You're saying we do meth?
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
- Thread starter dio
- Start date
- Status
I'm only short becaue I'm sitting down, you asshole.
And for the record, Mizzou hasn't let the 5th down go, some 22 years later.
The rivalry should be based on a 2 - 2 Pac 12 record, including a game in a conference championship and an emotional game decided by a bad call. That is the type of situation that jump starts lots of rivalries.
We will see many more times over the years, and right now, it looks like they will be some very hard-fought games.
I agree, the whole 'if they called this foul one way, and another this way, then AZ wins' - The newsflash is that no one knows what happens after those calls are made. The jacked up last second call to end the game is far different (as you noted previously). The outcome of a game was decided. We all know what happens if that call isn't messed up.
dply
Doble hoja
i think there was an initial venting and then acceptance that it doesn't matter because nothing is going to change it now. Then we have people trying to tell us that we are wrong and the basket didn't count. Then they tell us it doesn't matter if the basket counted because the refs screwed them over too. So the grieving process starts over.
Jimmy Dykes @JimmyDykesLive
Pg 37 in rulebook. When definitive information is unattainable with use of the monitor, the original call stands. CU got robbed
Expand
Pg 37 in rulebook. When definitive information is unattainable with use of the monitor, the original call stands. CU got robbed
Expand
But the Pac 12 isn't saying the information is unattainable. They're saying that they've got a picture of the clock showing 0:00 and a red light on the board AND Chen's fingers still on the ball. The call was confirmed. They've just decided not to show it to anyone else.
air-zona
Member
Based on what I've read on the 15th page I'm not about to read the rest. As an Arizona fan, I really can't tell whether or not it was good. I've seen pictures that make me lean both ways. But the original call was that he got it off in time and there was no evidence to overturn the call. I feel bad for Buff fans but as an Arizona fan I'm obviously happy. In a perfect world Roberson wouldn't have fouled out and we could have settled it in OT.
On to the rivalry discussion. Before this game I felt we were on our way to having a rivalry. I think the ending ensures that we become conference rivals. If anything at least the controversial ending will have that one positive. A rivalry between us two will greatly benefit our conference. It has been way too dull as there are few true rivals in our conference.
On to the rivalry discussion. Before this game I felt we were on our way to having a rivalry. I think the ending ensures that we become conference rivals. If anything at least the controversial ending will have that one positive. A rivalry between us two will greatly benefit our conference. It has been way too dull as there are few true rivals in our conference.
To be fair, that's the impression I'm getting from the vast majority of UA fans on various sites today.
dply
Doble hoja
And there isn't anything wrong with how you feel. You're still undefeated and a top 10 team.
It would have been awesome had the buffs won but that isn't what the record will show at the end of the year. I hope we beat you on Feb 14th.
Thank you. Good post. Rep
Junction
Club Member
Or going on a Packers site and mentioning that the Packers held a Seattle player on second and 8 in the second quarter, so you can't just look at that call at the end of the game and say that GB got robbed....
JCatano
New Member
Orr -
Showing a screenshot with the ball in his hand as time expires is what the officials may have seen:
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.
We're looking at screens with blur, the ball out of his hand at 0.0 (which is pointless), cropped screenshots showing the overlay clock (not official), etc.
Da Lama -
And, that may be exactly why they don't use truck footage. One camera may be showing the coach on the sideline during play for later use, and the others may be at a bad angle for a review.
Hey "dip****", learn what motion blur, tears, and light do to print and digital pixels. Oh, hey look... You can see her leg through the ball. Weird!
This is the next frame:
0.0 on both backboard clocks when the ball is out. The overlay clock is not official. It's a clock on the north or south side (there are two) of the arena for fans to view and has a delay. The time between the two frames is what the officials likely saw with their footage, since it is full motion.
As for people saying there isn't any conclusive evidence to overturn the original call of a good shot, that is an incorrect assumption. As I've pointed out 3 times in here, the officials are not using the same footage as we are seeing. They have their own, and there may be conclusive evidence in that footage to overturn the call.
Showing a screenshot with the ball in his hand as time expires is what the officials may have seen:
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.
We're looking at screens with blur, the ball out of his hand at 0.0 (which is pointless), cropped screenshots showing the overlay clock (not official), etc.
Da Lama -
And, that may be exactly why they don't use truck footage. One camera may be showing the coach on the sideline during play for later use, and the others may be at a bad angle for a review.
Hey "dip****", learn what motion blur, tears, and light do to print and digital pixels. Oh, hey look... You can see her leg through the ball. Weird!
This is the next frame:
0.0 on both backboard clocks when the ball is out. The overlay clock is not official. It's a clock on the north or south side (there are two) of the arena for fans to view and has a delay. The time between the two frames is what the officials likely saw with their footage, since it is full motion.
As for people saying there isn't any conclusive evidence to overturn the original call of a good shot, that is an incorrect assumption. As I've pointed out 3 times in here, the officials are not using the same footage as we are seeing. They have their own, and there may be conclusive evidence in that footage to overturn the call.
Last edited:
Wow you do not understand the basics of overturning a call, do ya?Orr -
Showing a screenshot with the ball in his hand as time expires is what the officials may have seen:
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.
We're looking at screens with blur, the ball out of his hand at 0.0 (which is pointless), cropped screenshots showing the overlay clock (not official)
Da Lama -
And, that may be exactly why they don't use truck footage. One camera may be showing the coach on the sideline during play for later use, and the others may be at a bad angle for a review.
Hey "dip****", learn what motion blur, tears, and light do to print and digital pixels. Oh, hey look... You can see her leg through the ball. Weird!
This is the next frame:
0.0 on both backboard clocks when the ball is out. The overlay clock is not official. It's a clock on the north or south side (there are two) of the arena for fans to view and has a delay. The time between the two frames is what the officials likely saw with their footage, since it is full motion.
JCatano
New Member
You mean the part you left of out the quote?
Orr -
Showing a screenshot with the ball in his hand as time expires is what the officials may have seen:
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.
We're looking at screens with blur, the ball out of his hand at 0.0 (which is pointless), cropped screenshots showing the overlay clock (not official), etc.
Da Lama -
And, that may be exactly why they don't use truck footage. One camera may be showing the coach on the sideline during play for later use, and the others may be at a bad angle for a review.
Hey "dip****", learn what motion blur, tears, and light do to print and digital pixels. Oh, hey look... You can see her leg through the ball. Weird!
This is the next frame:
0.0 on both backboard clocks when the ball is out. The overlay clock is not official. It's a clock on the north or south side (there are two) of the arena for fans to view and has a delay. The time between the two frames is what the officials likely saw with their footage, since it is full motion.
As for people saying there isn't any conclusive evidence to overturn the original call of a good shot, that is an incorrect assumption. As I've pointed out 3 times in here, the officials are not using the same footage as we are seeing. They have their own, and there may be conclusive evidence in that footage to overturn the call.
I don't see the red light on in your picture. Arizona needs to get its **** together.
Last edited:
JCatano
New Member
Check the rulebook. When there are clocks available that use tenths of a second, time overrides the light.
Red light is tied to the official time. And it's so close to being instantaneous (speed of light) that we can call it instantaneous. No red light, then still time left.
And all that shows is that the ball is not touching Chen when the clocks about the backboard read that there's no time left. Still haven't seen a photo that shows 0 time and Chen touching the ball.
Wrong, the motion blur clearly shows he is touching the ball
Arizona still needs to get its **** together. They've got two different times displayed, the light is not on, the court-side monitors are insufficient, and the arena is apparently full of geriatric blowhards.
:lol:
In all seriousness, this is what happened. They were looking for a reason to wave it off. They used a non-HD screen shot, had one angle with a motion blur that had Chen's fingertip and the ball superimposed in the motion blur, and used that as justification to reverse the call on the court. Same play happens in Boulder or a neutral site (or in Tucson with the shoe on the other foot) and that review takes 2 minutes at most before they rule the shot good.
JCatano
New Member
Section 7. Beginning and End of Period
Art. 2. Each period shall end when the red light or LED lights have become
activated. When the light fails to operate or is not visible, each period shall end
with the sounding of the game-clock horn.
a. In games when the red light is not present, the game-clock horn shall
terminate players’ activity.
b. In games with a 10th-of-a-second game clock display and where an official
courtside monitor is used, the reading of zeros on the game clock is to be
used to determine whether a try for goal occurred before or after the
expiration of time in any period. When the game clock is not visible, the
officials shall verify the original call with the use of the red/LED light(s).
When the red/LED light(s) are not visible, the sounding of the game-clock
horn shall be used. When definitive information is unattainable with the
use of the monitor, the original call stands.
---
Being "so close to instantaneous" is not instantaneous. Hence, the rule.
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.
JCatano
New Member
The only official time is the scoreboard clock, which is also stated in the rulebook. Television crews just use the arena clock, since a camera can be set straight across from it.
Hey dude. Guess what. When you gotta argue that hard in an attempt to prove you are right, when everyone else can just point at video footage, you are probably wrong.
JCatano
New Member
How ironic...
- Status