Stupid Rule Question about last night's tip in by Zeller

[bjornolf]

I realize that this is small potatoes considering the outcome of last night's game, but I was just thinking... shouldn't Zeller's tip-in of Kelly's shot have been a 3, not a 2? If a defender was standing in front of Kelly and got a finger on the ball and was inside the arc, it would be a 3, no? So why wouldn't Zeller's? Only a defender touched it, and it hadn't touched the rim yet. In fact, the ball was still above the rim when he touched it, AND his feet were off the floor. Just confused and looking for a ruling. Thanks.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

My understanding (and I was watching with a UNC fan yelling in my ear, so I might be mistaken) was that the official conferred and determined that there was no chance of the ball going in. If Zeller had interfered with it above the cylinder on it's downward flight and with a chance of going in, it would have been three.

Fact is, the only way that shot was ever going in was if somehow it careened off of another object above the rim and then bounced awkwardly through the hoop, which is exactly what happened.

In other words - you are right. If it had been ruled a goal-tending violation it would have been three points. Instead, the ball might has well have been rebounded and put back in by Zeller for a lay up. Either way, it was a very friendly bounce for us!

[anon]

From the rule book:



Art. 1. Goaltending shall have occurred when a defensive player touches the ball during a field-goal try and each of the following conditions is met:
a. The ball is in its downward flight; and
b. The entire ball is above the level of the ring and has the possibility, while in flight, of entering the basket and is not touching the cylinder.

[JBDuke]

The key here is that it wasn't goaltending - it was just like a tip-in from a Duke player. The last player to touch the ball before it went through the basket was in 2-point territory, therefore the basket is worth 2 points.

If it HAD been goaltending, it would have been 3 points.

[bjornolf]

I got that it wasn't goaltending, but if a guy in the shooter's face gets a finger on it and that's the only reason it goes in, it's still a 3. He touched it w/o it touching the rim, even above the rim, and it went in. It seems like a pretty big gray area that brings subjectivity into it. Where's the line? It's not just like an offensive player tipped it in, because he WAS a defensive player. Fact is, an offensive player did NOT touch it, nor did it touch the rim. By my understanding, that makes it part of the same shot, no? Let's say Kelly was clearly throwing a pass, but the defender was right in front of him. It hits the defender's head, goes up high and into the basket. Isn't that a 3? I'm just trying to wrap my head around it. Thanks.

[cspan37421]

Bjornolf, you make a very interesting observation. I'll be interested to understand the distinction. If it counted as a 3 and we are down by 1 instead, perhaps Austin finds Mason down low (he was open and heading down the lane at the very beginning of http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3X1ewxVwhug), Mason gets hacked on the layup, and has to shoot FTs to either win or tie it, after going 0-3 from the line in the game (though he had been doing much better lately).

[aimo]

who got credit for the basket? I understand the whole "no chance of going in" part, and that's why it was only worth two points. But, then, how can they credit Ryan with the points? Simply because he was the last offensive player to touch it? Personally, I think they should credit it to Zeller. Thanks, Ty!

[OldPhiKap]

who got credit for the basket? I understand the whole "no chance of going in" part, and that's why it was only worth two points. But, then, how can they credit Ryan with the points? Simply because he was the last offensive player to touch it? Personally, I think they should credit it to Zeller. Thanks, Ty!

I'm pretty sure the credit goes to the shooter.

I'll say this for Tyler -- and he'll get a lot of grief over the end of this game, from yours truly as well -- but the kid had a monster game and is a real force. We need to figure out how to deal with him the next two times we play.

[jjasper0729]

who got credit for the basket? I understand the whole "no chance of going in" part, and that's why it was only worth two points. But, then, how can they credit Ryan with the points? Simply because he was the last offensive player to touch it? Personally, I think they should credit it to Zeller. Thanks, Ty!

If the ball goes in a basket off of a defensive player, then the player closest to the ball when it goes in is generally credited. I believe, though I'd have to check the play by play, that Mason got the credit. or at least he should have.

As it's been said, it wasn't goaltending therefore not a three point basket. It's as if Kelly threw up an airball, it was caught by mason and put back home. (Think NCSU in 1983... Lowe-Charles)

[camion]

I believe the closest Duke player gets credit. That would be Mason I think. That's what the announcers (the non-ESPN ones) said so it has a 50/50 chance of being right.

[Highlander]

Bjornolf, you make a very interesting observation. I'll be interested to understand the distinction. If it counted as a 3 and we are down by 1 instead, perhaps Austin finds Mason down low (he was open and heading down the lane at the very beginning of http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3X1ewxVwhug), Mason gets hacked on the layup, and has to shoot FTs to either win or tie it, after going 0-3 from the line in the game (though he had been doing much better lately).

I think the key distinction in Bjornolf's scenario is this:


If a player shoots a 3 and a defender tips it from inside while the ball is on the way UP, it's still a 3.
If a player shoots a 3 and a defender tips it from inside while the ball is on the way DOWN, and has a chance to go in or is in the cylinder, it's a 3 due to a goaltend.
If a player shoots a 3 and a defender tips it in from inside while the ball is on its way DOWN, and has no chance to go in, it's a 2, similar to an Alley-Oop.


The key distinction is whether the ball is on its way UP (and is therefore an attempted block), or on its way DOWN (and is therefore a possible goaltend).

Still, interesting scenario, and definitely kind of a klooge.

[Dev11]

I think the key distinction in Bjornolf's scenario is this:


If a player shoots a 3 and a defender tips it from inside while the ball is on the way UP, it's still a 3.
If a player shoots a 3 and a defender tips it from inside while the ball is on the way DOWN, and has a chance to go in or is in the cylinder, it's a 3 due to a goaltend.
If a player shoots a 3 and a defender tips it in from inside while the ball is on its way DOWN, and has no chance to go in, it's a 2, similar to an Alley-Oop.


The key distinction is whether the ball is on its way UP (and is therefore an attempted block), or on its way DOWN (and is therefore a possible goaltend).

Still, interesting scenario, and definitely kind of a klooge.

As of now, both ESPN and GoDuke list Ryan Kelly as being 5-12 with 15 points. ESPN lists Kelly as having made the shot. Not disagreeing with anybody, because I honestly don't know the rule, but it appears that both sites still credit the basket to Kelly.

[El_Diablo]

There's an interesting issue with scoring it. If a player scores a basket for the other team, then he doesn't get credit for the points (or the field goal attempt). It usually happens in scrums around the basket, with multiple people going up for a rebound, so the scorer simply credits whoever is closest to the guy who mistakenly tipped it in. So 99% of the time, it's a two either way.

But (if the ESPN.com and GoDuke.com play-by-play commentary reflects the official scoring), Ryan Kelly was credited with attempting and making a 2-point FG. At the same time, as if by alchemy, the 3-point FGA never happened. Just bizarre. They probably should have credited Ryan with a missed 3-point FG and Mason with a made 2-point FG, even though Mason never even touched it.

It definitely wasn't a matter of goaltending, since the ball was not above the cylinder and had no chance of going in. And clearly, if Zeller had simply caught the airball, waited a couple seconds, and then went up for the layup, it would have been 2 points. So, while the rules may not be very clear on what to do in this situation, the 2-point call feels right. I'm not too sure about how it was scored after the fact (at least by ESPN and GoDuke), but I can't really complain with the result. After all, had that been counted as a 3, then the game would have been tied with 14 seconds left, and UNC could have held for the last shot. Which probably means OT or a Harrison Barnes buzzer beater...the latter of which sickens me even to imagine.

[devildeac]

Is a goaltending call reviewable? IANAR but my guess is that it is not, so if Zeller touched it/"interfered" while still in the air on its downward trajectory at that point, it should be a 3. He never had possession to "lose" it into our basket for an "own goal" so if the shot is still in the air (which it was) and still has a chance of going in, we should get a 3 out of it. I'm real happy we did not given the outcome.

[uh_no]

I think the key distinction in Bjornolf's scenario is this:


If a player shoots a 3 and a defender tips it from inside while the ball is on the way UP, it's still a 3.
If a player shoots a 3 and a defender tips it from inside while the ball is on the way DOWN, and has a chance to go in or is in the cylinder, it's a 3 due to a goaltend.
If a player shoots a 3 and a defender tips it in from inside while the ball is on its way DOWN, and has no chance to go in, it's a 2, similar to an Alley-Oop.


The key distinction is whether the ball is on its way UP (and is therefore an attempted block), or on its way DOWN (and is therefore a possible goaltend).

Still, interesting scenario, and definitely kind of a klooge.

There is a huge amount of ambiguity in this case. This is all the rule-book has to say on the topic.



Art. 2. A successful try from beyond the three-point line shall count three points
for the team when the ball is thrown or directed into its basket.
a. When a player scores a field goal in the opponent’s basket, it shall count
two points for the opponent regardless of the location on the playing court
from where it was released.

[El_Diablo]

Is a goaltending call reviewable? IANAR but my guess is that it is not, so if Zeller touched it/"interfered" while still in the air on its downward trajectory at that point, it should be a 3. He never had possession to "lose" it into our basket for an "own goal" so if the shot is still in the air (which it was) and still has a chance of going in, we should get a 3 out of it. I'm real happy we did not given the outcome.

I think the bolded part is the key though--it had no chance of going in at that point.

[bjornolf]

I believe the closest Duke player gets credit. That would be Mason I think. That's what the announcers (the non-ESPN ones) said so it has a 50/50 chance of being right.


Man. I always thought it was the last offensive player to touch the ball. I'm so out of it.

[alteran]

I got that it wasn't goaltending, but if a guy in the shooter's face gets a finger on it and that's the only reason it goes in, it's still a 3. He touched it w/o it touching the rim, even above the rim, and it went in. It seems like a pretty big gray area that brings subjectivity into it. Where's the line? It's not just like an offensive player tipped it in, because he WAS a defensive player. Fact is, an offensive player did NOT touch it, nor did it touch the rim. By my understanding, that makes it part of the same shot, no? Let's say Kelly was clearly throwing a pass, but the defender was right in front of him. It hits the defender's head, goes up high and into the basket. Isn't that a 3? I'm just trying to wrap my head around it. Thanks.

I'm just one guy firing off an opinion here, but I look at it like this.

In your first scenario, it's LEGAL to touch the ball as a defender on the way up, and there is a pretty good body of evidence that any contact by defenders on the ball is ignored WRT the shot by officials-- it goes in, it doesn't go in, whatever, it's treated like a shot with no defending contact on the ball.

Once the ball is on its way down, however, a new set of rules is applied to the shot-- goaltending. Defenders can no longer touch the ball, provided it's a shot with a chance of going in or is in the cylinder.

Because the officials ruled that Ryan's shot was both outside the cylinder AND had no possibility of going in, Ryan's attempt at that point is now legally a missed shot. Missed shot rules now apply-- it's anybody's ball. Zeller swatted at a loose ball a few feet from the basket and it happened to go in. 2 points, credited to the closest opposing player.

JMHO.

[LoveGun2112]

The good news for Tyler is that he now only needs 2,768 more points to be Duke's all-time leading scorer.

[WakeDevil]

As others have pointed out, the try ended when the ball was not going into the basket. Regarding another question, if the ball hits off a player during a pass it can go into the basket for a score. But, the ball would become dead if there was a foul or inadvertent whistle while the ball is on its way to the basket. Why? It's not a try, just a live ball.

[cspan37421]

The good news for Tyler is that he now only needs 2,768 more points to be Duke's all-time leading scorer.

While maybe not the cleverest or funniest post I've ever read, I can't seem to stop chuckling about it. I am probably still giddy from the outcome.

[gep]

Sorry for my ignorance... if Ryan's shot was so far off as to have no chance of going in, why couldn't it be a lob pass instead of a missed shot? When is a shot not a "shot" but a "pass"... :confused:

[rasputin]

Sorry for my ignorance... if Ryan's shot was so far off as to have no chance of going in, why couldn't it be a lob pass instead of a missed shot? When is a shot not a "shot" but a "pass"... :confused:

When the "passer" is Dereck Whittenburg.:)

[JasonEvans]

Have we figured out who got credit for the points? No way should Ryan get credit for it. It must go to Mason. Think of it this way, the only reason Zeller did not merely grab the ball like a normal rebound was that he was battling Mason for position and possession. The only way to keep it from Mason was to tip it... and he happened to tip it in.

If Mason is not there, the points never get scored for Duke. No question in my mind that Mason deserves a FGM for that play... not Ryan.

-Jason "of course, the real call should have been 3 FTs for Ryan, who was clearly fouled... but I ain't complaining ;) " Evans

[CDu]

Have we figured out who got credit for the points? No way should Ryan get credit for it. It must go to Mason. Think of it this way, the only reason Zeller did not merely grab the ball like a normal rebound was that he was battling Mason for position and possession. The only way to keep it from Mason was to tip it... and he happened to tip it in.

If Mason is not there, the points never get scored for Duke. No question in my mind that Mason deserves a FGM for that play... not Ryan.

-Jason "of course, the real call should have been 3 FTs for Ryan, who was clearly fouled... but I ain't complaining ;) " Evans

Ryan Kelly was credited with the basket, per both GoDuke and ESPN play-by-play summaries.

[devilsadvocate85]

Ryan Kelly was credited with the basket, per both GoDuke and ESPN play-by-play summaries.

While it seems that this is the case; how can a player who attempts a shot from behind the 3-point line and was still behind the line throughout the entire sequence logically be credited with a 2-point basket?

[CDu]

While it seems that this is the case; how can a player who attempts a shot from behind the 3-point line and was still behind the line throughout the entire sequence logically be credited with a 2-point basket?

The weird part is that Kelly wasn't credited with a missed 3pt shot. He was credited with a made 2pt shot. My only explanation is that the tip-in (which counts as a 2pt shot) trumped the missed shot. And they just decided to give the credit for the 2pt shot to Kelly. That, or the scorekeepers just kind of bungled it, thinking that Kelly must have had a foot on the line (which he didn't). Strange scoring for a strange play.

The beauty (in retrospect) is how that completely changed the game's outcome. Had they called it goaltending, we're tied. Then Thornton wouldn't foul Zeller (fouling out in the process), and UNC gets the last possession of regulation. There's a very real (>40% chance) that we lose in regulation, with the most likely outcome being overtime. Would have been an interesting overtime with Mason, Curry, Thornton, Zeller, Barnes, and McAdoo all having 4 fouls and Kelly, Dawkins, Miles, Bullock and Marshall with 3 fouls each.

[calltheobvious]

The weird part is that Kelly wasn't credited with a missed 3pt shot. He was credited with a made 2pt shot. My only explanation is that the tip-in (which counts as a 2pt shot) trumped the missed shot. And they just decided to give the credit for the 2pt shot to Kelly. That, or the scorekeepers just kind of bungled it, thinking that Kelly must have had a foot on the line (which he didn't). Strange scoring for a strange play.

The beauty (in retrospect) is how that completely changed the game's outcome. Had they called it goaltending, we're tied. Then Thornton wouldn't foul Zeller (fouling out in the process), and UNC gets the last possession of regulation. There's a very real (>40% chance) that we lose in regulation, with the most likely outcome being overtime. Would have been an interesting overtime with Mason, Curry, Thornton, Zeller, Barnes, and McAdoo all having 4 fouls and Kelly, Dawkins, Miles, Bullock and Marshall with 3 fouls each.

This was definitely a scoring error, and I think that the above explanation is close. Recall that after the officiating crew came together to discuss the play, one of them, John Cahill, walked to the TV table to try to explain the ruling. But the scorer's table is on the other side of the court, so the official scorer didn't get the benefit of the explanation. It's possible that CDu's second surmisal is correct; but I think a likelier explanation is some combination of A) scorer saw what had happened but didn't understand the rule, and B) knew both the rule and generally what had happened, but didn't remember who the nearest Duke player was, and decided to just go with Kelly because, well, just because.

As noted earlier, the critical element of the play is when the try officially ends. One way it can end is when an official judges that the ball has no chance to go in. The crew ruled that the try had ended on that basis, and thus any touch inside the arc that resulted in a basket would be ruled a two-point goal.

[miramar]

While it seems that this is the case; how can a player who attempts a shot from behind the 3-point line and was still behind the line throughout the entire sequence logically be credited with a 2-point basket?

That is pretty strange, but I believe that the official scorer decides who gets the points since there are no own goals in basketball. Usually it's somebody nearby, such as when a defensive players goes up for a rebound and accidentally tips the ball in. I guess they decided that since it was part of Kelly's shot rather than a rebound, then Kelly gets the credit, but obviously he was trying a three. That also means that he scored two pointers on both threes that he tried at the end, including the one where Carolina froze and allowed him to get his own miss (and then compounded their error by stepping back and allowing him an uncontested shot, which is pretty dumb considering that two of their guys were in the vicinity). But that's no dumber than batting a missed ball in, allowing Mason to strip the ball away (considering that his foul to steal ratio is probably 10 to 1), driving out of control to the basket and not realizing that there is a 6-10 guy standing there, missing two free throws down the stretch, and laying off the opponent's best shooter with your hands down when you know that time is winding down and that he has to put it up. I suspect that wearing baby blue naturally gives you brain lock. I just can't think of any other reason why a team with four sure-fire first rounders would lose at home to a team that is still finding itself.

[Reilly]

A friend said the answer's here and nobobdy should get the points. Haven't verified. What I was given:

http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/Stats_Manuals/Basketball/2012EZ.pdf

Page 3. Article 8, section b.

last being touched by a player on Team B, score the play as
follows:
(a) If the touching by Team B was an attempt to block a shot
by Team A and did not appreciably alter its fl ight, then
such touching is ignored.
(b) If the touching by Team B came after an attempt, either
a FGA or a FTA, by Team A that had obviously missed
and there was no control by Team B, then a FGA or FTA is
charged to Team A on the original shot. No FGM is credited
or FGA charged on the tip-in to either team. Instead,
two points are added to Team A’s score and a footnote
is added to explain the extra points. Also, a dead-ball
rebound is credited to Team A. On the box score, the
two points should appear on the line used for team rebounds.
An asterisk should be placed by the two points
and an explanation for the asterisk should be written in
the form of a footnote.

[gep]

A friend said the answer's here and nobobdy should get the points. Haven't verified. What I was given:



Wow... When I read that first part, I thought that no one, not even Duke, should get the points. But really, except for stats, I really don't care if the asterisk gets the points, as long it counts for Duke and Duke WINS!!!

[miramar]

A friend said the answer's here and nobobdy should get the points. Haven't verified. What I was given:

http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/Stats_Manuals/Basketball/2012EZ.pdf

Page 3. Article 8, section b.

last being touched by a player on Team B, score the play as
follows:
(a) If the touching by Team B was an attempt to block a shot
by Team A and did not appreciably alter its fl ight, then
such touching is ignored.
(b) If the touching by Team B came after an attempt, either
a FGA or a FTA, by Team A that had obviously missed
and there was no control by Team B, then a FGA or FTA is
charged to Team A on the original shot. No FGM is credited
or FGA charged on the tip-in to either team. Instead,
two points are added to Team A’s score and a footnote
is added to explain the extra points. Also, a dead-ball
rebound is credited to Team A. On the box score, the
two points should appear on the line used for team rebounds.
An asterisk should be placed by the two points
and an explanation for the asterisk should be written in
the form of a footnote.

This looks pretty convincing, but has anyone ever seen a box score with an asterisk for a team basket? Perhaps this rule is so arcane that nobody follows it.

Looking over this section, I had no idea that if a player tries a desperation shot, at least from very far away and with an unusual motion, then it doesn't count as a shot attempt. Unless it goes in, of course.

[-jk]

This looks pretty convincing, but has anyone ever seen a box score with an asterisk for a team basket? Perhaps this rule is so arcane that nobody follows it...

My guess is no one's stats software can handle it. The same way they can't deal with a "0" and "00" on the same team.

-jk

[sagegrouse]

My guess is no one's stats software can handle it. The same way they can't deal with a "0" and "00" on the same team.

-jk

You know, there's an obvious solution. Give the basket to the last player that touched the ball (Zeller, in this case), and if it's in the wrong basket, it counts as -2, and UNC's total is reduced. Smoke will be coming out of the computers tracking game stats!


sagegrouse

[Olympic Fan]

That is pretty strange, but I believe that the official scorer decides who gets the points since there are no own goals in basketball. Usually it's somebody nearby, such as when a defensive players goes up for a rebound and accidentally tips the ball in. I guess they decided that since it was part of Kelly's shot rather than a rebound, then Kelly gets the credit, but obviously he was trying a three. That also means that he scored two pointers on both threes that he tried at the end, including the one where Carolina froze and allowed him to get his own miss (and then compounded their error by stepping back and allowing him an uncontested shot, which is pretty dumb considering that two of their guys were in the vicinity). But that's no dumber than batting a missed ball in, allowing Mason to strip the ball away (considering that his foul to steal ratio is probably 10 to 1), driving out of control to the basket and not realizing that there is a 6-10 guy standing there, missing two free throws down the stretch, and laying off the opponent's best shooter with your hands down when you know that time is winding down and that he has to put it up. I suspect that wearing baby blue naturally gives you brain lock. I just can't think of any other reason why a team with four sure-fire first rounders would lose at home to a team that is still finding itself.

Okay, I have found something even stranger than the fact that Ryan was credited with a two-point basket on the play. The official play-by-play:

https://www.nmnathletics.com//pdf8/823170.pdf?ATCLID=205376489&SPSID=22724&SPID=1845&DB_LANG=C&DB_OEM_ID=4200

indicates that Austin Rivers as credited with an assist on the play (scroll down to the final 14 seconds)! Apparently, Austin made the pass to Ryan for the original 3-point attempt. Somehow, that translated to an assist after the Zeller tap-in.

Now THAT is crazy.

[devildeac]

Okay, I have found something even stranger than the fact that Ryan was credited with a two-point basket on the play. The official play-by-play:

https://www.nmnathletics.com//pdf8/823170.pdf?ATCLID=205376489&SPSID=22724&SPID=1845&DB_LANG=C&DB_OEM_ID=4200

indicates that Austin Rivers as credited with an assist on the play (scroll down to the final 14 seconds)! Apparently, Austin made the pass to Ryan for the original 3-point attempt. Somehow, that translated to an assist after the Zeller tap-in.

Now THAT is crazy.

The only thing crazier would be if Daniel Ewing (or Andre Dawkins) got T'ed up on the play, too:rolleyes:.

[ahiromu]

Duke fan from Seattle here, I made an account simply for the sake of answering this question.

I do official stats for the University of Washington and discussed this with my uncle (the guy who runs the stats crew and taught me). After some research, you guys are on the right track. The correct call is as follows:

Missed 3-pointer by Ryan Kelly.
Deadball offensive rebound. (A rebound is required after a missed shot)
Wrong basket attributed to Duke. (Yes, something along the lines of "wrong basket" can go into the play-by-play. In the box score - the points would be on the same line as team rebounds)

Then in the comments section the stats crew would explain the situation (On the rebound, Zeller tipped it in). This is different from the NBA, where the basket would have gone to the closest player. For reference, in the decades my uncle has done UW basketball a situation like this has never come up.

BUT!!!!!!!!!!!!

The official stats crew is at the mercy of the head scorekeeper who has final say on everything (this is the guy in the striped ref uniform behind the possession arrow). There are a few stats that MUST line up at the end of the game and one of them is individual points. We need approval from the head scorekeeper before we can send our stats to the NCAA/ESPN, but I'm not sure if other crews wait for said approval. What must have happened here is one of two things:

1. The UNC crew just plain screwed up.
2. The head scorekeeper (incorrectly) attributed the 2 points to Kelly. In this case we would have talked with him after the game, but if he stuck to it we would have to jumble something together (but not what they have). What's just plain wrong about what they have is that it was clearly a three pointer and the ref even put three fingers up, therefore for him to be given two points something else must have happened.


Lastly: I'm like 99% sure it's NCAA-wide, but everyone in the Pac-12 uses the same software (old DOS program) and it can handle the wrong basket.


Edit: Looking at the box scores posted on the Duke&UNC websites, we have the -exact- same format. So it's probably safe to assume we use the same program.

[Newton_14]

Duke fan from Seattle here, I made an account simply for the sake of answering this question.

I do official stats for the University of Washington and discussed this with my uncle (the guy who runs the stats crew and taught me). After some research, you guys are on the right track. The correct call is as follows:

Missed 3-pointer by Ryan Kelly.
Deadball offensive rebound. (A rebound is required after a missed shot)
Wrong basket attributed to Duke. (Yes, something along the lines of "wrong basket" can go into the play-by-play. In the box score - the points would be on the same line as team rebounds)

Then in the comments section the stats crew would explain the situation (On the rebound, Zeller tipped it in). This is different from the NBA, where the basket would have gone to the closest player. For reference, in the decades my uncle has done UW basketball a situation like this has never come up.

BUT!!!!!!!!!!!!

The official stats crew is at the mercy of the head scorekeeper who has final say on everything (this is the guy in the striped ref uniform behind the possession arrow). There are a few stats that MUST line up at the end of the game and one of them is individual points. We need approval from the head scorekeeper before we can send our stats to the NCAA/ESPN, but I'm not sure if other crews wait for said approval. What must have happened here is one of two things:

1. The UNC crew just plain screwed up.
2. The head scorekeeper (incorrectly) attributed the 2 points to Kelly. In this case we would have talked with him after the game, but if he stuck to it we would have to jumble something together (but not what they have). What's just plain wrong about what they have is that it was clearly a three pointer and the ref even put three fingers up, therefore for him to be given two points something else must have happened.


Lastly: I'm like 99% sure it's NCAA-wide, but everyone in the Pac-12 uses the same software (old DOS program) and it can handle the wrong basket.


Edit: Looking at the box scores posted on the Duke&UNC websites, we have the -exact- same format. So it's probably safe to assume we use the same program.

Welcome to DBR and thanks for providing your expertise here. I falsely assumed the rule was the closest Duke player should get the points (Mason). Never knew that was NBA only. So actually Duke attempted 37 three pointers but the official record will always state 36. Weird!

[Reilly]

Okay, I have found something even stranger than the fact that Ryan was credited with a two-point basket on the play. ... Austin Rivers as credited with an assist on the play....

In the "Spreading the Love a Bit More" thread, post #2, I noted that Austin was given an assist there. When I was compiling the list of plays from the play by play, it didn't strike me as right. The whole comeback was dream-like, and I was wondering if in my own mind I wasn't remembering the sequence of events down the stretch (at that time, had not had the opportunity to re-watch the last 2 minutes).

[ahiromu]

Welcome to DBR and thanks for providing your expertise here. I falsely assumed the rule was the closest Duke player should get the points (Mason). Never knew that was NBA only. So actually Duke attempted 37 three pointers but the official record will always state 36. Weird!

Thank you. I believe that at some point in the past the rules were the same as the NBA (Mason would have received the rebound/shot) but it was changed for whatever reason. I have absolutely no proof of this but it came from my uncle and he's kind of a genius when it comes to these things.

I would not say "always state 36." There's usually a governing body somewhere that has a final say. In the NFL "New York" as they're called will often critique official stats during the game. In college football, the head of the stats crew will routinely go back and fix mistakes after the game is over. We don't have an NBA team in town and I don't work the WNBA, but probably the same deal. I've been doing this for two years and I don't remember someone fixing a mistake, but I would not be surprised if this gets changed in the near future (or already has been but nobody's updated).

FYI, in the MLS none of the stats are official. The "governing body" does the real stats off of tape and everything done on-site is just for the press/fans.


The only situation where Austin should have been given an assist is if the head scorekeeper decided that the ball was going in on its own and gave Kelly a three pointer.

[anon]

Duke fan from Seattle here, I made an account simply for the sake of answering this question.

I do official stats for the University of Washington and discussed this with my uncle (the guy who runs the stats crew and taught me). After some research, you guys are on the right track. The correct call is as follows:

Missed 3-pointer by Ryan Kelly.
Deadball offensive rebound. (A rebound is required after a missed shot)
Wrong basket attributed to Duke. (Yes, something along the lines of "wrong basket" can go into the play-by-play. In the box score - the points would be on the same line as team rebounds)

Then in the comments section the stats crew would explain the situation (On the rebound, Zeller tipped it in). This is different from the NBA, where the basket would have gone to the closest player. For reference, in the decades my uncle has done UW basketball a situation like this has never come up.

BUT!!!!!!!!!!!!

The official stats crew is at the mercy of the head scorekeeper who has final say on everything (this is the guy in the striped ref uniform behind the possession arrow). There are a few stats that MUST line up at the end of the game and one of them is individual points. We need approval from the head scorekeeper before we can send our stats to the NCAA/ESPN, but I'm not sure if other crews wait for said approval. What must have happened here is one of two things:

1. The UNC crew just plain screwed up.
2. The head scorekeeper (incorrectly) attributed the 2 points to Kelly. In this case we would have talked with him after the game, but if he stuck to it we would have to jumble something together (but not what they have). What's just plain wrong about what they have is that it was clearly a three pointer and the ref even put three fingers up, therefore for him to be given two points something else must have happened.


Lastly: I'm like 99% sure it's NCAA-wide, but everyone in the Pac-12 uses the same software (old DOS program) and it can handle the wrong basket.


Edit: Looking at the box scores posted on the Duke&UNC websites, we have the -exact- same format. So it's probably safe to assume we use the same program.

Actually, the ref put two fingers up. You can watch a replay of the game on WatchESPN.com.

[ahiromu]

Actually, the ref put two fingers up. You can watch a replay of the game on WatchESPN.com.

First off, I input. This means that I never watch the ref and decide whether or not he signals a two or three pointer.

After watching that several times, I'm going to have to disagree with you (but admit it's not 100% clear). I inferred because he put his hand up AND Kelly was about two full feet behind the line.

I'm working a game tomorrow, I'll ask but there's a possibility the number of fingers doesn't matter - just as long as the hand is straight up.

If anyone here is bored and wants to decide for themself:
http://espn.go.com/watchespn/index/_/id/380324/duke-vs-north-carolina
Around 2:00:00

[uh_no]

First off, I input. This means that I never watch the ref and decide whether or not he signals a two or three pointer.

After watching that several times, I'm going to have to disagree with you (but admit it's not 100% clear). I inferred because he put his hand up AND Kelly was about two full feet behind the line.

I'm working a game tomorrow, I'll ask but there's a possibility the number of fingers doesn't matter - just as long as the hand is straight up.

If anyone here is bored and wants to decide for themself:
http://espn.go.com/watchespn/index/_/id/380324/duke-vs-north-carolina
Around 2:00:00

THat would seem to be correct. If the ref raises one hand during a shot, its a three. IN the case of a questionable two, refs will often wave two fingers towards teh scorer just to be clear, but never put a hand up in the air with two fingers.

[ahiromu]

THat would seem to be correct. If the ref raises one hand during a shot, its a three. IN the case of a questionable two, refs will often wave two fingers towards teh scorer just to be clear, but never put a hand up in the air with two fingers.

Yeah, wave two fingers at waist-level usually.

[throatybeard]

I may be a bear of very little brain, but I've read this whole thread twice and I'm still confused.

Here's a question. In the 1983 title game, did Whittenburg get an assist, or was he credited with a miss and Charles credited with a rebound?

[Reilly]

...I've read this whole thread twice and I'm still confused....

Kelly should be charged with a 3 point attempt.
Kelly should *not* be credited with 2 points.
Kelly should *not* be charged with a 2 point attempt.
Rivers should *not* be credited with an assist.
Duke should be credited with 2 points.
Stats geeks should keep watching to see if the official scoring changes.
Zeller should be thanked.
Roy should be mocked.

[WakeDevil]

There was no deadball rebound on that play.

Whittenburg shot, so there was no assist.

[WakeDevil]

Kelly attempted a shot. Where you get that he shouldn't be credited with one is beyond me.

[Reilly]

Kelly attempted a shot. Where you get that he shouldn't be credited with one is beyond me.

Go beyond yourself to the link in post #30 above. Kelly should be credited with a 3-point attempt. He is not (should not be) credited with a made bucket.

"then a FGA or FTA is
charged to Team A on the original shot. No FGM is credited
or FGA charged on the tip-in to either team."

[WakeDevil]

That's what I said. The argument is with someone else.

[ahiromu]

I may be a bear of very little brain, but I've read this whole thread twice and I'm still confused.

Here's a question. In the 1983 title game, did Whittenburg get an assist, or was he credited with a miss and Charles credited with a rebound?

I'm not old enough to have seen or remember that. Just remember that rules change with time and I'm pretty sure this one has.

So I talked with our head scorekeeper, he told me that the ONLY thing that matters is that a hand is straight up. If no hand signals are made at the time of the shot it's a two pointer, but sometimes you will see the ref show two fingers (the peace/victory sign) to the head scorekeeper just to clarify when he's running to the other side of the court.

[turnandburn55]

What we were all wondering is whether or not Duke should get the ball back... after all, Tyler Zeller scored, didn't he? :cool:

[TexHawk]

Something similar happened in the KU game against Oklahoma State on Saturday. Not the same of course, but the same rules apply. Thomas Robinson drove the lane and tried to pass to Jeff Withey, the ball was deflected off of OSU (Lebryan Nash's face, to be exact) and into the basket. At the time, Robinson was awarded two points. But the announcers were told that it would be fixed after the game to "Kansas basket". I can't find an official play-by-play, but that was the ruling the audience was given.