So, here is where the officials screwed up in my opinion

4,080 Views | 43 Replies | Last: 2 days ago by BusterAg
BusterAg
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:59a, 1/7/26
AG
After the missed free-throw, the review made it really clear that the ball actually did hit the rim.

The officials called the no-violation correctly on review, and then said that an "inadvertent whistle" stopped the play after the missed FT but before the end of the game.

That should not have happened. Auburn clearly made an attempt at a shot before the whistle. The game should have been over.

But, the officials didn't want to be the reason why the game was called for A&M as opposed to Auburn. So they gave Auburn a very improbable chance to win the game by giving them .6 seconds.

That blew up in their face, royally.

Honestly, that was an amazing shot, an amazing play, and Auburn made a very, very low-probability play in spectacular fashion. Maybe. It was oh, oh, oh so close. I don't think that the officials get into trouble if they allow that shot had they not screwed up the FT call.

So, now they have to "hand" the win to A&M anyways by ruling for them on the close call, even after the call on the floor was that the shot was good.

The ref's were cowards for ever giving Auburn that improbable chance. They were cowards again for waiving it off.

Don't ask Auburn to spin straw into gold, and then claim that it wasn't good enough gold when Auburn accomplishes it.

Regardless, the outcome was the correct outcome. But, there would have been less controversy had the officials just called the game after the missed free throw that actually did hit the rim. No one would have been doing analysis on whether or not a whistle was actually blown before the game was over to force an arcane inadvertent whistle. The average BB fan probably doesn't even know what the inadvertent whistle rule is, or what to do when it happens. Had the arrow been on the Ags, I would be that the zebras would have just called the game, and that would have been the end of it.

This is just an example of the Refs "trying to let the kids decide the game", and then crawfishing on that when it blew up in their face.

Just my 2 cents as a high-school BB official.
Reply Quote
27
1 edit
PJYoung
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:00p, 1/7/26
AG
They could've just waited until the full court heave to go over and check the replay to make sure the FT attempt grazed the rim. But no, they blew live play dead to check which makes no sense to me. They just had to wait a half second more and then confirm on replay.
Reply Quote
34
1 edit
bobinator
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BusterAg • 12:04p, 1/7/26
AG
I think you're ascribing decisions to what, once the ref blew the whistle, were just the required mechanics of officiating.

Once they blew that whistle, everything happened the way it had to happen. It's just that whistle that shouldn't have happened.

That was either bad officiating mechanics, or they need to change those mechanics for that situation.

Like PJYoung said, the mechanics in that situation should be to let it play out (unless it's just incredibly obvious that the ball didn't hit the rim) and then review it. If it hit the rim, game over, if it didn't, Auburn gets the ball under the basket with however much time left (apparently a mysteriously increasing amount of time.)
Reply Quote
6
1 edit
BusterAg
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to bobinator • 12:23p, 1/7/26
AG
bobinator said:
I think you're ascribing decisions to what, once the ref blew the whistle, were just the required mechanics of officiating.

Once they blew that whistle, everything happened the way it had to happen. It's just that whistle that shouldn't have happened.

That was either bad officiating mechanics, or they need to change those mechanics for that situation.

Like PJYoung said, the mechanics in that situation should be to let it play out (unless it's just incredibly obvious that the ball didn't hit the rim) and then review it. If it hit the rim, game over, if it didn't, Auburn gets the ball under the basket with however much time left (apparently a mysteriously increasing amount of time.)

In your opinion, did the whistle after the FT stop the play?

In my opinion, it did not.

Do you honestly think that Auburn fans would have been as upset about the inadvertent whistle happening, and arguing that they should have had .6 seconds left of the clock due to the jump ball?

No. They would not have. And that play would not have been the major topic of discussion on ESPN this morning. The coach may have asked for an opportunity to inbound the ball due to the inadvertent whistle, but the best thing to do in this situation is tell the coach that the whistle didn't happen until time expires, and head to the locker room.

IMO, either give Auburn 1.7 seconds to inbound at the free throw line, or call the game. The refs tried to split the baby here with a Herculean trial for Auburn to overcome to appease Auburn fans, and it blew up in their faces.
Reply Quote
2
bobinator
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BusterAg • 12:37p, 1/7/26
AG
You're talking about opinions though. Once that whistle blew, the mechanics are the mechanics. The officials can't just decide to go on vibes because they feel like it. Though it would be great it they would have because maybe these three dudes would get shipped off to the SWAC or something.

The whistle definitely blew while the guy was shooting the ball, so it is what it is at that point.
Reply Quote
1
Complete Idiot
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to bobinator • 12:50p, 1/7/26
bobinator said:
You're talking about opinions though. Once that whistle blew, the mechanics are the mechanics. The officials can't just decide to go on vibes because they feel like it. Though it would be great it they would have because maybe these three dudes would get shipped off to the SWAC or something.

The whistle definitely blew while the guy was shooting the ball, so it is what it is at that point.

The whistle was blown after the ball was released on the 3/4 court heave.

If a ref or crew has the discretion to say the whistle had no impact on game play and therefore we can ignore it and game is over, then they should have done that. I didn't think they have that discretion, I thought once the whistle blew (which it shouldn't have been, but hard reaction in real time) the clock had to stop. But again, the whistle had no impact on his decision to shoot and was not blown prior to release of the ball and therefore did not impact the shot and the clock would have been at zero when it landed out of bounds. Game should have been over.
Reply Quote
2
bobinator
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Complete Idiot • 12:57p, 1/7/26
AG
Whether it blew before the shot or not it definitely blew before the clock ran out.

It's also important to remember that they're on the line with the replay center, it's not just a local decision. Hard to be like "nah we're gonna call it" with your boss on the line.
Reply Quote
1
txag72
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:59p, 1/7/26
AG
So, exactly what is the rule for reviewing situations? Is it "the official can stop live play to review" or is it "live play must come to a natural stop before a play can be reviewed"? Inasmuch as they review 3 point plays WAY after the actual shot is taken without stoppage of play, it can't be both ways can it? They can stop play at their discretion? Or they can also review after play has stopped? If it's either way, that needs to change.
Reply Quote
AggByMarriage
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:59p, 1/7/26
If the teams had a few more trips down the court, then the refs would have rolled back the game clock to a 01:45.

Seemed every play, time was being added to the clock.
Reply Quote
bobinator
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to txag72 • 1:04p, 1/7/26
AG
It is both depending on what the call and situation is.
Reply Quote
Complete Idiot
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to bobinator • 1:08p, 1/7/26
bobinator said:
Whether it blew before the shot or not it definitely blew before the clock ran out.

It's also important to remember that they're on the line with the replay center, it's not just a local decision. Hard to be like "nah we're gonna call it" with your boss on the line.

Yes, that's why I said the clock stopped when the whistle below - that is obviously only possible if the whistle is blown before the clock runs out.

But, it's a HUGE distinction between blowing the whistle before the shooter lets go, which is what I thought you said happened, or if it was after - and even then ONLY IF a ref would have the discretion to basically wave off the whistle - and I don't know if they have that discretion despite the former official above implying they do.

If blown before he releases (TWSS), clearly the right argument is the whistle impacted play and therefore clock has to stop and team given the ball. If blown after he releases, there can't be an argument it impacted play and - IF they have the discretion - I think the rational argument is to wave off the whistle and let the game end once confirmed FT hit the rim and ball went out of bounds after clock hit 0:00.

For a football comparison I'd say it would be like blowing the whistle while a fumble is bouncing around the field, before it's recovered, so the refs could review if it was a fumble or not. You don't blow the whistle there, you let it play out then go to review the play to determine entire situation - fumble, recovery, clock, etc. Don't blow the whistle with ball flying through air under a second left, let the ball land then go to review. Easier said than done, just commentary from a TV viewer.
Reply Quote
1
Heineken-Ashi
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to bobinator • 1:09p, 1/7/26
bobinator said:
It is both depending on what the call and situation is.

If so, that's more idiotic than arguing the refs handled things right.

The ball was nearly out of bounds by the time the whistle blew. Even if inadvertent, how the hell do you argue it was Auburn's ball?

There's no way to spin this unless you are just trying to argue.
Reply Quote
LB12Diamond
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:13p, 1/7/26
AG
What made them blow the whistle even worse is they did it because the Auburn coach yelled that to them and then they blew the whistle. You just can't do that. They didn't blow the whistle cause one of them thought that's what happened. They reacted to a coach yelling at them, That's it.
Gig ‘Em Baby!
Reply Quote
10
bobinator
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Complete Idiot • 1:19p, 1/7/26
AG
I mean yeah, that's what I said. The mechanics in that situation should obviously be to let the entire play play out, and then go back and review its various parts. The refs either screwed up the mechanics or the mechanics of that situation need to change.

All I'm saying is once they did blow the whistle I don't think they had any choice on the rest of it. I don't think they made a conscious decision to give Auburn the ball with .6 second left because they thought it was "giving Auburn a very improbable chance" that's just what the clock was when the whistle happened.

We actually had kind of similar play with Georgia a few years ago if memory serves which makes me think they got the mechanics wrong. Slightly different situation, but in that situation the clock stopped in the middle of a possession for some reason, but the officials let the entire sequence play out, then went back and timed it and it was determined that was more time than what was on the clock, and called the game in our favor.

(Edit: had some of the details wrong on the Georgia game)
Reply Quote
1
3 edits
bobinator
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:23p, 1/7/26
AG
The TL/DR of what I'm saying isn't that the officials didn't screw up, they obviously did, I'm saying the screw up was the whistle while the ball was still in play. Once that happened I don't think they had any real options to fix it.

OP said the bad decision was them deciding to give Auburn the ball with time on the clock rather than just calling the game on the spot, but I don't think they have the ability to do that within the framework of the rules.
Reply Quote
1
1 edit
aginresearch
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Heineken-Ashi • 1:38p, 1/7/26
AG
My wife said the same thing to me. That since the shot was already in flight prior to the whistle the ball at worst should have belonged to A&M. The outcome of the replay review of the FT shot should of have either given Auburn the ball under the A&M basket and 2.4 seconds or it should have been game over. Since they determined the ball did hit the rim on the FT there should have never been a reset to 0.6 seconds and the ball at 2/3 court.

I find it hard to believe an already in flight ball is suddenly frozen in time by the whistle when that's not the way it works on any other shot. Especially for what is being termed an inadvertent whistle. The sequence of events that led to the initial shot were confirmed as legal by the replay review. Clock had expired prior to an in flight ball landing out of bounds.
Reply Quote
5
bobinator
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:27p, 1/7/26
AG
BTW I've watched this sequence probably 12 times now and it's close on whether the ball had left the shooters hand when the ref blew the whistle. (For science I tried closing my eyes and pausing the video when I first heard a whistle, lol) I also don't know if they can use the audio on reviews so it may not matter if he actually blew it during the shot or just thought he did.

But at the end of the day that whole game was poorly officiated but knew it would be when it started. That ref that kinda looks like our former assistant Dustin Clark (we've been calling him Dustin Clark ref for years) is absolutely terrible and is probably just behind Pat Adams on how often he gets himself into stupid late game situations.

The jump ball call at 2.5 seconds that cost us the arrow was egregiously bad. Agee has the ball on the ground and everyone on our team is calling timeout. An Auburn player (who pushed and jumped on top of Lane btw to get into the play, but whatever) has a hand on the ball but in no way does he have possession and yet that somehow becomes a tie up and we lose the arrow.
Reply Quote
6
1 edit
BQ_90
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to bobinator • 2:31p, 1/7/26
AG
its like anyone on the floor like that with the ball its automatically a jump ball,

but i get equally mad when a clean block shot happens and the shoot never gets the ball off, that's a travel not a jump ball
Reply Quote
txag72
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:33p, 1/7/26
AG
Refs have entirely too much discretion, and confusing situations. Rule needs to be changed even if it means getting rid of the review altogether. Whether or not and when a ref makes a replay situation just complicates the game unnecessarily. Not made for basketball where play is continuous unlike football or baseball.
Reply Quote
PJYoung
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to txag72 • 2:39p, 1/7/26
AG
txag72 said:
Refs have entirely too much discretion, and confusing situations. Rule needs to be changed even if it means getting rid of the review altogether. Whether or not and when a ref makes a replay situation just complicates the game unnecessarily. Not made for basketball where play is continuous unlike football or baseball.

Replay is going nowhere and I wouldn't be opposed to a Hawkeye like system eventually.
Reply Quote
bobinator
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to txag72 • 2:40p, 1/7/26
AG
This also goes back to one of my favorite offseason topics which is they need to fundamentally change how fouls work at the end of basketball games. It's absolutely stupid that we've gotten to a point where in certain situations both teams are trying to foul each other.
Reply Quote
5
Goat Man
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to bobinator • 3:27p, 1/7/26
AG
bobinator said:
This also goes back to one of my favorite offseason topics which is they need to fundamentally change how fouls work at the end of basketball games. It's absolutely stupid that we've gotten to a point where in certain situations both teams are trying to foul each other.
I agree. How about fouls committed inside of 45 seconds result in three free throw attempts?
Reply Quote
LB12Diamond
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to bobinator • 4:16p, 1/7/26
AG
Yes

The jump ball call was horrible. We had the ball and called time out prior to Auburn player tying up the ball.
Gig ‘Em Baby!
Reply Quote
1
BQ_90
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
4:19p, 1/7/26
AG
i still think an intentional foul the team should have option of FTs or option to in bound the ball

of course, then the fouls will get more violent since they won't call a flagrant foul.

Pop got bloody nose, but it didn't rate as "flagrant"
Reply Quote
1
bobinator
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BQ_90 • 4:28p, 1/7/26
AG
My only problem with the free throw or inbound idea is that it doesn't discourage fouling enough because not enough time runs off the clock on the inbounds so they'll just keep fouling.

I think there's a lot of ideas that run the gamut from minor (a minimum amount of time has to run off the clock, three free throws under a minute...) to more extreme (fouled team can choose an uncontested inbound in the backcourt) but something needs to be done.
Reply Quote
BusterAg
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
5:36p, 1/7/26
AG
1) There is no situation in basketball where a ball becomes dead on a try prior to the ball completing it's flight. Once a try is in flight, nothing can stop the clock until the ball has completed its flight. If there is a foul while the ball is in the air, the foul will be dealt with after the ball has landed, but the clock does not stop until the try is over. If a player launches a ball toward the goal with 4 minutes left into the game, and the ball gets sucked into a gravity vacuum and stays in the air for seven hours, the clock is not stopped until the ball lands seven hours later, even if the shooter goes on a rampage and starts punching people. If the ball was in the air when time expired, it doesn't matter if the whistle was blown prior to the clock expiring, since there was no foul after the try attempt, the game is over. The heave was an obvious try.

2) The key principle here, and this is important, is to make sure that the inadvertent whistle does not give one side or the other an advantage from the official's mistake. When getting down to the nitty and gritty of the rules in subjective situations, this principle is the most important. After that heave, there was zero chance that Auburn was going to win. Even if the ball hit the floor with 0.6 seconds remaining, no one on the Auburn team was in a position to execute a tip-in of that heave had the whistle not blown. If there was an Auburn player making a legitimate play on the ball that stopped moving towards the ball due to the whistle, that would be different. There was not.

3) A third principle here is that an inadvertent whistle is a whistle that is accidently blown that interrupts play. There is a case example where an official blows a really weak whistle, the official motions with his hands to keep playing, the kids just kept playing, and, after the play, the coach calls a timeout and wants a do-over even though the kids didn't respond to the whistle. In that case, the inadvertent whistle is ignored.

Based on the totality of the circumstances here, the decision to give Auburn the ball at the supposed point of interruption (where the try was attempted) is mind-boggling to me.

The only thing I can think of here is that maybe there was an inadvertent whistle that occurred just prior to the try. But, even in that situation, I would say that the inadvertent whistle did not interrupt play.


The ref's had every good excuse to call the game and walk off the court once they realized that the FT was not a violation. They chose not to. They chose poorly.
Reply Quote
4
chap
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to PJYoung • 5:42p, 1/7/26
AG
PJYoung said:
txag72 said:
Refs have entirely too much discretion, and confusing situations. Rule needs to be changed even if it means getting rid of the review altogether. Whether or not and when a ref makes a replay situation just complicates the game unnecessarily. Not made for basketball where play is continuous unlike football or baseball.

Replay is going nowhere and I wouldn't be opposed to a Hawkeye like system eventually.


I was curious about this because Monaco specifically mentioned they were using Hawkeye last night.
Reply Quote
1
BusterAg
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to bobinator • 5:47p, 1/7/26
AG
bobinator said:
BTW I've watched this sequence probably 12 times now and it's close on whether the ball had left the shooters hand when the ref blew the whistle. (For science I tried closing my eyes and pausing the video when I first heard a whistle, lol) I also don't know if they can use the audio on reviews so it may not matter if he actually blew it during the shot or just thought he did.

But at the end of the day that whole game was poorly officiated but knew it would be when it started. That ref that kinda looks like our former assistant Dustin Clark (we've been calling him Dustin Clark ref for years) is absolutely terrible and is probably just behind Pat Adams on how often he gets himself into stupid late game situations.

The jump ball call at 2.5 seconds that cost us the arrow was egregiously bad. Agee has the ball on the ground and everyone on our team is calling timeout. An Auburn player (who pushed and jumped on top of Lane btw to get into the play, but whatever) has a hand on the ball but in no way does he have possession and yet that somehow becomes a tie up and we lose the arrow.

Did the officials state that the AP arrow impacted who was going to get the ball? Or was that just the announcers, who don't always know all of the rules?

If Auburn has possession of the ball when the whistle was blown, the arrow is absolutely meaningless. Auburn gets the ball at the point of interruption.

The only way that the AP comes into play is if no one has possession of the ball when the whistle is blown. One example of when no team has possession of the ball is during a try.

So, either Auburn should have gotten the ball at the point of interruption, or the game should have continued until the try was over.

The only way the arrow is important is if the try had occurred prior to the inadvertent whistle, and the try had completed prior to time expiring.
Reply Quote
BusterAg
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Complete Idiot • 5:58p, 1/7/26
AG
Complete Idiot said:
bobinator said:
Whether it blew before the shot or not it definitely blew before the clock ran out.

It's also important to remember that they're on the line with the replay center, it's not just a local decision. Hard to be like "nah we're gonna call it" with your boss on the line.

Yes, that's why I said the clock stopped when the whistle below - that is obviously only possible if the whistle is blown before the clock runs out.

But, it's a HUGE distinction between blowing the whistle before the shooter lets go, which is what I thought you said happened, or if it was after - and even then ONLY IF a ref would have the discretion to basically wave off the whistle - and I don't know if they have that discretion despite the former official above implying they do.

If blown before he releases (TWSS), clearly the right argument is the whistle impacted play and therefore clock has to stop and team given the ball. If blown after he releases, there can't be an argument it impacted play and - IF they have the discretion - I think the rational argument is to wave off the whistle and let the game end once confirmed FT hit the rim and ball went out of bounds after clock hit 0:00.

For a football comparison I'd say it would be like blowing the whistle while a fumble is bouncing around the field, before it's recovered, so the refs could review if it was a fumble or not. You don't blow the whistle there, you let it play out then go to review the play to determine entire situation - fumble, recovery, clock, etc. Don't blow the whistle with ball flying through air under a second left, let the ball land then go to review. Easier said than done, just commentary from a TV viewer.

In football, the inadvertent whistle is different.

There are 22 players on the field. The assumption is that any inadvertent whistle impacts the play. Every inadvertent whistle assumes that the play is dead.

But, even in football, if the whistle has no ability to impact the result of the play, the whistle is ignored. The example is if, after a fumble, a call is played dead like it is an incomplete pass, and the ball bounces out of bounds before anyone can make a play on it, if there are zero players in the area that can make an attempt on the ball, then the result of the play can still be a fumble, even if a whistle was blown.
Reply Quote
bobinator
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BusterAg • 6:00p, 1/7/26
AG
The arrow didn't matter on the final possession. I was talking about an unrelated terrible call.
Reply Quote
BusterAg
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aginresearch • 6:05p, 1/7/26
AG
aginresearch said:
My wife said the same thing to me. That since the shot was already in flight prior to the whistle the ball at worst should have belonged to A&M. The outcome of the replay review of the FT shot should of have either given Auburn the ball under the A&M basket and 2.4 seconds or it should have been game over. Since they determined the ball did hit the rim on the FT there should have never been a reset to 0.6 seconds and the ball at 2/3 court.

I find it hard to believe an already in flight ball is suddenly frozen in time by the whistle when that's not the way it works on any other shot. Especially for what is being termed an inadvertent whistle. The sequence of events that led to the initial shot were confirmed as legal by the replay review. Clock had expired prior to an in flight ball landing out of bounds.

1) I don't know who you are or who you married, but if you are having these types of discussions with your wife, you married well. Congrats.

2) After a free throw violation, if it is the last free throw attempt, the opposing team gets a throw in from either sideline at the point of the free throw line extended. This makes sense. If there was .6 seconds on the clock instead of 1.7 seconds on the clock, there is a huge difference between throwing the ball in at the point of the violation (the free throw line) and throwing the ball in under your own basket.

3) The only thing I can think of here is that the officials determined that the whistle happened before the try, while Auburn still had possession, with 0.6 seconds left. In that case, Auburn gets the ball with a sideline throw-in where the interruption happened. In this situation, the arrow is meaningless.

4) The reason why it is hard to believe that an inadvertent whistle stops the clock during a try before the end of a try is because it absolutely does not. What happens during the flight of the try matters, in that fouls can occur after time expires but before the end of the game (when the try is over), but there is no situation other than someone shooting the ball out of the air with a shotgun where the clock stops during a try.
Reply Quote
BusterAg
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to bobinator • 6:08p, 1/7/26
AG
bobinator said:
The arrow didn't matter on the final possession. I was talking about an unrelated terrible call.

Thanks.

Important.

I still think the officials chose poorly. If you can't tell if the whistle occurred prior to or after the try even in slow-mo replay then it is easy to say that the whistle didn't interrupt play.
Reply Quote
bobinator
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BusterAg • 6:09p, 1/7/26
AG
Yeah the officials obviously decided that the whistle happened before the shot attempt. Nothing else makes any sense.

That's why I said once they blew the whistle while the ball was in play their options were limited.
Reply Quote
1
BusterAg
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to bobinator • 8:13a, 1/8/26
AG
bobinator said:
Yeah the officials obviously decided that the whistle happened before the shot attempt. Nothing else makes any sense.

That's why I said once they blew the whistle while the ball was in play their options were limited.

There is no way that a whistle blown with 0.6 seconds left during that try interrupted play.

There is also no way that the officials face as much scrutiny this week if they had called the game at that point.

The officials options were not limited. Super easy to call the game there. If they had, this would have been a complete non-story.
Reply Quote
1
TjgtAg08
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BusterAg • 9:01a, 1/8/26
AG
BusterAg said:
bobinator said:
Yeah the officials obviously decided that the whistle happened before the shot attempt. Nothing else makes any sense.

That's why I said once they blew the whistle while the ball was in play their options were limited.

There is no way that a whistle blown with 0.6 seconds left during that try interrupted play.

There is also no way that the officials face as much scrutiny this week if they had called the game at that point.

The officials options were not limited. Super easy to call the game there. If they had, this would have been a complete non-story.


You are wrong here as it pertains to this specific situation. In any sport, if there is an inadvertent whistle to stop play while the ball is being possessed, the is no option for the officials to decide to "go on with the result of the play." The only option is to revert back to the point in time on the clock where the whistle was blown and proceed with the game (inbound in basketball, new snap in football).

If the ball is not possessed at the time of the whistle (during a shot in basketball, during a kick/fumble/pass in football), then the officials will let the remainder of the play stand if there is a clear an obvious result.

The refs in that game clearly ruled that the whistle occurred while the Auburn player still possessed the ball, thus it reverts back to Auburn ball, side inbounds.

We can argue whether the whistle should have been blown (it absolutely should not have) or if that was the correct call or not once it was blown (whether the shot happened before or after the whistle), but once the rule was made, there is ZERO option to "let the play continue."
Reply Quote
1 edit
Page 1 of 2 ▼
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.