Why did they get the ball back after they were called for offensive goaltending? Is this a new rule they snuck in?

The three man crew of rules experts didn't get the rule right

Somehow, goaltending isn't a turnover

Since possession was not immediately established due to the ball going in the hoop, they used a Jump Ball - and the possession arrow went to ISU.

And they missed an out of bounds 3 pt shot and ruled it good

Gump 02 said:

---

Since possession was not immediately established due to the ball going in the hoop, they used a Jump Ball - and the possession arrow went to ISU.

---

Lol, nice try but that's a moronic explanation.

AggieMD95 said:

---

And they missed an out of bounds 3 pt shot and ruled it good

---

That was a rule change this year.

That's not the rule. Offensive goaltending is a turnover. It's not a possession arrow situation.

Someone on premium posted the rule…. Refs just blew the call

What happened is they originally callled goaltending on us, then reviewed it and took away our goaltending, but they can't add a goaltend on ISU on review so it went to the possession arrow.

Just an odd play with how the rule is worded but we came out ahead of where we'd be if it weren't reviewable

https://texags.com/forums/25/topics/3426454

Missing the original call is what started this cluster****. It was pretty obvious to me in real time on TV that it was offensive interference. So the middle and the trail official both missing that led to the alternating possession fiasco.

bobinator said:

---

What happened is they originally callled goaltending on us, then reviewed it and took away our goaltending, but they can't add a goaltend on ISU on review so it went to the possession arrow.

Just an odd play with how the rule is worded but we came out ahead of where we'd be if it weren't reviewable

---

But why call goaltending on us? We were on D, the ball went in. Basket either way.

If they called goaltending on us, and we did not goaltend, then why were they able to disallow the basket?

The review allows them remove the goaltend on us. But the play essentially ends at that point...before the ball goes in the basket.

They are not allowed to assess offensive goaltending strictly from replay so you are essentially left with neither team having possession and thus go to the arrow.

Equivalent to an inadvertent whistle during a loose ball.

Yeah, whether it went in afterward or not doesn't matter.

They didn't disallow the basket, they got two points from the goaltend, then lost them on the review.

But this reviewable goaltending thing is wonky for sure.

TV didn't know what was going on either...they still had ISU with the arrow afterwards.

I think they need to reverse course a bit here and make goaltending not reviewable until the last two minutes of the game and then it needs to be immediately reviewable both ways.

It's not like bad goaltending calls were some kind of plague killing the game like charges were.

If you are the official, why call goaltending when the basket goes in? Is basket interference not reviewable?

If the ball goes in and official is unsure, basket interference would appear to be the call to make.

I also find the rule that a shot blocked after it touches the backboard constitutes goaltending. We saw this tonight with Garcia. Not sure why the backboard matters when shot is going up. Coming down is of course a different matter.

They've already started to blow the whistle for the goaltend, the play is over. There's no "wait around and see if it goes in" aspect of it. Worth noting the goaltend wasn't called when it was sitting on the rim, it was Solo earlier in the shot.

Sure but the two events are usually instantaneous. No waiting.

And context that the call was on Solo was not offered by the talking heads. That does make more sense relative to actions officials took.

R-Dog said:

---

The review allows them remove the goaltend on us. But the play essentially ends at that point...before the ball goes in the basket.

They are not allowed to assess offensive goaltending strictly from replay so you are essentially left with neither team having possession and thus go to the arrow.

Equivalent to an inadvertent whistle during a loose ball.

---

That is so freaking ridiculous, that it is beyond comprehension.

So instead of getting the call right with replay, they actually CANNOT use replay to fix the outcome to what actually happened?

That literally makes ZERO sense.

But it is okay to go back several minutes of game time to determine whether or not a shot was a 2 or 3 pointer?

That happened to us in one of the first games this year. Come back from commercial and they decided a shot made 2 minutes ago (of gametime) , was not a 3 pointer.

aggiez03 said:

---

R-Dog said:

---

The review allows them remove the goaltend on us. But the play essentially ends at that point...before the ball goes in the basket.

They are not allowed to assess offensive goaltending strictly from replay so you are essentially left with neither team having possession and thus go to the arrow.

Equivalent to an inadvertent whistle during a loose ball.

---

That is so freaking ridiculous, that it is beyond comprehension.

So instead of getting the call right with replay, they actually CANNOT use replay to fix the outcome to what actually happened?

That literally makes ZERO sense.

But it is okay to go back several minutes of game time to determine whether or not a shot was a 2 or 3 pointer?

That happened to us in one of the first games this year. Come back from commercial and they decided a shot made 2 minutes ago (of gametime) , was not a 3 pointer.

---

Yes. There are restrictions as to what can and cannot be reviewed. And a three vs two is done as the first possible time to look at it. And that could be seconds or minutes after

The 2/3 pointer thing doesn't bother me, they want to get it right but don't want to stop the flow of the game. Taking or adding a point a few minutes later doesn't matter much and they review 2/3 calls immediately late in the game.

But I almost think because of the nature of the goaltending call that we need to just live or die with the call on the floor. If you originally call a goaltend, but then later take it away, you've taken away the offense's chance to get the ball back. That's what happened to us earlier this year (I think it was against Ohio State.)

He had clear possession after the block, but they blew it dead because of goaltending and then two minutes later took away the goaltend. That doesn't feel like how it should work to me.

If we're going to review goaltending it needs to be immediate and then possession goes with clear recovery. If neither team clearly had it then it goes to a jump.

But like I said, I also don't think goaltending calls were a big enough deal that we even need to review them.