[M T]

much as i would like the pac-12 to be successful, belmont should just have won at the end of the first ot. first sabally clearly traveled on her last shot. then with belmont driving for the go-ahead basket, sabally ran over the screener and knocked her flat in order to go for that block. no call.

Actually, it shouldn't have gone to even the first OT.   Tied at 50-50, with 24 seconds left and 6 seconds left on the shot clock for Belmont, the female ref (Demoya Williams) called a foul on a close guarding play against Oregon.   The Oregon player had her arms out like a crucifix, so it wasn't a hand foul.  The camera had a good angle (and the ref didn't).  There was a good 6" separation between the players, excepting the dribbler's forearm pushing away the defender.  The result was a 2 point lead for Belmont rather than a desperation 3.

This Kyle Bacon team of officials was typically poor.  With 1:10 left in Q2, with under 5 seconds on the shot clock, an  Oregon player tipped a Belmont dribble toward the sideline, raced to do a backward underarm flip on the ball as it was going out of bounds, but it went right back to the Belmont player.  10 seconds later, when the shot clock buzzer hadn't gone off, Bacon stopped play. The refs discussed it.  It appeared Williams must have been arguing that the flip of the ball counted as a change of possession.  Bacon reviewed the play at let it stand as 25 seconds on the shot clock. The shot clock supposedly was properly reset.  I'm not that familiar with change  of possession rulings.  I was surprised, but maybe that's what it should be.  (The only rule that applies that authorizes the reset to 30 seconds is "There is a change in team control.")

But then, with 7 seconds left in the 2nd OT, a Belmont player saved a rebound going out of bounds at the Oregon end by jumping out of bounds, grabbing the ball, and purposely passed (not deflected) the ball back to a Belmont player,  who then turned back to the court to pass it.  She got swarmed and so turned toward the sidelines and called time out.   Belmont was allowed to advance the ball to the front court.

However, the rule for advancing the ball upon a timeout in the last minute only applies if you haven't advanced the ball prior to the timeout.  If indeed, the throw-in from a player jumping above the out-of-bounds area constitutes team control, then Belmont had secured control of the rebound by the player who made the out-of-bounds save, and then advanced it to the player that called the time out. IMO, the timeout is allowed, but advancing to the front court is not, so Belmont would have had to inbound from the corner at the Oregon end.

At least one of those two rulings must be in error.  The first was reviewed by Bacon.  The second was made by Bacon.

On further review, I believe both were in error. During an interrupted dribble as in the shot-clock play, the dribbler's team is still considered as in control. So, unless the desperate swat was considered as in control, Oregon never had control. I suppose one could consider a desperate swat at a ball as control but it seems much more like the batting or tapping referenced when there is no team control. But that pass at the end of the game clearly was team control and advancing the ball from one player to another.

[M T]

much as i would like the pac-12 to be successful, belmont should just have won at the end of the first ot. first sabally clearly traveled on her last shot. then with belmont driving for the go-ahead basket, sabally ran over the screener and knocked her flat in order to go for that block. no call.

Actually, it shouldn't have gone to even the first OT.   Tied at 50-50, with 24 seconds left and 6 seconds left on the shot clock for Belmont, the female ref (Demoya Williams) called a foul on a close guarding play against Oregon.   The Oregon player had her arms out like a crucifix, so it wasn't a hand foul.  The camera had a good angle (and the ref didn't).  There was a good 6" separation between the players, excepting the dribbler's forearm pushing away the defender.  The result was a 2 point lead for Belmont rather than a desperation 3.

This Kyle Bacon team of officials was typically poor.  With 1:10 left in Q2, with under 5 seconds on the shot clock, an  Oregon player tipped a Belmont dribble toward the sideline, raced to do a backward underarm flip on the ball as it was going out of bounds, but it went right back to the Belmont player.  10 seconds later, when the shot clock buzzer hadn't gone off, Bacon stopped play. The refs discussed it.  It appeared Williams must have been arguing that the flip of the ball counted as a change of possession.  Bacon reviewed the play at let it stand as 25 seconds on the shot clock. The shot clock supposedly was properly reset.  I'm not that familiar with change  of possession rulings.  I was surprised, but maybe that's what it should be.  (The only rule that applies that authorizes the reset to 30 seconds is "There is a change in team control.")

But then, with 7 seconds left in the 2nd OT, a Belmont player saved a rebound going out of bounds at the Oregon end by jumping out of bounds, grabbing the ball, and purposely passed (not deflected) the ball back to a Belmont player,  who then turned back to the court to pass it.  She got swarmed and so turned toward the sidelines and called time out.   Belmont was allowed to advance the ball to the front court.

However, the rule for advancing the ball upon a timeout in the last minute only applies if you haven't advanced the ball prior to the timeout.  If indeed, the throw-in from a player jumping above the out-of-bounds area constitutes team control, then Belmont had secured control of the rebound by the player who made the out-of-bounds save, and then advanced it to the player that called the time out. IMO, the timeout is allowed, but advancing to the front court is not, so Belmont would have had to inbound from the corner at the Oregon end.

At least one of those two rulings must be in error.  The first was reviewed by Bacon.  The second was made by Bacon.

On further review, I believe both were in error. During an interrupted dribble as in the shot-clock play, the dribbler's team is still considered as in control. So, unless the desperate swat was considered as in control, Oregon never had control. I suppose one could consider a desperate swat at a ball as control but it seems much more like the batting or tapping referenced when there is no team control. But that pass at the end of the game clearly was team control and advancing the ball from one player to another.