|
|
Post by badgerbreath on Nov 25, 2014 16:10:23 GMT -5
Really odd. But you can see the thinking. The game never actually finished since one of the tech points should have been ISU's, which would leave the score at 14-12 tech. So they could play for that final point, but the concern is that the whole dynamic of the set was affected by that call. So they will just rerun it from the point of the bad call.
Still...seems hard on the Tech girls, especially because now they have to play the final points at Ames rather than Lubbuck. That part barely seems fair.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 25, 2014 16:15:58 GMT -5
Odd that it would be replayed since, according to the other article (which also doesn't give specifics about the infraction), ISU tied the 5th game at 9-9 before losing. In effect, they had a better chance of winning the previous match than they do of winning this replay. Except they did lose. They don't have any chance of winning that one. They do have a chance now. Right. They are basically getting a second chance to accomplish a very difficult task. But the point is they DID accomplish it (came back to tie). If anything, the call seemed to help them. What are the odds of them running off 4 straight points in the replay? I'd still like to know what happened. |
|
|
|
Post by cyclonepower on Nov 25, 2014 16:16:15 GMT -5
How is replaying this even an option? No one replays football or basketball games based on bad calls?? Do the teams have to use the same line-ups that were on the floor then? This just seems all around wrong...there are bad calls in every match. And it certainly shouldn't be done at the opponents venue, fans or not. Strange precedent being set here? 1. This has been mentioned in the RPI thread, but because this decision came down from the NCAA Rules Committee (not the conference), the result has not counted in RPI for almost three weeks now. On that note, ISU has seen its RPI soar. Part of that is due to picking up wins against K-State and Oklahoma, but part of that is that they are not counting a bad RPI loss. If anything, fans of other teams SHOULD want this replayed, because if ISU loses it, that will hurt their 1st & 2nd Round hosting chances. Not counting it helps them. 2. If this protest stems from a substitution infraction (or NOT a substitution infraction), is that a bad call or a "misapplication of rules" (wording from Big 12 statement)? Or is there a difference? That is a can of worms that we can get to later. 3. Yes on same lineups, which goes back to being interesting due to both teams now running 6-2s when they were running 5-1s at the time of the match. 4. ISU was in a tough situation travel-wise for where to play it because it made all four of its Big 12 trips to Texas before the end of October. With nine teams, the Big 12 rarely has bye weeks for multiple teams on the same date. That is not even factoring in the class-time missed for a not short trip from Ames to Lubbock. By playing it on the same day as a scheduled TTU-ISU match and over Thanksgiving Break, that solves some hassles. 5. There is certainly a precedent being set here, and coaches will take notice. I don't remember ever seeing something like this, but as long as the NCAA maintains control of these kind of situations and keeps it to "misapplication of rules" and not bad calls (that is if you think there is a difference, and by allowing this replay the NCAA certainly looks like it thinks there is a difference), it won't spiral out of control. It is all strange. |
|
|
|
Post by elevationvb on Nov 25, 2014 16:20:27 GMT -5
How is replaying this even an option? No one replays football or basketball games based on bad calls?? Do the teams have to use the same line-ups that were on the floor then? This just seems all around wrong...there are bad calls in every match. And it certainly shouldn't be done at the opponents venue, fans or not. Strange precedent being set here? |
|
|
|
Post by leftcoaster71 on Nov 25, 2014 16:25:10 GMT -5
Don't give John Cook any ideas. Remember "the ball was out"? Is it too late to protest the 84 championship? Liz Masakayan totally hit that ball out. Someone call up Fred Sturm and Don Shaw please. |
|
bluepenquin
Hall of Fame
4-Time VolleyTalk Poster of the Year (2019, 2018, 2017, 2016), All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016)
Posts: 12,365 
|
Post by bluepenquin on Nov 25, 2014 16:31:50 GMT -5
In an RKPI Projection thread - it was implied that the NCAA would only replay this match if it had implications on the tournament bracket. And this match could have implications. ISU is probably better off taking a no contest than risking another loss. A win probably doesn't impact their current RPI, but a loss will drop them several spots.
|
|
|
|
Post by n00b on Nov 25, 2014 16:37:20 GMT -5
There are pretty strict standards to what is protestable and what is not. Moreover, there are multiple things that have to go wrong for this to happen. When the coach first protested, the officials should have pulled out the rule book to cite their call. How the officials can STILL have gotten the call wrong is a monumental failure by the officiating crew. That is why you never see this happen, because Division I - caliber officials should never screw up this bad.
I second the request for more details on the call...
|
|
|
|
Post by Pirate VB Fan on Nov 25, 2014 16:39:30 GMT -5
Is it too late to protest the 84 championship? Liz Masakayan totally hit that ball out. Someone call up Fred Sturm and Don Shaw please. You can't protest a judgement call, only a misapplication of the rules. |
|
|
|
Post by nakedcrayon on Nov 25, 2014 16:41:39 GMT -5
Blue or Bofa. Anyway you can project what RPI will likely look like with an Iowa State win and also a loss?
|
|
|
|
Post by austintatious on Nov 25, 2014 16:59:47 GMT -5
Odd that it would be replayed since, according to the other article (which also doesn't give specifics about the infraction), ISU tied the 5th game at 9-9 before losing. In effect, they had a better chance of winning the previous match than they do of winning this replay. They get a second chance. Used the rule to their advantage. |
|
|
|
Post by azvb on Nov 25, 2014 17:01:55 GMT -5
Been a while since I read a rulebook, but I can't think of a substitution infraction that would result in a yellow card. Unless they did it twice in the same set, which seems highly unlikely. As was mentioned, R1 should have climbed off the stand and got out the rulebook right there. Maybe no one had a rulebook? R1 must have misinterpreted the rule, thus the protest was upheld.
|
|
|
|
Post by austintatious on Nov 25, 2014 17:03:50 GMT -5
There are pretty strict standards to what is protestable and what is not. Moreover, there are multiple things that have to go wrong for this to happen. When the coach first protested, the officials should have pulled out the rule book to cite their call. How the officials can STILL have gotten the call wrong is a monumental failure by the officiating crew. That is why you never see this happen, because Division I - caliber officials should never screw up this bad. I second the request for more details on the call... R2 same one who had the Nebraska-OU match 3 or 4 years ago where the illegal pursuit took place and was a big deal, but Cook didn't protest (instead raised a stink after the match. Would have one that protest easily.) Lesson learned as stated above: PULL OUT THE FRICKIN RULE BOOK, DON'T BLUFF YOUR WAY OUT. |
|
|
|
Post by alpacaone on Nov 25, 2014 17:05:58 GMT -5
Odd that it would be replayed since, according to the other article (which also doesn't give specifics about the infraction), ISU tied the 5th game at 9-9 before losing. In effect, they had a better chance of winning the previous match than they do of winning this replay. Except they did lose. They don't have any chance of winning that one. They do have a chance now. Lucky for ISU! Is the do over played in an empty gym? |
|
|
|
Post by trollhunter on Nov 25, 2014 17:10:30 GMT -5
Have seen this before. Rulebook states that valid protests are to be replayed from point of ref misapplication of the rules. Don't know exactly what happened, but can think of a few possibilities of ref errors:
A) Sub entered zone but was pulled back by coach. This is supposed to be just a team delay warning, not a point for delay. It appears from Gametracker that ISU flipped their OH's for set 5, possibly causing confusion with subs, scorekeepers, R2 being used to different sub pattern.
B) Sub was attempted after a timeout (timeout was at 4-8 just before ref error), but denied and a delay point given. While unusual, you can sub after a T/O. Morgan Kuhrt sub is on GT at 5-8.
C) Confusion with middles/libero after timeout. With lineup change perhaps both middles returned to court then one came off as they figured it out. That is not a libero replacement violation.
D) Libero was late to the floor replacing a middle, entering after the whistle, but before the ball was actually served. This should be a warning and not a point.
Curious to hear what it was. Is game video archived online anywhere?
|
|
|
|
Post by austintatious on Nov 25, 2014 17:36:35 GMT -5
How is replaying this even an option? No one replays football or basketball games based on bad calls?? Do the teams have to use the same line-ups that were on the floor then? This just seems all around wrong...there are bad calls in every match. And it certainly shouldn't be done at the opponents venue, fans or not. Strange precedent being set here? Just what I would expect out of you. The official who made the error lives near you why don't you check with him. BAD CALL means judgement. Substititutions requirements are clearly delineated in the rule book and this was not followed. Hence misapplication. |
|
