A&M....Rebound!!

benjay · 03-22-2007, 11:52 PM

A&M honestly pissed it away. I had them in the Final Four, so I'm pretty sure I'll never forgive them. They earned a hater for life.

aeroclone08 · 03-22-2007, 11:53 PM

Originally Posted by mwitt

I hate to bring up bad memories, but did Law missing that layup remind anyone else of our point guard missing a pretty important layup late in a tourney game about seven years ago?

unfortunately...

ISUonthemove · 03-23-2007, 04:33 PM

It was off the guys hand and into the scorer's table before you could blink....wtf

but you can't blame it on the ref's

make a damn lay up "mr. clutch" and try getting atleast 1 of 4 rebounds and you win

wonkadog · 03-23-2007, 05:54 PM

My thoughts exactly, did Law ever really make a shot after those couple 3's in that overtime game during the regular season?? I don't really recall that happening...

mjones34 · 03-23-2007, 06:20 PM

An instantaneous touch should be rounded to.1 seconds at most. It just makes sense.

benjay · 03-23-2007, 06:26 PM

Well, it's simple. Once the ball is touched, time starts. Time does not subsequently stop until a whistle is blown or the ball is out of bounds. In this case, the ball was not out of bounds until 1.1 seconds had elapsed.

Even the announcer who said it should have been .2 seconds later conceded that the refs made the right call.

wonkadog · 03-23-2007, 06:26 PM

Let's not rehash all the timing stuff again. If you missed it the ball went straight into the court INBOUNDS and then bounced up in the air, finally hitting someone on the sidelines anywhere from .5-1.5 seconds later. From my own point of view it looked like the clock guy started the clock late on the final play anyway.

ozone · 03-23-2007, 06:36 PM

The clock should have stopped when the trailing referee raised his arm. He did that when the ball first hit the floor. 2/10 would have been the right call. If the officials decided that the ball really bounced inbounds and they made their 2.0 sec call on that, they misused the TV replay.

wonkadog · 03-23-2007, 06:42 PM

I saw you argue this before but it doesn't make a lot of sense. Referees will often make "mistake" motions if they anticipate a foul that doesn't happen and end up raising their arm. Should the game always be stopped when this happens too? Am I mistaken or isn't the clock tied into stopping on their whistle? I'm thinking that the game halts on the ball being dead, not on the officials signifying that it's dead...

hawkeye_t · 03-23-2007, 06:47 PM

The clock never actually started anyway, so the refs had to use a stopwatch in real-time to determine the amount of time that went off. It is amazing how this many people can see the same play and have this many interpretations.

hawkeye_t · 03-23-2007, 06:47 PM

The clock never actually started anyway, so the refs had to use a stopwatch in real-time to determine the amount of time that went off. It is amazing how this many people can see the same play and have this many interpretations.

ozone · 03-23-2007, 07:49 PM

Let me elaborate on what I should have said.

The blowing of the whistle and the raising of the arm is the referee's indication to the clock operator to stop the clock. Conversely, the hand chopping motion is the indication to start the clock.

I was attempting to point out that clock should have run from the time the Memphis player touched the ball to when the official (coming in from the upper left side) gave the indication to stop the clock with the raised arm indication.

Start Clock

Stop Clock

(Hopefully this cut and paste works.)

CloneFan65 · 03-23-2007, 08:01 PM

For the love of Naismith, Aggies, BLOCK OUT!