Show me video overturning the call on the court. Please do. You haven't yet. Except to allege that there must be magical P12 video that does. You know, the standard definition video.
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
http://msn.foxsports.com/collegebas...ball-call-caused-by-substandard-replay-010413
"When the NCAA tournament selection committee is looking at which teams to select in March, they need to consider Colorado’s buzzer-beating upset victory over the third-ranked team in the nation back in January. Because even though its record doesn’t count it as a victory, that’s exactly what it was. An official’s botched call in January need not knock a team off the bubble in March."
"When the NCAA tournament selection committee is looking at which teams to select in March, they need to consider Colorado’s buzzer-beating upset victory over the third-ranked team in the nation back in January. Because even though its record doesn’t count it as a victory, that’s exactly what it was. An official’s botched call in January need not knock a team off the bubble in March."
You don't understand. The secret clock, and the tilt of the earth caused Chen's fingers to blur and touch the ball.
Thank god the refs have all the secret information, or else they might have gotten the call wrong.
Again, Arizona needs to get its **** together. They have at least two unsynched clocks and the LED light isn't synched with either of them. Also, the monitors the officials are expected to use in the event that a review is necessary are obviously insufficient.
JCatano
New Member
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.
If you can't understand that whatever footage they see may have different angles, then... *shrug*
They aren't looking at screenshots and .gifs on forums.
Wait, there are secret ref cameras? :rofl:
This is a particularly useful situation.... the hidden feeds that no one else can see are the ones they based their decision on.
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.
not quite the frame i was looking at. there is another frame between this and the op. still, the point stands that the back lights on the bb are still not lit and that ball is damn near two feet from his hands.
i would go back and get it if someone would tell me how to work this freaking ipad! :lol:
JCatano
New Member
Correct. They aren't synched, which isn't abnormal for a lot of places with their unofficial clocks. They are labeled that for a reason.
But, you and dio are right... It's the fault of the McKale mafia, Obama, and Israel. They all made the officials call the shot no good. I mean, why wouldn't 2 officials who reside in Denver want to call it no good when the result would be stalking and threats when they are out in public? I'm sure Verne Harris said: "Listen, guys... I've worked 41 NCAA tournament games and the 2004 and 2005 National Championship games, but let's @#&% this call up, so I don't have a chance to work it this year. You with me?!"
JCatano
New Member
I think I know which one you're talking about. I can't find it, though. Someone said that it looked shopped, but I wasn't really buying that.
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.
he has no response. None. Just changes the subject.
So is your position that the refs got the call right?
Or are you trying to build a case for how it's possible that they found some justification for making that call since they had a bit of gray area with things?
Because the facts remain that:
1. There is no screen shot showing that Chen was making contact with the basketball with 0.0 on the clock.
2. The frame rate for standard tv is 24 frames per second (HD, which they didn't use, is 50 or 60 fps).
3. So, at minimum, the refs had 2 (possibly 3) frames to look at with 0.1 and the first frame at 0.0 to look at. Each one showed less than half a tenth of a second.
4. You're saying the speed of light isn't instantaneous for these purposes, but a light second is 1/299,792,458 of a second. That's the delay you seem to be worried about.
5. Taken together, to justify overturning the call you have to go to such great mathematical improbabilities that it's a ridiculous case to make that the refs could have been certain that they got the call wrong on the court. There was a miniscule chance they had gotten it wrong, and they used that to do what they wanted to do.
Just drop this. If you're a sports fan, you know that when there's doubt the play stands. And what's really ridiculous is that with as long as they were taking, they didn't ask for the HD feed they had access to. That would have at least doubled the number of frames they had to look at. If it's that close and you don't ask for better information that's available to you, you're not really trying to get it correct. You're trying to justify a decision you want to make.
This crew, especially Verne, turned in the worst officiating performance we saw in Boulder during the entire non-conference schedule. All night, we were in the stands trying to figure out how a crew that was supposed to be good was so bad.
Take away that last play. Do you think that crew was on its game last night? Did you wonder how any official could miss the call in the first half when they ruled an airball on the Zona 3 pointer in the first half that Ski clearly got a piece of? That was one of many screw ups last night. Beyond that, the crew was inconsistent in the way it called the game. Sometimes they let the teams play and then sometimes they had quick whistles. Worst of all, the members of the crew didn't seem to be on the same page with each other on how they wanted to call the game. This is not a good officiating crew.
JCatano
New Member
I'm not 100% positive, as I've already stated numerous times. I'm pretty sure they did. That's about as far as I'll go.
1. The only screenshots seen are at 0.1 and 0.0 with an obvious lapse of time in between frames. It's not like officials are going to use screenshots, anyway. They'll use full motion stoppage.
2. You have no idea if they used HD or not. Ask the PAC 12 officials what they installed into all league arenas.
3. See #2.
4. The time (in tenths) overrides the light for a reason. Ask the NCAA if you need an explanation.
5. They overturned it with footage on the PAC 12's system installed for reviews. Saying the officials didn't see what you saw holds no water, since you aren't looking at the same footage.
You're correct. They were bad both ways. That doesn't necessarily relate to seeing footage for a review, though.
Last edited:
Come on man. If the Pac-12 had access to a super secret video that would satisfy the burden of proof that the rule you posted requires, I am sure they would release it in order to put an end to the embarrassment the call is causing them. I don't know why the refs made the wrong call, but I suspect it's the same reason KU got all the calls in the Big 12. It sucks, but that's the way it is.
Also, to my original point, perhaps Zona should look into trying to get their clocks in synch or at least the official synched with the LED light. I'm sure you can get an HD monitor for the refs to use in review situations for the price of one of the tickets the blue-hairs had sitting court side. I think it'd be money well spent.
1. We have the same camera angles as the refs. There are no special "ref cameras"
2. We had better definition than the refs.
3. We had better framerate than the refs.
4. The refs knew all of the above.
5. The refs chose not to use the better equipment.
6. The better equipment provides absolutely zero incontrovertible evidence to overturn the call. hell, it barely provides enough to conjecture that the call on the court was wrong.
7. The refs overturned the call.
2. We had better definition than the refs.
3. We had better framerate than the refs.
4. The refs knew all of the above.
5. The refs chose not to use the better equipment.
6. The better equipment provides absolutely zero incontrovertible evidence to overturn the call. hell, it barely provides enough to conjecture that the call on the court was wrong.
7. The refs overturned the call.
You could have ended with the bold. If you're not 100% sure, the play stands. The rest is just window dressing.
But fwiw, we've seen several sports media folks say that the ref system is not HD and they did not go to it despite that option being available to them.
no, sir. what i was looking at was a youtube replay. i was just hitting play/pause over and over again, rewinding and doing it again. it was not a photo and could not have been shopped. period.
I did not edit any part of your post when I quoted it. It was called on the court as a made basket. In order to overturn a call made, there must be definitive evidence stating the opposite. There was not definitive evidence to overturn the call.
JCatano
New Member
1. 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?
2. You don't know if the system is HD or not.
3. See #2.
4. The refs are so evil.
5. See #2.
6. You didn't see the footage they saw.
7. Fortunately or unfortunately.
You guys keep talking about "no evidence" when none of us have seen the footage that was available to them.
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:
Last edited:
You really believe that they use a different camera system? :rofl:
I think it is quite logical. Twice the space needed, more camera operators required, more equipment to manage. Makes sense to me.
And JCatano - We know they had the same angle because you can see their monitor at the table when watching it on TV. It is right there!
JCatano
New Member
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.
All television production cameras aren't continuously centered on the action. It's logical to think that's why the PAC 12 system is there. The angle you spied probably wasn't the only angle they looked at. Who knows.
Last edited:
Wait, you really think that this means different cameras? Think about it like this: Different feed means the refs get it before ESPN slaps its little tracker on the bottom of the screen. Same cameras, different feed.
:lol:
I guess we should trust the UA beat writer? I heard the media always gets it right - someone on Allbuffs told me
This guy is seriously arguing that ESPN magically chose not to show an angle that conclusively proved AZ won the game. :lol: CONSPIRACY!!
JCatano
New Member
SCO @TucsonSco
@BrucePascoe I'm not sure people realize the refs use their own replay system for games and don't get their replays from us in the tv truck
If they aren't getting it from the truck, where would they get the footage from? Tad's cell phone recording?
Sure. He has heavily implied that he thought the shot was good.
Also, check the SCO link. That's the truck. He says Colorado won even though the screenshot he shows to prove it has 0.0 on the clock with the ball out.
It's not ESPN's feed.
Last edited:
Are you agreeing with me? Do you realize that you are agreeing with me?
- Status