How in the hades does that call not get reviewed?

[docabel]

Seriously

[Mustangs35SMU]

It's not allowed to be reviewed.

[Rebel10]

UCLA got the rebound anyway

[HarvCrimYaleBlue]

UCLA got the rebound anyway

And...that's presumably the difference between a tie and the lead.

[ojaipony]

How did Nic miss those 2 good looks? I'm scratching my head almost as much on that one as the BS call.

And what was Cannen doing? That was REALLY the play that [deleted] it up for us IMHO.

[PonySnob]

If Yanick had shot 50% from the free throw line today


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[PoconoPony]

UCLA got the rebound anyway

Put back is only 2 points and a tie game leaving SMU with a TO and plenty of clock. Goal tending was a 3 point play.

[Mustangs35SMU]

We had four timeouts anyway....

We weren't calling one regardless.

[Bruin Steve]

Calls went both ways...Refs were not all that bad...
That last call though, was correct...It likely would not have gone in, but you can't touch the ball on the downward slope as long as it's above the rim...Even if the ball was to only graze the rim, crazy bounces DO happen...and that IS the rule...

OTOH, had the whistle not blown, Looney had the rebound, right at the rim...and your guy, having attempted to get it, had come down out of position, back to Looney--in no position to defend...or even to foul and deny the shot...So, wither it's a tie game at that point or it likely would have been a three point opportunity for Looney...which likely would mean we'd be in the same place--but with another 3 or 4 seconds off the clock...

And, also, as someone stated, the call isn't renewable--fouls, goaltending calls, etc; aren't...Only things reviewable in that circumstance are out of bounds and shot clock or game clock violations...If other referee calls were reviewable, games would take four hours...Everyone has a different angle and a different idea on just about every time a ref blows a whistle...

All that said, good game, Mustangs...It worked out to be just as close and competitive a game as I expected it to be...
I'm glad my Bruins won...and I know you guys are disappointed...Good luck in coming years...

[Oliver]

Calls went both ways...Refs were not all that bad...
That last call though, was correct...It likely would not have gone in, but you can't touch the ball on the downward slope as long as it's above the rim...Even if the ball was to only graze the rim, crazy bounces DO happen...and that IS the rule...

OTOH, had the whistle not blown, Looney had the rebound, right at the rim...and your guy, having attempted to get it, had come down out of position, back to Looney--in no position to defend...or even to foul and deny the shot...So, wither it's a tie game at that point or it likely would have been a three point opportunity for Looney...which likely would mean we'd be in the same place--but with another 3 or 4 seconds off the clock...

And, also, as someone stated, the call isn't renewable--fouls, goaltending calls, etc; aren't...Only things reviewable in that circumstance are out of bounds and shot clock or game clock violations...If other referee calls were reviewable, games would take four hours...Everyone has a different angle and a different idea on just about every time a ref blows a whistle...

All that said, good game, Mustangs...It worked out to be just as close and competitive a game as I expected it to be...
I'm glad my Bruins won...and I know you guys are disappointed...Good luck in coming years...

It's not that simple. Part of the rule explicitly states that the ball must have a possibility of going in in order for it to be a goaltend. That ball clearly did not. To make matters worse, It was called by a ref that had no view of the shot standing 70 feet away.

You're attempt to rationalize the win for the Bruins and that Looney would have gotten a 3 point play is straight up laughable, and leads me to believe you are just a drive by troll. Good luck the rest of the way.

[RGV Pony]

Bruin Steve are you serious? That little bxtch airballed it. Was not close. Period. Not to mention your guys got away with a travel a possession of two before. Enjoy the sweet 16

[Oliver]

Just to add to that, I fully understand SMU shot themselves in the foot against one of the more mediocre UCLA teams in recent tournament history.

The call technically lost us the game, but shame on us for backpedaling through 3/4 of that game and being in that position in the first place.

[RGV Pony]

Oliver doesn't matter. If you come over to chill and are a D for two hours but offer to take out the trash right before you leave do I see you as a cool dude?

[Bruin Steve]

And, between Moore's final two shots, Looney had the rebound and was fouled from behind, causing him to lose the ball enabling that last shot...During the 19-0 run, Powell drove to the basket and was fould by TWO SMU players--no call...Actually there were many poor calls in SMUs favor...
But, them's the breaks--you have to play through it...

As to the goaltending--the rule isn't that it's LIKELY to go in, just that it has a chance...Balls hit front rim and the spin casuses funny bounces...so, it wasn't all that clear.
The OVERHEAD shot--directly above the basket--shows that the ball was actually at least partially in the cylinder...CLEARLY...That is enough for the Goaltending rule to apply. The call was proper--even if unfortunate for you guys...

Had we lost, I would have congratulated you guys just the same...
I was NOT "trolling"...
I posted here BEFORE the game...I was always respectful...
When I post on an opponent's board, I usually come back, win or lose...
I know it's tough for you guys to take the contrary opinion...
It's heartbreaking to lose in the tourney...especially in a game you had expected to win...
Suddenly, your season is over and it's months until Football...I get it, it sucks...

The power in my house went out this morning (nearby major construction)
...So I watched this one in a noisy, crowded bar...There were fans of lots of different teams there--even one SMU guy.
No one in the bar seemed to think the Bruins didn't deserve this one...

I am proud of my team...
They fought hard...played well most of the game (save a few minutes in that second half)...but survived that and came back at the end...
It did appear to me that SMU got more tentative after gaining a lead...and tried to milk the clock a bit...

Now, going in, some of you guys told me that SMU would play to allow the three point shots...Of course, you also told me they tend to do that and win anyway...
Seems you were partially right...You just didn't account for Bryce Alford being able to hit them...9 of 11 from three...

That said, yes, the game was razor close--it could have gone either way...But I would rather credit the players than the refs...
When you get a one-point game, almost anything going differently might have brought a different result..."Game of inches"...

That said, good luck...

[RGV Pony]

Is there a digest version available?