Possibly the worst rule in the history of sports

[HagginHall1999]

So a referee can call a goal tend, change it 5 minutes later, and completely take away the possession from Kentucky?

Kentucky had the rebound and most likely would have had a put back.

I have trouble putting into words how terrible that rule is, and how open to corruption.

If that rule is going to be in place there should be some sort of rule that would allow for free throws to make up for points wiped away. The simple fact that UK would have retained possession with a likely layup should afford them the opportunity to make up for the referee error in judgement call.

Take points off the board and come out of timeout with two free throws, no one on the line.

 

[CASblue]

I believe the rule needs to be completely removed. There are way too many variables to make a solid, fair rule, especially regarding a situation like this.

 

[saxonburgcat]

I believe the rule needs to be completely removed. There are way too many variables to make a solid, fair rule, especially regarding a situation like this.

The rule was put in place because UK lost a game in 2019 to LSU when LSU had a putback on a ball sitting on the rim that was ruled good. Had the current rule been in place then, that game would have gone to overtime.

On a final play of the game reviewing a violation makes sense but the way it was implemented in our game was simply horrible.

 

[MychalG]

I am convinced that a lot of these ref's don't know all of the rules of the game. Each game I watch, I see a lot of questionable calls. This is across the board in FB, BB and Baseball. I watch a baseball game and the damn strike zone changes, not from game to game, but pitch to pitch. I watch a BB game and the calls change from game to game depending on who the ref's are. There were numerous calls in yesterday's game that left me saying, WTF??

 

[CASblue]

The rule was put in place because UK lost a game in 2019 to LSU when LSU had a putback on a ball sitting on the rim that was ruled good. Had the current rule been in place then, that game would have gone to overtime.

On a final play of the game reviewing a violation makes sense but the way it was implemented in our game was simply horrible.

Ok but in yesterday’s game A&M made a good block, but whistled dead for a goal tending call. The “rebound” by Onyenso would have been seen as obtained during a blown-dead ball, so who should have gotten possession? The ball was in air when the whistle came in. We’re going to argue that is should be UK’s, while A&M will also say they should have possession, so is relying on the possession arrow effective and fair? If NCAA continues with the rule something has got to change…but how to keep it effective and fair is the problem.

 

[true blue1]

So a referee can call a goal tend, change it 5 minutes later, and completely take away the possession from Kentucky?

Kentucky had the rebound and most likely would have had a put back.

I have trouble putting into words how terrible that rule is, and how open to corruption.

It’s a pathetic rule.

 

[Aike]

Ok but in yesterday’s game A&M made a good block, but whistled dead for a goal tending call. The “rebound” by Onyenso would have been seen as obtained during a blown-dead ball, so who should have gotten possession? The ball was in air when the whistle came in. We’re going to argue that is should be UK’s, while A&M will also say they should have possession, so is relying on the possession arrow effective and fair? If NCAA continues with the rule something has got to change…but how to keep it effective and fair is the problem.

The official is supposed to determine if there is a team in possession at the time the call was made.

Since, technically, no one is in possession at the moment that a shot is blocked (unless the ball is grabbed out of midair and secured), it would seem the spirit of the rule would be to honor possession obtained a split second later.

In other words, blocking straight into Onyenso’s hands should be UK’s possession.

It’s a terrible rule. Either go to the monitor immediately using the reasonable criteria of whoever possessed the ball following the block remains in possession, or leave it alone.

 

[Mike-D]

Ok but in yesterday’s game A&M made a good block, but whistled dead for a goal tending call. The “rebound” by Onyenso would have been seen as obtained during a blown-dead ball, so who should have gotten possession? The ball was in air when the whistle came in. We’re going to argue that is should be UK’s, while A&M will also say they should have possession, so is relying on the possession arrow effective and fair? If NCAA continues with the rule something has got to change…but how to keep it effective and fair is the problem.

Lol, the ball literally was blocked off the backboard and into Onyenso's hands. The ball was called dead, but he had a wide open layup/dunk.

 

[saxonburgcat]

Ok but in yesterday’s game A&M made a good block, but whistled dead for a goal tending call. The “rebound” by Onyenso would have been seen as obtained during a blown-dead ball, so who should have gotten possession? The ball was in air when the whistle came in. We’re going to argue that is should be UK’s, while A&M will also say they should have possession, so is relying on the possession arrow effective and fair? If NCAA continues with the rule something has got to change…but how to keep it effective and fair is the problem.

Good points. 1) The delayed review is horrible to begin with. 2) Using the possession arrow is the MOST fair way I can come up with to at least make it somewhat fair.

As it was, TAMU was rewarded and we were penalized by the initial bad call.

 

[saxonburgcat]

The official is supposed to determine if there is a team in possession at the time the call was made.

Since, technically, no one is in possession at the moment that a shot is blocked (unless the ball is grabbed out of midair and secured), it would seem the spirit of the rule would be to honor possession obtained a split second later.

In other words, blocking straight into Onyenso’s hands should be UK’s possession.

It’s a terrible rule. Either go to the monitor immediately using the reasonable criteria of whoever possessed the ball following the block remains in possession, or leave it alone.

Is there a way for college bball to follow the lead of football in which the refs are told to refrain from blowing a play dead? In other words, just make a late call. I remember 2 very late calls yesterday that both went against us.

 

[CASblue]

Lol, the ball literally was blocked off the backboard and into Onyenso's hands. The ball was called dead, but he had a wide open layup/dunk.

I agree but ref blew the play dead. The refs missed the call (it was a good block), we got screwed out of a needed possession, and possibly 2 points. It’s a terrible rule and one that can’t simply be left in place in its current form.

 

[Aike]

Is there a way for college bball to follow the lead of football in which the refs are told to refrain from blowing a play dead? In other words, just make a late call. I remember 2 very late calls yesterday that both went against us.

I thinks it’s tougher because basketball is more fluid. Football is going to reset at the line after each play.

 

[saxonburgcat]

I thinks it’s tougher because basketball is more fluid. Football is going to reset at the line after each play.

Therein lies the problem. So, they wait until a TV timeout to review the play. It seems that, at that point, they need to let the call stand, IMO. Afterall, how many bad calls did we see yesterday that could not be reviewed?

 

[Aike]

Therein lies the problem. So, they wait until a TV timeout to review the play. It seems that, at that point, they need to let the call stand, IMO. Afterall, how many bad calls did we see yesterday that could not be reviewed?

Exactly. In fact, there was another probable goal tend where I think Mitchell shot and someone yanked the net.

But they didn’t call that, so it couldn’t be reviewed. Feels like 4 points lost between those two plays.

 

[michaeluk26]

It’s like when they T’ed up Josh Harrelson at the end of the game and f***ed us, only sneakier.

Do you mean Isaac Humphrey sp? when Pat Adams called a technical on him after he got the rebound at ATM and barely slammed the ball down in excitement and we lost at the buzzer? That bullshit call costed us a whole seed line. I'm not familiar with a Jorts technical that screwed us but my memory isn't the greatest either.

Edit- Saturday an ATM player slammed the ball down one handed and it went up in the air and no technical for them.

 

[michaeluk26]

Also if we're talking calls I can't stand, it's when a player jumps into the defender and gets the call every single time. ATM got away with this numerous times and it makes my blood boil. DJ did it once and got the call to be fair.

 

[chroix]

Do you mean Isaac Humphrey sp? when Pat Adams called a technical on him after he got the rebound at ATM and barely slammed the ball down in excitement and we lost at the buzzer? That bullshit call costed us a whole seed line. I'm not familiar with a Jorts technical that screwed us but my memory isn't the greatest either.

Edit- Saturday an ATM player slammed the ball down one handed and it went up in the air and no technical for them.

You’re right it was Humphrey. Game still pisses me off. Now we’ve got a bookend.

 

[jrm693]

They used to call it "home cooking"

 

[CapnBlubs]

The rule is completely nuts and could only make sense to someone hoping to exploit it for nefarious purposes.

Bilas, the effing idiot that he always is, started out by gushing about how sensible it was...only to begrudgingly admit we got screwed later. I'm sick of both him and Shulman. Worst two anti-UK idiots since Billy Packer.

 

[Aike]

Just going to drop this here…does anyone remember in the first half when an ATM player punched the ball out of bounds after a made basket?

I thought they had called delay of game, which it clearly was.

But then I’m pretty sure ATM got called for delay of game in the second half, and there was no technical.

 

[LineSkiCat14]

Just going to drop this here…does anyone remember in the first half when an ATM player punched the ball out of bounds after a made basket?

I thought they had called delay of game, which it clearly was.

But then I’m pretty sure ATM got called for delay of game in the second half, and there was no technical.

There was a LOT of stuff they were letting TAM get away with yesterday. It was a classic "let's help the other SEC teams". I figure we started in a 10-15pt hole. And we almost climbed out, but we weren't quite perfect, so we lost.

 

[Aike]

There was a LOT of stuff they were letting TAM get away with yesterday. It was a classic "let's help the other SEC teams". I figure we started in a 10-15pt hole. And we almost climbed out, but we weren't quite perfect, so we lost.

Truthfully, we lost the game when we were up 7, gave up an offensive rebound, and they stuck a 3.

We had a chance to push the lead to double digits in that 3-4 minute stretch, but instead we let them catch us.

 

[Greatestalltime]

This play is emblematic of the incompetence of the NCAA. Could no one imagine this scenario happening? I’m sure there was some committee of “professionals” making this decision.

Bilas also couldn’t figure it out until the points were gone. As soon as I heard they could review it and take away the points an obvious question was so we lose possession too?

Unreal they couldn’t imagine the drawback of taking points away and who possessed the ball.