Game 18 at Northeastern on 1/9/2020 at 8:00 P.M.

[triplec2195]

With all the talk about the clock I believe the announcers said that Hofstra is going to win before the NE player even took the shot. Was that based on what the clock should have showed??

[Jordan]

To add into the clock talk, I can add in a first hand account. I made the trip up to Boston (had a great time, met up with some classmates, we had a little student section going behind the bench, fun time.)

So, the big scoreboards in the building actually stopped working right after Northeastern hit the game tying three at the end (at least that's when I noticed it). So Hofstra then inbounds the ball and continues playing, and the time and score had not updated on the scoreboard. However, the shot clocks above the nets were still working correctly and were still counting down the game time.

I'm surprised (and in hindsight thankful) they did not stop play to fix the scoreboard. Fair? Hmmmmmmm probably not. I'm sure it can up for discussion, but I'm also sure I'd be a bit upset if I were a Northeastern fan.

And in reference to the .5 at the end: to my recollection they also may not have started the clock correctly in the arena. I remember thinking "there's no way he can be doing all of this in .5 seconds"

This was all just my memory. I do know, however, that the fans in the stands were a tad confused throughout the final sequence.

[EvanJ]

One time years ago at the end of the half a guy scored before the clock ran out, but it was negated because he shot after when the clock should have run out if it started on time, which was unfair to the player who looked at the clock. IMO if a player scores between when the clock should have run out and when it did run out, there should be a do-over.

Should they add a statistic of points per game that hit the rim and/or backboard before going in? They keep track of second chance points. The ball hitting something first could be called indirect points.

[Wags]

Wags, in a perfect world you're right. The world, including NCAA referees, is rarely perfect.

Even in the highly imperfect world of NCAA (and in particular, CAA) officiating, if that shot goes in, they absolutely go to the monitor to determine that the clock started too late and that he wouldn't have been able to get the shot off within :00.5, with the actual time it took him to release the shot. NU would've complained, but I'm confident the refs would've got it right. Thankfully, it never came to that.

[cactus]

Wags, in a perfect world you're right. The world, including NCAA referees, is rarely perfect.

Even in the highly imperfect world of NCAA (and in particular, CAA) officiating, if that shot goes in, they absolutely go to the monitor to determine that the clock started too late and that he wouldn't have been able to get the shot off within :00.5, with the actual time it took him to release the shot. NU would've complained, but I'm confident the refs would've got it right. Thankfully, it never came to that.

It's not only the shot, Trueheart might have bumped him expecting him to shoot right after getting the ball but taking two dribbles instead. Now you have to decide if the foul would have been before .5 should have expired, and that's harder to judge than a ball leaving a hand.

Thanks Jordan for your account at the game - I feel better that it was related to an actual malfunction rather than a home clock operator trying to help them out.

[EvanJ]

I hope there would be severe discipline from the NCAA and/or a conference if it was ever proven that a clock operator was trying to help one team.

https://www.flohoops.com/articles/66499 ... s-the-hero is by Jerry Beach, who cited Jaden Daly's Daily Dose of Hoops on Twitter, who said that before this game and before JWF's shot hosting Northeastern last year, the score was tied at 72. Jerry also wrote "it is the first time in at least 30 years (as far back as my records go at home) that fewer than five players have scored in a game for Hofstra."