Question

[152219]

Why didn't the officials stop the game right away to check if Davis' foot was on the line? May not have mattered, but it probably would have given OU a chance to make a steal or foul and have a desperation heave at the basket.

 

[campbest]

Why didn't the officials stop the game right away to check if Davis' foot was on the line? May not have mattered, but it probably would have given OU a chance to make a steal or foul and have a desperation heave at the basket.

Can they? Thought it was only on a dead ball.

In the NBA you could.

 

[152219]

Can they? Thought it was only on a dead ball.

In the NBA you could.

I may be confusing it with the NBA, but I could have sworn that the officials can stop the game to look at the replay.

 

[Section31]

Why didn't the officials stop the game right away to check if Davis' foot was on the line? May not have mattered, but it probably would have given OU a chance to make a steal or foul and have a desperation heave at the basket.

I'm not sure they can by rule, but last nights events are a good argument for it.

If that's the rule then it could have SERIOUSLY affected the outcome of that game last night - FOR BOTH TEAMS.

Think about it. If Nebraska, in an attempt to hurry down the floor makes a bad pass and OU gets a steal and layup - GAME OVER BAD FOR NU.

In hindsight, BOTH TEAMS benefit from knowing the situation. NU just got a little more lucky last night.

 

[campbest]

I may be confusing it with the NBA, but I could have sworn that the officials can stop the game to look at the replay.

Maybe.

I just don't have any sympathy from OU, shot was marked as a "2" when released, not just after it was made. No excuse for our coaching staff to not be on the ball.

 

[campbest]

I'm not sure they can by rule, but last nights events are a good argument for it.

If that's the rule then it could have SERIOUSLY affected the outcome of that game last night - FOR BOTH TEAMS.

Think about it. If Nebraska, in an attempt to hurry down the floor makes a bad pass and OU gets a steal and layup - GAME OVER BAD FOR NU.

In hindsight, BOTH TEAMS benefit from knowing the situation. NU just got a little more lucky last night.

But it was called correctly...why punish NU and allow OU to set up their defense?

 

[Section31]

Maybe.

I just don't have any sympathy from OU, shot was marked as a "2" when released, not just after it was made. No excuse for our coaching staff to not be on the ball.

While I agree...it's pretty obvious only about 2 people in the ENTIRE gym thought it was a 2. Doc didn't know.

If the rule is such that they can review it, I'd say review it IMMEDIATELY so BOTH teams know the scoop.

 

[Big Old Booger]

While I agree...it's pretty obvious only about 2 people in the ENTIRE gym thought it was a 2. Doc didn't know.

If the rule is such that they can review it, I'd say review it IMMEDIATELY so BOTH teams know the scoop.

I'd bet one of the asst coaches was watching and noticed his foot was on the line. Somebody has to watch for that, so the blame falls on the coaches, especially when it's right in front of the OU bench.

Had it occurred on the NW side (instead of the SE), then I'd agree the coaches shouldn't be blamed because they have a bad angle, but this was right in front of them.

 

[thebigabd]

But it was called correctly...why punish NU and allow OU to set up their defense?

This is the big issue here.

 

[campbest]

While I agree...it's pretty obvious only about 2 people in the ENTIRE gym thought it was a 2. Doc didn't know.

...and Pledger was one of them. Don't totally disagree with where you're going, because if it had ended up in someone gettting screwed there would be an outcry.

However, I'll coutner with what I have maintained from the beginning...why is no one paying attention to the official marking the shot? It should have been known before the ball went in. That is on the coaching staffs, especially OU since it is right there. Sadler is looking right at the official to see the shot, no reason he can't see the call on the release.

Couldn't care less if the fans knew what was going on.

P.S. why were some of the OU fans booing after they went to the replay and confirmed the call?

 

[AdaSooner]

Valid question. I feel sure the officials would have done that if there had been more time left on the clock. Reaction time is part of the decision-making process when an official makes a call. In this instance, the official who signaled that Cade's shot was a two was certain of the call he made, so he had no reason to stop the clock to be sure. The officials review after the fact showed he was right, and to be honest it wasn't really that close. Cade's foot was cleary on the line.

The truly sad part here is that OU did not have a timeout left to stop the clock. As I recall, Capel used two almost back to back with only a short time remaining in the game. A quick time out before Nebraska inbounded the ball would have triggered an official review, and put OU on notice that the only chance they had was to foul and put Nebraska on the line again.

But, let's be honest here. The game should never have come down to a shot at the buzzer. OU squandered numerous opportunities to win that game, long before the clock ran down.

 

[campbest]

The truly sad part here is that OU did not have a timeout left to stop the clock. As I recall, Capel used two almost back to back with only a short time remaining in the game. A quick time out before Nebraska inbounded the ball would have triggered an official review, and put OU on notice that the only chance they had was to foul and put Nebraska on the line again.

Agree...poor management.

But, let's be honest here. The game should never have come down to a shot at the buzzer. OU squandered numerous opportunities to win that game, long before the clock ran down.

+1.

 

[AdaSooner]

Can they? Thought it was only on a dead ball.

In the NBA you could.

I'm fairly certain you're right, campbest. Official reviews are only made in dead ball situations. I never considered that in my first response. In most cases, a timeout would have been called. Unfortunately, OU didn't have any left. Thus, the official review took place after the clock ran down to end the game.

 

[OUhoops11]

Agree...poor management.

It wasn't poor management. Those were crucial moments in the game. He took the first timeout because our offense was 5-10 seconds into the possession and looked out of sync. He took the second timeout to set up a tricky inbounds play considering where the ball was located. Every coach takes those two timeouts, the game was won or lost on that possession

 

[campbest]

It wasn't poor management. Those were crucial moments in the game. He took the first timeout because our offense was 5-10 seconds into the possession and looked out of sync. He took the second timeout to set up a tricky inbounds play considering where the ball was located. Every coach takes those two timeouts, the game was won or lost on that possession

We should probably take a TO every other possession.

Joking, but I agree with you...would have never had a chance to tie if he doesn't take those TOs.

 

[AdaSooner]

It wasn't poor management. Those were crucial moments in the game. He took the first timeout because our offense was 5-10 seconds into the possession and looked out of sync. He took the second timeout to set up a tricky inbounds play considering where the ball was located. Every coach takes those two timeouts, the game was won or lost on that possession

I don't have a problem with the timeouts Capel took. They were necessary in those situations. My remarks were directed primarily at the team's poor execution on both sides of the ball that put us in that position in the first place. Namely, mental errors, ill-advised decisions and a half dozen more I could name. Mainly they were mistakes in basic fundamentals you might expect to see in the first six games of the season, not in the last six.

To paraphrase a thread I started last night, OU gift wrapped that game and handed it to Nebraska with a bright crimson and cream ribbon tied to the top.

 

[OUhoops11]

I don't have a problem with the timeouts Capel took. They were necessary in those situations. My remarks were directed primarily at the team's poor execution on both sides of the ball that put us in that position in the first place. Namely, mental errors, ill-advised decisions and a half dozen more I could name. Mainly they were mistakes in basic fundamentals you might expect to see in the first six games of the season, not in the last six.

To paraphrase a thread I started last night, OU gift wrapped that game and handed it to Nebraska with a bright crimson and cream ribbon tied to the top.

Players gotta make plays, and ours didn't.

 

[aaron7]

While I understand the argument that the official marked it a two immediately, let's not act like they never make mistakes. It would have been a far bigger travesty if Pledger, the guy some think knew it was a two, would've fouled, officials review and notice they screwed up the call, and Nebbish makes a free throw or two to win the game. Tough situation for all involved. If the rule is a dead ball triggers the review, this situation would at least warrant a discussion amongst those that make the rules.