Butler-Xavier Controversy

[tornado]

http://www.hoopsworld.com/FeedItem.asp?FEED_ITEM_ID=1174214

gotta watch the video...especially at about 14 seconds on the game clock and you'll see the homie Butler clock operator stops the clock which gives Butler extra time to score! Some claim it also stops for another split second at 13.2

--first - when the refs rule the ball into the back court was tipped...the call is a bit premature as a Butler player actually retrieves it and touches it last, so just maybe this call should have gone to Xavier

--then the clock stops for a split second while the ball is in the back court...

BUT-- the Xavier people say if the whole tape is carefully watched, the clock stopped two other times inadvertently during the last minute, not just that one time
and at 36.9 when the ball is inbounded by Butler, the ball is already inbounds at least half a second before the clock starts.

--then as Butler scores with apparently 1.2 seconds left...enough time for Xavier to try to score...
the refs huddle and rule that if the time is deducted for the one stoppage in the back court, then game over and Xavier does NOT get a chance to score...

so the refs end the game there much to the Xavier people's dismay..

BUT--recall if all the clock stoppages were deducted, then even Hayward's shot should be discounted as well!
PLUS....some bloggers have said the refs are wrong about the time of the stoppage with about 14 seconds left...and that it wasn't over a second...it was more like 0.4 to 0.7 seconds....

the Indianapolis press says the calls were correct, but the Cincy press claims robbery!

[Indy_BB]

Of course they weren't "robbed", at least in the context that it is being said.

I believe that Xavier should have just gotten the .4 to 1.2 seconds, even though "technically" the rules said the time had elapsed.

The probability of scoring from full court with no time outs with that amount of time (anything less than .7 can't be caught, just tipped) is basically zero percent.

Maybe Xavier was robbed of making an inbounds pass, but if they are talking about actually winning, that's like saying you were robbed of winning the lottery when someone steals the dollar that you were going to buy the ticket with.

[jasonpeoria911]

Yeah I missed that stoppage at 14 seconds when the refs were discussing it for 15 minutes lol. That whole last 2 mins of play seemed to favor Butler, from the time clock to the refs. Weird happenings.

Jason

[longtimelistener]

After the refs made the decision, I realized they took 15 minutes to sort out how they were going to tell X it didn't get a chance to win.

In my brief training as a soccer ref, the big thing I remember is that you never give the offender the break. Butler's people screwed up the clock, but Butler benefits because of it.

If I were the X coach, I would have been livid too, and questioned how they can be certain Butler's shot would have counted before time expired.

[TheAsianSensation]

My question is when did they notice the clock stoppage? I thought by rule you had to stop play once you spotted it. Butler made their plays at the end of the game based on what the clock said at the given time - so having an incorrect time at the end of the game changed the structure and integrity of the game at the end. Sorta like the butterfly effect - had the clock been right, Butler plays the final 14 seconds a little differently.

[CABUFan]

My question is when did they notice the clock stoppage? I thought by rule you had to stop play once you spotted it. Butler made their plays at the end of the game based on what the clock said at the given time - so having an incorrect time at the end of the game changed the structure and integrity of the game at the end. Sorta like the butterfly effect - had the clock been right, Butler plays the final 14 seconds a little differently.

Maybe, but the last few seconds of the game weren't exact drawn up. If there were 2 seconds less on the clock, I'm not sure Butler gets the winning shot up. Anyway, I was happy to see Butler win.

[wily coyote]

Of course they weren't "robbed", at least in the context that it is being said.

I believe that Xavier should have just gotten the .4 to 1.2 seconds, even though "technically" the rules said the time had elapsed.

The probability of scoring from full court with no time outs with that amount of time (anything less than .7 can't be caught, just tipped) is basically zero percent.

Maybe Xavier was robbed of making an inbounds pass, but if they are talking about actually winning, that's like saying you were robbed of winning the lottery when someone steals the dollar that you were going to buy the ticket with.

I did not see or hear about this fiasco but just to make a small correction. You may catch and shoot with .7 on the clock. It is .3 or under when you can not catch and shoot. It must be a tip. Just wanted to set the record straight.