Miami vs. Akron - WTF is happening?

[TomCollins]

Can someone explain what happened?

[Ken_AA]

[ QUOTE ]
Can someone explain what happened?

[/ QUOTE ]

Ball inbounded.

Clock does not start right away.

Buzzer goes off as game winning shot goes in.

Ref's decide time should be added since the clock didn't start right away (WTF?)

Miami wins anyways.

We find out MicrBOB went to about 100 straight Miami of Ohio basketball games (WTF?)

Ken

[LionelHutz00]

wtf, I changed the channel after the kid hit the 3. awesome ending. wtf wtf wtf were the refs thinking?

[MicroBob]

Really dumb nit-pick - actually it wasn't 'ball inbounded' but rather 'free-throw missed'.


Is the WTF part about you finding out that I went to so many games or about me actually going to so many games?
Not much else to do in small-town Oxford, OH for a kid.

I also attended practically every home football and hockey game as well as many road games.

I used to do play-by-play for the student-radio in college of the different sports. After college I did it professionally for the hockey and womens hoops teams.

[Austiger]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There's always the chance that they did not want to alert them to the fact that time should be taken off in case they would disallow the shot.

[/ QUOTE ]

They can't do this. Even if the clock started late, the play stands. They can correct the clock after the play if theres a problem with it, but they cannot change the results of the play since people were playing according to how the clock was running at that time.

[/ QUOTE ]

Assani! Seth Davis just said he spoke with the supervisor of officials and he said that they COULD have waived off the basket. Did you make this rule up?

[TomCollins]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Can someone explain what happened?

[/ QUOTE ]

Ball inbounded.

Clock does not start right away.

Buzzer goes off as game winning shot goes in.

Ref's decide time should be added since the clock didn't start right away (WTF?)

Miami wins anyways.

We find out MicrBOB went to about 100 straight Miami of Ohio basketball games (WTF?)

Ken

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow. The officials must have went to school in the MAC conference or something.

[HajiShirazu]

I'm sure he probably just assumed that was the way the rule was written, since it would be absolutely insane if they could have waived off that basket. I can't believe something like that was even considered. To me it doesn't seem like such a horrible screwjob anyway. Miami got an advantage from the clock but it's not like they weren't going to get a decent shot off. Certainly they would have been able to do better than a shot that didn't even land on the rim.
Poor Akron. They actually might have given a good game in the first round.

[gusmahler]

[ QUOTE ]
Can someone explain what happened?

[/ QUOTE ]

http://youtube.com/watch?v=sjwHOSR1XG8

Also see http://blog.cleveland.com/sports/200...t_the_end.html

[MicroBob]

This is still really weird.

That blog-article doesn't mention anything about how they put time BACK ON the clock when it should have been taken away.

Giving Akron .6 secs left at the end was ridiculous.

It said the refs timed the play.
There was 6.6 secs left on the clock...but the play only took exactly 6 seconds somehow?
How is that possible?

If the clock started late then that means the play would have taken close to 7.6 seconds. It took MORE time than 6.6...not less.

Did they even keep the watch running up until the ball went through the basket?


As best I can tell...it took about .5-1 seconds before the clock started.
But the shot was released with 1.4 or 1.5 seconds left.

If the shot had been released with 0.1 seconds left then I think Akron has a legitimate case. But as it went down, I just don't think they got hosed very badly here.


Also - Interesting that an official said they could have waved off the basket.

Guess I'll try to look around for more articles on this because I'm still amazed that a play that took MORE time, not less somehow resulted in putting time back on the clock.

[MicroBob]

Just checked the video again and as best I can tell I think he clearly had released the ball with 1.6 left on the clock.

I don't think the clock was more than 1.0 late in starting.