Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

The officiating at the end of this game is why basketball can suck

Status
Not open for further replies.
JCatano said:
Do you read threads or cherry pick posts? (The following isn't just a normal Joe from the street. Click the name.)

Bruce Pascoe ‏@BrucePascoe
FWIW, UA official told me that Pac-12 installed a new video system for officials only at its schools this year, so refs do not use TV feeds.
Click to expand...

Yeah, you keep posting that. FWIW, that tweet is ambiguous and does not mean the refs weren't using the same footage everyone else has seen a million times now. If I had to guess, there might be a splitter from the cameras at McKale - one cable to the video system for officials and one to the TV truck.

Second, while you keep arguing for this mystery footage that shows Chen didn't get the shot off, every sports website I visited today agrees we got jobbed. See, e.g., http://deadspin.com/5973038/colorad...d-arizona-referees-wave-it-off-for-no-reason; http://www.thebiglead.com/index.php...-shot-video-refereesarizona-won-in-overtime/; http://www.barstoolsports.com/barst...night-wasnt-oregon-vs-k-state-not-even-close/ ("Nothing worse than mounting a furious comeback then losing on a short armed bank shot 3 at the buzzer. Total buzzkill. And nothing better than when the refs are so stupid that they wave it off for no apparent reason after watching replay for 10 minutes showing it’s clearly good"). Or hell, just turn on ESPN.

Even the UofA fans I know - and I know a lot of them - agree that shot got off.
 
Darth Snow said:
Are you agreeing with me? Do you realize that you are agreeing with me?
Click to expand...

I'm not agreeing. You think a different feed simply has to do with slapping tickers on the footage.

SCO ‏@TucsonSco
@budd1e_lee We had better angles inside the TV truck that I'm not sure the refs got to see cause they use a different system. 1/2

Do I need to paste more posts that show it's different footage?
 
JCatano said:
I'm not agreeing. You think a different feed simply has to do with slapping tickers on the footage.

SCO ‏@TucsonSco
@budd1e_lee We had better angles inside the TV truck that I'm not sure the refs got to see cause they use a different system. 1/2

Do I need to paste more posts that show it's different footage?
Click to expand...
I'm gonna let you think about this one for a while.
 
JCatano said:
Speculation, unless you've been inside of McKale and scouted out the PAC 12 system placement. There are "ref cameras". What part of PAC 12 installed system for reviews isn't clear?

I know, the media is always correct. I mean, Jimmy Dykes referred to the screenshot of the clock showing 0.0 and the ball out of his hand as proof that the shot was good... :rolling_eyes:
Click to expand...
I didn't know that PAC12 refs had their own HD sports cable network, observable only by them, that has more cameras, higher resolution, and better angles than ESPN.

Also, if you have a screenshot that shows Zeros on the clock and the ball clearly in Chen's hand, post it. Or a Zapruder film.
 
JCatano said:
I'm not agreeing. You think a different feed simply has to do with slapping tickers on the footage.

SCO ‏@TucsonSco
@budd1e_lee We had better angles inside the TV truck that I'm not sure the refs got to see cause they use a different system. 1/2

Do I need to paste more posts that show it's different footage?
Click to expand...

Sounds to me like @budd1e_lee thinks if the refs had seen ESPN's footage, they would not have overturned the call.
 
729205.jpg


Yeah that angle looks completely unfamiliar.
 
JCatano said:
They used their footage, which may have made the information attainable.

And, no... That screenshot doesn't show conclusive evidence either way. You aren't going to see photo with 0.0 on the clock and his hands on the ball, because of the frames. You need to see the full motion view, which the officials had.
Click to expand...

So, TV had a camera trained on the shooter which clearly showed his hand and the ball leaving it, and also included the official clocks above the backboard in the same shot, AND was shot and displayed in HD. What, exactly could the officials have that is going to show, on a lower resolution monitor, something that the TV feed did not?

Just out of curiosity, what kind of video are the officials using that does not have any frame breaks in the video? Film? Videotape? Or something else?
 
BuffNut99 said:
I didn't know that PAC12 refs had their own HD sports cable network, observable only by them, that has more cameras, higher resolution, and better angles than ESPN.

Also, if you have a screenshot that shows Zeros on the clock and the ball clearly in Chen's hand, post it. Or a Zapruder film.
Click to expand...

You might want to look at the post above yours. They have their own cameras/system.

If you have access to the footage the officials saw, post it. Actually, post any screenshot with the clock at 0.1 and the ball conclusively out of his hands.

Bottom line... The footage they looked at, which is not the same video we see, is the only factor. Whether or not they saw a definite reason to overturn it is another story, but unless you're going to call a Tim Donaghy-type scenario, there isn't really anything other than... "I know he made it!" or "He didn't get it off."


14er -

Anyone can pick a moment in time.


Junction -

Why don't you ask them?
 
Last edited:
JCatano said:
And, tenths of a second override the light per the rulebook. So, seeing the ball out of his hands at 0.0 does no good.
Click to expand...

This is the entire damn point. The only thing that does any good is seeing the ball IN his hands at 0.0. Amazingly, nobody has been able to locate a single image showing that. And yet you continue to claim that the most logical explanation for this is not that such an image does not exist and the officials ****ed up (hey, it happens), but that the magic bullet exists either between the frames of the television footage (shot at 24 fps, that's a damn bit of a bad break for us, since there should be 2-3 frames for each .1 second) or on a super secret bit of video used only by the officials, shot by invisible camera operators with invisible cameras that produce video with no frame breaks that displays on a standard definition monitor at clarity greater than that of high definition video.

I think I finally have to ask... have you met Waldo? I think you two might hit it off....
 
Junction said:
This is the entire damn point. The only thing that does any good is seeing the ball IN his hands at 0.0. Amazingly, nobody has been able to locate a single image showing that. And yet you continue to claim that the most logical explanation for this is not that such an image does not exist and the officials ****ed up (hey, it happens), but that the magic bullet exists either between the frames of the television footage (shot at 30 fps, that's a damn bit of a bad break for us, since there should be 3 frames for each .1 second) or on a super secret bit of video used only by the officials, shot by invisible camera operators with invisible cameras that produce video with no frame breaks that displays on a standard definition monitor at clarity greater than that of high definition video.

I think I finally have to ask... have you met Waldo? I think you two might hit it off....
Click to expand...

Hah! Rep.
 
Per chance, did anyone hear the Tad interview on CJ's and Nate's show?

I recorded Around the Horn and PTI. 6 for 6 on "CU got screwed." I've not seen anywhere or anyone in the media defend the call. Not one.
 
14er said:
Dance catboy dance.
Click to expand...

Junction said:
This is the entire damn point. The only thing that does any good is seeing the ball IN his hands at 0.0. Amazingly, nobody has been able to locate a single image showing that. And yet you continue to claim that the most logical explanation for this is not that such an image does not exist and the officials ****ed up (hey, it happens), but that the magic bullet exists either between the frames of the television footage (shot at 24 fps, that's a damn bit of a bad break for us, since there should be 2-3 frames for each .1 second) or on a super secret bit of video used only by the officials, shot by invisible camera operators with invisible cameras that produce video with no frame breaks that displays on a standard definition monitor at clarity greater than that of high definition video.

I think I finally have to ask... have you met Waldo? I think you two might hit it off....
Click to expand...

The only dancing is the fervor by your fans.

- Have you seen the PAC 12 footage? No.
- Without seeing the PAC 12 footage, can you say with 100% certainty that there wasn't any evidence that called for an overturn? No.

That's been my entire point, which you all seem to gloss over. Me saying that I'm "70%" sure they got the call correct has put some of you into nerd-rage mode, and caused others to ignore the bulletpoints. Feel free to speculate that the PAC 12 system doesn't have this or doesn't have that, but that doesn't mean much when you're taking those guesses and labeling them as fact.
 
Last edited:
JCatano said:
The only dancing is the fervor by your fans.

- Have you seen the PAC 12 footage? No.
- Without seeing the PAC 12 footage, can you say with 100% certainty that there wasn't any evidence that called for an overturn? No.

That's been my entire point, which you all seem to gloss over. Me saying that I'm "70%" sure they got the call correct has put some of you into nerd-rage mode, and caused some to ignore the bulletpoints.
Click to expand...

Okay, what makes you 70% sure? Have you seen the supposed footage? No. Have you seen any footage indicating Chen didn't get it off? No. So you're 70% sure based purely on conjecture and your UofA bias? The fact that not a single media outlet is claiming the refs made the right call doesn't reduce your 70% belief?

Moreover, given the media scrutiny of that ****tastic ending, this board isn't the only outlet in a "fervor" over the call. You would think that same media scrutiny would provoke the Pac-12 into releasing the footage you argue exists.
 
JCatano said:
What exactly is the claim?
Click to expand...

That there is some kind of magical mystery footage out there produced by a second full video production unit solely for the use of the officials, and that this video somehow was of a quality to prevent the moment where the ball was in Chen's hand with 0.0 on the clock from disappearing between frames, the way it apparently did on the TV footage, and that even on a standard definition monitor this footage (aka "the PAC 12 footage") is able to produce greater detail than the TV footage rendered in high definition.

And yet, you have been unable to produce any information on what kind of video or film the Pac 12 system uses, any information on who shoots the video, on where the cameras are located, on absolutely a single detail of the entire operation. You basically keep posting something that says the Pac 12 officials don't use the TV replays, use this to posit an entire video production system into existence, use that existence to declare that this system obviously produced entirely new information that none of us have had access to. And then declare that this is cause for 70% certainty that the officials were right. Without ONE SHRED on evidence that you have not imagined into existence.

That claim.
 
azbuff said:
Okay, what makes you 70% sure? Have you seen the supposed footage? No. Have you seen any footage indicating Chen didn't get it off? No. So you're 70% sure based purely on conjecture and your UofA bias? The fact that not a single media outlet is claiming the refs made the right call doesn't reduce your 70% belief?

Moreover, given the media scrutiny of that ****tastic ending, this board isn't the only outlet in a "fervor" over the call. You would think that same media scrutiny would provoke the Pac-12 into releasing the footage you argue exists.
Click to expand...

Read back through the thread and you can clearly see why I mostly think they got it right. I didn't just wake up, see the score, then say that the shot was no good. By the way, my bias wasn't working well until I saw the .gif with the two additional screenshots connected to it. Coupled with the 0.0 sideview and ball directly over his wrist... That led me to the 70% thinking it wasn't good. Before that, I was 100% sure it was a good shot.

The problem with the media is that some are using the unofficial clock as the factor, while many others are using screenshots of the backboard clock at 0.0 and the ball out as showing it was a good shot, which can't be used as conclusive evidence (looking at you Jimmy Dykes).

I'm not in charge of the PAC 12, so don't ask me why they don't release the footage.


Junction said:
That there is some kind of magical mystery footage out there produced by a second full video production unit solely for the use of the officials, and that this video somehow was of a quality to prevent the moment where the ball was in Chen's hand with 0.0 on the clock from disappearing between frames, the way it apparently did on the TV footage, and that even on a standard definition monitor this footage (aka "the PAC 12 footage") is able to produce greater detail than the TV footage rendered in high definition.

And yet, you have been unable to produce any information on what kind of video or film the Pac 12 system uses, any information on who shoots the video, on where the cameras are located, on absolutely a single detail of the entire operation. You basically keep posting something that says the Pac 12 officials don't use the TV replays, use this to posit an entire video production system into existence, use that existence to declare that this system obviously produced entirely new information that none of us have had access to. And then declare that this is cause for 70% certainty that the officials were right. Without ONE SHRED on evidence that you have not imagined into existence.

That claim.
Click to expand...

There is other footage. I've posted about it plenty of times, and you (or someone) just choose to say it's not real. The actual truck crew said they have their own cameras and footage. Bruce Pascoe was told by a UA official that they have their own system. If you don't want to believe it, I don't have any problem with that.
 
Last edited:
Call me crazy but wouldn't a major broadcasting company who has been in the business for 30+ years have much better equipment than a brand new conference network?
 
Wainaminnit. Is the game over at 0.1 seconds?

Is there an NCAA rule stating that a shot made with the tip of a player's finger on an outgoing ball with 0.1 on the clock provides irrefutable evedence to be used by the officiating crew that any ensuing basket shall be waved off?

Apparently now the length of the basketball game is officially 39 minutes 59 and 9/10 seconds.

0:1 on the clock is the new 0:0
 
Skidmark -

The ball would need to be out of his hands at 0.1 in order to have proof that there was no contact. Seeing it out of the hand at 0.0 doesn't do any good, because of the lapse of time between 0.1 and 0.0.
 
Skidmark said:
Wainaminnit. Is the game over at 0.1 seconds?

Is there an NCAA rule stating that a shot made with the tip of a player's finger on an outgoing ball with 0.1 on the clock provides irrefutable evedence to be used by the officiating crew that any ensuing basket shall be waved off?

Apparently now the length of the basketball game is officially 39 minutes 59 and 9/10 seconds.

0:1 on the clock is the new 0:0
Click to expand...

Games apparently also end after regulation even if they're tied. Colorado could have simply outplayed Arizona in the overtime period and overcome the bad call, or was that just out of the question? As has been pointed out repeatedly in this thread, Arizona had its share of bad calls go against it during the game, but you guys have brushed those off as non-game changing calls that could be overcome. Well Colorado could have overcome this, but they didn't. Can't have it both ways.
 
UACat said:
Games apparently also end after regulation even if they're tied. Colorado could have simply outplayed Arizona in the overtime period and overcome the bad call, or was that just out of the question? As has been pointed out repeatedly in this thread, Arizona had its share of bad calls go against it during the game, but you guys have brushed those off as non-game changing calls that could be overcome. Well Colorado could have overcome this, but they didn't. Can't have it both ways.
Click to expand...
0d7a8740_Shaking_head.gif
 
UACat said:
Games apparently also end after regulation even if they're tied. Colorado could have simply outplayed Arizona in the overtime period and overcome the bad call, or was that just out of the question? As has been pointed out repeatedly in this thread, Arizona had its share of bad calls go against it during the game, but you guys have brushed those off as non-game changing calls that could be overcome. Well Colorado could have overcome this, but they didn't. Can't have it both ways.
Click to expand...

To be fair... Hitting what you think is a game winning shot, a double dribble not called that ended up as a basket, and then finding out after the game that an illegally subbed-in player hit a big 3 pointer... Pretty brutal.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top