Posted February 17, 2014

Pac-12 referees admit missed call on Arizona State dunk

NCAAB
Jahii Carson (Ralph Freso/Getty Images)

Jahii Carson gave Arizona State its second win over a ranked opponent this season. (Ralph Freso/Getty Images)

When Arizona State’s Jahii Carson dunked with a half-second left, he sealed the Sun Devils’ 69-66 double-overtime upset over No. 2 Arizona on Friday.

But Carson hung on the rim and then pulled himself up in a chin-up motion.

SI WIRE: Lamar University fires Pat Knight

The Pac-12 conference acknowledged its referees should have assessed a technical foul on the play, which would have given Arizona two free throws and possession of the ball. The officials noted the error in their standard review of the game, a conference official told Andy Katz of ESPN.com Sunday night.

Carson’s dunk came after Jordan Bachynski blocked an attempted game-winning shot by Arizona’s T.J. McConnell with 5.2 seconds left.

Wrote Katz: “The NCAA rulebook cites Section 4 Class B technical infractions article 1, letter f, which states ‘Grasping, either basket in an excessive, emphatic manner during the officials’ jurisdiction when the player is not, in the judgment of an official, trying to prevent an obvious injury to self or others,’ results in a technical.”

Video of the play can be seen below.

SI WIRE: Memphis suspends Dominic Woodson for using foul language


15 comments
LogicalConsider
LogicalConsider

I'm an ACC fan on the East Coast.  So, I have no dog in this fight, but in looking at the still shot at the top of the article and watching the video replay, it seems obvious to me that at least IN PART, the hanging on the rim was to preserve his own safety.  His teammate (I guess in a moment of exuberance) had run under him and, to protect himself, raised his hands above his head.  One ends up on Carson's ankle; one nearly in Carson's crotch.  It seems obvious that if Carson lets go at that moment, the teammate's hands become the point of rotation and Carson's back, neck and head rotate rapidly towards the floor.  


Purity of motive isn't required for the safety provision to be effective.  I have no doubt a part of him WANTED to hang on the rim, but since he HAD to hang on the rim to avoid getting undercut and going head first to the floor, it was correct no call.

greg857az
greg857az

And no mention by anybody of the goaltending non call  on the block at the other end.

JRTENN
JRTENN

Egad, so it "was" a foul play, indeed. Well, the 'Cats have won a few, and lost a few this season, some that went both for and against the 'Cats. They will be a better team than before for tasting defeat. Go 'Cats, Bear Down.

drudown
drudown

What's the controversy?


U of A will be a stronger team by losing on the merits, i.e., who would feel good about winning on a technical foul under the operative facts? Not a champion. 


/s/ Rudy T


ps. Bear Down, Cats! 

SunDevil4Life
SunDevil4Life

If I am correct, the rule book states that a technical foul cannot be assessed for that in a "dead-ball situation." and the referees had already stated that they had blown play dead at the time.


Plus, even if they assess the technical foul, UofA would have to shoot 2 free throws (which they were less than 50% for the game) and then make a shot with 0.8 seconds left, which allows only for a catch and shoot (and UofA shot less than 38% for the game).  Chances of them coming back from 3 down in that situation were extremely low.

ThatDonGuy
ThatDonGuy

I wonder how many people would have responded, "How could the officials make that call in a situation like that?" (with the occasional "The Pac-12 obviously wanted Arizona to win rather badly" added) had they actually called a technical for that?

CarlEdwardJansen
CarlEdwardJansen

 Sorry, the play was over, no T unless a uofa player had attempted to inbound the ball. Obviously, they are not intelligent enough to know that (that's why they attend that filthy barrio). Have some tacos with your whine!

BlairELConquistadorMcKee
BlairELConquistadorMcKee

@greg857az  I watched that game and I don't agree that it was goaltending. The ball , in my opinion was at the top of the arc. 

But that was no question an egregious oversight to miss an egregious showboating slam dunk that should have been called a technical.

drudown
drudown

"Wrong must not win on a technicality." - Aeschylus

shays01
shays01

@CarlEdwardJansen  The Pac12 itself has announced that the refs missed the call.  As for the rest of your comment, hopefully you speak only for yourself and do not share sentiments common amongst Sun Devil fans or students.  Then again, you probably are from Arizona

Chip
Chip

@CarlEdwardJansen  What does the play being over (or not) have to do with assessing a technical? There's nothing about that in the rule book as far as grabbing and hanging onto the rim is concerned.

shays01
shays01

@badboykilla4rilla  I'm a Pac12 fan and am relatively neutral with regard to the Arizona schools, unless they are playing a non-conference game.  A technical could have been called and, assuming both free throws made, the Wildcats would have had a little over 5 seconds to get the ball in, call their last time out, and get the ball in at half court for the chance of one more shot.  No guarantee of anything, of course ... but at least the opportunity would have been there.  Still ... it was a clean block at the other end and no shot would have sealed the victory.


Why is it that the ASU and AU fans who take the time to leave a comment must resort to ethnic slurs and dismissive slang?