PurpleWhiteBoy said:

The Big Ten issued a statement that you can touch the rim as long as the ball isn't "in the basket" or "in contact with the rim."

I found the rulebook...

Section 15. Basket Interference and Goaltending
Art. 1. It is a violation to commit basket interference or goaltending.
Art. 2. Basket interference.

a. Basket interference occurs when a player:

1. Touches the ball or any part of the basket while the ball is on or within the basket. If the touching of the basket involves contact with the net only, the official must determine if the touching had any effect on the ball which would rise to the level of basket interference;
2. Touches the ball while any part of it is within the cylinder that has the ring as its lower base;
3. Reaches through the basket from below and touches the ball before it enters the cylinder;
4. Pulls down a movable ring so that it contacts the ball before the ring returns to its original position; and
5. Causes the basket or backboard to vibrate when the ball is on or within the basket or the backboard and/or is on or in the cylinder.

b. The cylinder is the imaginary geometric figure that has the ring as its base and is formed by the upward extension of that ring.
c. The ball shall be considered to be within the basket when any part of the ball is below the cylinder and the level of the ring

Click to expand...

• Where can one see this Big Ten statement you are referencing, PurpleWhiteBoy?
  
  
• This is where it's a judgment call: "Basket interference occurs when a player... Causes the basket or backboard to vibrate when the ball is... in the cylinder"... both Penn State players hit the rim / backboard, and particularly given the way the rim was contacted by #14 (he hits the rim straight on and then his hand slides along the front side of the rim to the left) and the ball being in the cylinder at that time, the refs could have made that judgment call (which would have matched the result that was actually the fair result -- no one can say with a straight face the whistle at 6.1 actually affected the result of the play)

PurpleWhiteBoy said:

I think the make-up call was to call goaltending the 2nd time (when it didn't happen).
Whichever ref blew his whistle was trying to make up for the first blown call.
While the ball was being put into the basket.

If the refs realize they can fix games by blowing their whistle "inadvertently" when a guy is about to score, all hell will break loose.
That needs to be fixed immediately. Any field goal attempt during an inadvertent or erroneous whistle must be counted if it goes in. Seems obvious, but thats not the rule. The current rule is idiotic.
And we lost because of it.

Click to expand...

Max_Power said:

The only other time I have seen such a foul disparity was against Purdue but that was due to Edie and NU employing a strategy to foul him and NU was trapping. Last night their were just crazy calls like the Mullins foul on the 3.

Click to expand...

corbi296 said:

SDSU #1 WR in portal. Just a Sophomore.

Click to expand...

FanatiCat said:

Who’s Wilde?

If Gronowski really wanted to be here he would’ve come with Lujan. Or at the very least, right after entering the portal last week.

Click to expand...

TheC said:

Why do you think that? Doesn't that cheapen the accomplishment of an extraordinarily successful season? I realize you have to be successful to make the championship game in the first place, but it would bother me if an undefeated team loses that last game to a two-loss conference foe whom they already beat in the regular season and now, because of that, loses those perks you are providing the conference champ in your model.

Click to expand...

Hungry Jack said:

The French Revolution did not start with the storming of the Bastille. It started when people felt the first pangs of hunger.

I am getting plenty hungry for good officiating.

Click to expand...

AdamOnFirst said:

I think the exact opposite, conferences should be required to have the game in order to qualify for one of the automatic 5 spots.

Click to expand...

FanatiCat said:

Who’s Wilde?

If Gronowski really wanted to be here he would’ve come with Lujan. Or at the very least, right after entering the portal last week.

Click to expand...