant he touched ball. That was with what, about 0.6 left? Rutgers ball up 3. Game over. This should be contested and reversed.

Stop being silly.

Has any game in the history of basketball gotten a result changed the next day due to an officiating g error?

What needs to happen is the Big Ten issue a statement tomorrow, and the whole CBB world know it was a debatable outcome.
 
Reading general basketball rules, a player can go out of bounds and then reestablish themselves in bounds and touch the ball
legally
If that is our beef I think we are not right here
You are reading the wrong rule. Their guy intentionally went out of bounds, so he cannot be the first guy to receive a pass once coming back inbounds.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT