Monday, March 10, 2008

Berkeley Game Follow Up

First on the Ryan Anderson play, this is from The California Golden Blogs, referring to the video posted in the previous entry:

We here at the California Golden Blogs do the dirty work you don’t have to. We watched this video. Over and over and over again. Hoping to see those damnable Bruins hogtie up Anderson and roll the ball out of bounds as the refs received millions of dollars in cash money from Bill Walton. Hoping to see something. Anything.

Well……………….and this is not what the Cal fans are not going to want to hear, but it actually looks clean. I know I know! The refs. Screwed Cal. No hope. Braun not at fault.

It goes down like this. Player #0, Russell Westbrook, comes towards Anderson from behind. He drapes his left hand over the back of Anderson. However, this is done with the gentlest of care, as if Westbrook and Anderson were in a committed monogamous relationship. Then, Westbrook slaps vertically down upon the ball and it looks like ONLY the ball. Then, Anderson falls to the ground as the ball bounces off his knee.

Now, here is where it gets a bit tricky. Even though its in slo mo and HD, it is tough to make out what happens next exactly. Westbrook clearly bounces the ball once, trying to recover it. It looks like Anderson then punches the ball out of bounds as he falls forward. I cannot tell if Westbrook in any way touches the ball also at this point. Another Bruins player comes over, but it does not appear as if he touches the ball. I have watched that section of the video innumerable times in both the side and front angle, but it is still a bit unclear. If you stuck a gun to my head and asked my opinion, I’d have to say that it looks like Anderson was the last player to touch the ball.

What this means is that the refs might have gotten it totally correct. From the video, it appears that the non-call on the foul was correct. And it looks reasonably certain that it was Bruins ball. I hate to have to say this. But I’m just trying to be objective and reasonable about it.

I still think that Shipp’s shot was apparently illegal and should have been waived off. I also still think Cal would have nonetheless found a creative and exciting way to lose the game. I mean c’mon.

Now, about that shot, here's what an expert thinks (emphasis mine):
According to Hank Nichols, the NCAA's national coordinator of men's officiating, the rule is often referred to as the Wilt Chamberlain rule because its original intent was to prevent a team from lobbing the ball over the backboard to an immensely tall and talented player because the play couldn't be defended. "The intent wasn't to stop a circus jump shot," Nichols said.
So, we have even Berkeley fans admitting that there was no foul, and the ball correctly was given to UCLA, and we have the NCAA coordinator of officiating saying that there's really no good reason that Shipp's shot shouldn't have counted. Seems pretty cut and dried to me.


Anonymous said...

I'm missing something here. You say the rule was put in because of Chamberlin, so therefore it doesn't apply to anyone else? What kind of a rule is that? The rules have to apply to all players, don't you agree? Otherwise you're saying that anyone except Wilt can have the ball go behind the backboard and still be in bounds. How can you have a rule that can only be applied to one player,especially when that player left college 50 yers ago?

Seitz said...

Not to sound too blunt, but yes, you're missing something. Primarily, you're missing the fact that it's not me saying the rule was put in because of Wilt. It was the coordinator of officials for mens basketball. And he specifically said the intent of the rule wasn't to take away the skill of a shot, but rather to eliminate a particular play. It's pretty much an anachronism now. The rule was designed to prevent passes directly over the backboard, not shots that go over the corner of the backboard.