Does anyone have a link to the video, or even a story, from the ISU vs KU game where state was shooting 2 free throws and KU took off after the first shot, made a 3, they left it on the board and brought everyone back down for the second free throw? My boss is a creighton alumn and doesn't believe that it is possible. thanks in advance
Kansas phantom 3 pointer
- Thread starter JordanHXC
- Start date
I don't have a link to a story, but I remember the details. Homan at the line for a two-shot foul. Misses the first and KU rebounds and J.R. Giddeons (transferred to New Mexico St. since then I believe) hit the three that they kept on the board. Homan never even left the free throw line that I remember during the whole event.
Almost as upsetting as the blundered double-foul against Shirley in the MSU game.
Crap that almost happened again to us in a game this year I believe. Everyone in Hilton was screaming when it happened but thankfully the refs called it dead in time.
I remember it that way as well.
What was the justification by the ref (I use that term loosely)?
If you ask me, this was far worse that the Shirley incident - importance not withstanding. At least with the Shirley double foul - it was poor use of an actual rule. In fact, I think there was a near reoccurance of it this year in the NCAA tourney. Don't remember the teams or exact scenario, but I do remember thinking that a mere 6 years later, we see it again.
The Phantom 3 incident - I just can't figure that one out.
What was the justification by the ref (I use that term loosely)?
If you ask me, this was far worse that the Shirley incident - importance not withstanding. At least with the Shirley double foul - it was poor use of an actual rule. In fact, I think there was a near reoccurance of it this year in the NCAA tourney. Don't remember the teams or exact scenario, but I do remember thinking that a mere 6 years later, we see it again.
The Phantom 3 incident - I just can't figure that one out.
Last edited:
Something about "correctable errors" I think. In looking for articles about it, that was the game where KU forced overtime with another 3 where the shooter's (Keith Langford?) foot was on the line. BOOOOO!!!!:baffled5wh:
KU won 90-89 in OT. Langford hit a "3" to send it to OT, but his foot was on the line. The refs called it a trey and wasn't reviewed.
In neither the Shirley double foul or the phantomm 3 did the refs to anything wrong by the rule book. The just made some really bone headed gaffs.
The three was really boneheaded. All 3 of the refs had to space off and not realize it was a two shotter. Since none of them blew it dead, the three should count. The refs should not be punished for screwing up the rules, they got those pretty much right. They should have been punished for each of them having the attention span of a 5 year old.
The double foul was a little less of a goof. The two officials should have been communicating better before calling the charge and block. They could have blown the whistle, realized they both had the call and discussed it before signalling, or they could have looked at each other, realized the both had the call and just let one of them make the call. Good eye contact and communication should make sure that situation never happens, but since it did happen, they handled it correctly. It did happen the same way in the tournament this year, too.
Neither of these situations should be allowed to happen. Communciation and good officiating prowess should make sure they never do. But in these 2 cases, the officials handled the situations correctly after stupidly allowing the situation to occur.
The three was really boneheaded. All 3 of the refs had to space off and not realize it was a two shotter. Since none of them blew it dead, the three should count. The refs should not be punished for screwing up the rules, they got those pretty much right. They should have been punished for each of them having the attention span of a 5 year old.
The double foul was a little less of a goof. The two officials should have been communicating better before calling the charge and block. They could have blown the whistle, realized they both had the call and discussed it before signalling, or they could have looked at each other, realized the both had the call and just let one of them make the call. Good eye contact and communication should make sure that situation never happens, but since it did happen, they handled it correctly. It did happen the same way in the tournament this year, too.
Neither of these situations should be allowed to happen. Communciation and good officiating prowess should make sure they never do. But in these 2 cases, the officials handled the situations correctly after stupidly allowing the situation to occur.
Every time KU plays ISU I bring that up to KU fans and they just choose to believe that it didn't happen. They always say "I don't remember that play you must be wrong. It makes me so mad. That should have been ISU's 4th win in Lawerence since the start ot the Big 12 that would have tied ISU with the rest of the Big 12 with 4 wins in Lawerence. Also it would have been 4 out of 5 years,
I disagree with you about the Shirley double foul. While a double foul may be allowable according to the rules, a double blocking/charging foul is a virtual impossibility under the rulebook. Either the defensive player has established position, or he hasn't. If he has, the correct call is a charge on the offensive player, and no foul should be called on the defender. If he hasn't established position, then the offensive player has "first dibs" to the spot that the defensive player is moving to, and the call should have been a block. It's an either/or situation. Calling a foul on both players means the refs blew it, plain and simple.
What makes it even worse is that they waived off Shirley's basket. Replays show that the ball had clearly left Shirley's hand when the contact occurred. It was obvious in real-time, and it was even more obvious in slow motion. To this day, I think the refs were scared of making a call that would upset the pro-Spartans crowd at the Palace in Auburn Hills, and they destroyed ISU's chances of winning that game as a result.
Just remember to give Tommy O'Neill (KU game) and Curtis Shaw (MSU game) hell whenever they come to Hilton. O'Neill has screwed us more than just that one time in the Phog as well. I don't have a big problem with Shaw but that block/charge call will eat at me until the day I die so I can't help but rip him.
By rule, those both can't occur at the same time, but the rule is open to interpretation. One ref saw it as a charge and one a block. The call is a tough one, it could go either way. The problem is that both refs made the call simultaneously. They are trained (or should be) to be aware of the other refs and not get into that situation. Once they were in that situation, calling a double foul is the correct course of action.
Here is another example. Two refs call fouls on different sides of the court. It appears as though they are called at the same time. In this case, they would talk and probably decide that one play occurred before the other. If the decided they happened at the same time, both fouls would count, but you'd never see that happen. You would always be able to choose one over the other and justify it by saying that official A heard Official B's whistle right after he made the call. You don't have that argument in a block/charge case. You can't justify it by saying the block happened before the charge.
You'll probably see this situation occur on lower levels much more often. One ref calling a block and one a charge. I've done it before and one of the things I really work on is making eye contact with the other refs in a play like that. I just raise my hand and can wait a few seconds to call a block or a charge. What probably happens when both are called on the lower levels (middle school and high school for me) is that the refs will talk and decide on one or the other. Thats probably not the right thing to do according to the rules.
Regarding the shot counting, I don't remember that so I'll trust your recollection. Funny thing about that game is I remember the experience, we had friends over, moved an extra TV into another room since we didn't all have room to watch on the main TV. I don't remember the specifics of the game other other than recollections of this call and highlights of the tirade. I haven't rewatched it and don't remember much else.
Sshhhhh! That situation was completely different... because... umm... Iowa State won the game... :yes4lo:
I think it is possible to have a play where one ref believes that the defensive player blocked and another ref believes that the offensive player charged. The solution to this conundrum is to have an explicit rule for this situation. We can assume, since the refs were divided in their judgment, it is likely that, in fact, no foul occurred on the play. Therefore, the rule should be that in this case, no foul is called and any points scored on the play will count, since no foul occurred.
I believe this is a reasonable solution and would be acceptable to the refs, the coaches, the players and the fans.
I appreciate the suggestion, but I think that is a silly idea. How is it possibly likely that no foul occured on the play? Two refs saw a foul. If no whistle was blown initially, fans would be made at times to. Lets say that is the case and a whistle is blown, but you can't tell who had possession? How do you determine if a shot should count? The rules for a shot counting on a charge are different from that of a block.
