For the record, the officials were Tiara Cruse, Teresa Stuck, Krystle Apellaniz
I don't recognize any of those names.
Regarding the called foul charged against Agara late in regulation, I can't recall the last time I've ever seen an official call a foul more than a second after the occurrence. A half second late would see like a slow whistle.
Had she called it only 1.1 second late (when the clock showed 0.1), the applicable rule is that the clock be stopped when she SIGNALS the foul, so Clemson would get the ball with 0.1 on the clock. But she clearly was watching the shot & backboard, and signaled the foul when the red light came on, 1.2 seconds after she ruled the foul occurred. There is a rule that if the clock expires before the ref has called the foul, then the clock is set to when the foul occurred (even if it was 10 seconds before the clock expired). I'm sure those that made the rule never considered such a slow whistle. So Clemson got the ball with 1.2 seconds on the clock.
Did the official intentionally wait for the clock to run out? I have to say that I think so. We saw no earlier calls for fouls that were way late. The red light comes on before she begins to raise her arm. I'm sorta surprised she didn't signal that the foul was before the shot, which I could see being called. EDIT: Indeed, the foul was ruled as being before the shot. Agara was not credited with a shot in the play-by-play.
I actually can see a reasoning behind waiting even though I don't agree with it. The idea would be that whatever you call, the signal will be later than the foul. But if you wait until time expires, the clock can be wound backwards to the time of the foul.
(The second set of extra time given to Clemson was based on the requirement that at least 0.3 seconds be taken off the clock. 1.2 - 0.3 = 0.9.)
As for the legitimacy of the foul, the defensive player was clearly moving laterally throughout. Agara's outside foot (right) was outside the defender's outside foot (left). Did the defensive player move into Agara's path. Clearly so. Both of Agara's feet were off the floor when the contact was made. The defender can't move into the path of an airborne player (not just airborne shooter). Unfortunately, the rules don't clarify "airborne".
At the next chalk talk, I suggest someone asking if Stanford asked if the official intentionally waited until the clock ran out before calling the foul on Agara. Is this a directive to officials, or just a one-off action by this ref. If a directive, when (5 seconds? 20?) do they stop calling fouls as they happen, and instead wait for the clock to run out?
I don't recognize any of those names.
Regarding the called foul charged against Agara late in regulation, I can't recall the last time I've ever seen an official call a foul more than a second after the occurrence. A half second late would see like a slow whistle.
Had she called it only 1.1 second late (when the clock showed 0.1), the applicable rule is that the clock be stopped when she SIGNALS the foul, so Clemson would get the ball with 0.1 on the clock. But she clearly was watching the shot & backboard, and signaled the foul when the red light came on, 1.2 seconds after she ruled the foul occurred. There is a rule that if the clock expires before the ref has called the foul, then the clock is set to when the foul occurred (even if it was 10 seconds before the clock expired). I'm sure those that made the rule never considered such a slow whistle. So Clemson got the ball with 1.2 seconds on the clock.
Did the official intentionally wait for the clock to run out? I have to say that I think so. We saw no earlier calls for fouls that were way late. The red light comes on before she begins to raise her arm. I'm sorta surprised she didn't signal that the foul was before the shot, which I could see being called. EDIT: Indeed, the foul was ruled as being before the shot. Agara was not credited with a shot in the play-by-play.
I actually can see a reasoning behind waiting even though I don't agree with it. The idea would be that whatever you call, the signal will be later than the foul. But if you wait until time expires, the clock can be wound backwards to the time of the foul.
(The second set of extra time given to Clemson was based on the requirement that at least 0.3 seconds be taken off the clock. 1.2 - 0.3 = 0.9.)
As for the legitimacy of the foul, the defensive player was clearly moving laterally throughout. Agara's outside foot (right) was outside the defender's outside foot (left). Did the defensive player move into Agara's path. Clearly so. Both of Agara's feet were off the floor when the contact was made. The defender can't move into the path of an airborne player (not just airborne shooter). Unfortunately, the rules don't clarify "airborne".
At the next chalk talk, I suggest someone asking if Stanford asked if the official intentionally waited until the clock ran out before calling the foul on Agara. Is this a directive to officials, or just a one-off action by this ref. If a directive, when (5 seconds? 20?) do they stop calling fouls as they happen, and instead wait for the clock to run out?