• The KillerFrogs

SI: TCU Beats Georgetown on Incredible Game-Winning Shot That Shouldn’t Have Counted

TopFrog

TopFrog

Lifelong Frog

TCU Beats Georgetown on Incredible Game-Winning Shot That Shouldn’t Have Counted​

Story by Frankie Taddeo



TCU beat Georgetown 84–83 at Capital One Arena in Washington in controversial fashion on Saturday.

Inbounding the ball under their own basket with only 2.7 seconds remaining, TCU guard Micah Peavy heaved a half-court pass to forward Emanuel Miller down the near sideline.

Miller caught the pass and banked home the incredible game-winning three-pointer as time expired.

Despite video review clearly showing that Peavy had stepped out of bounds prior to getting the winning shot off, officials were not able to overturn the shot because there was no call on the court.

Read more at https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/ot...-shot-that-shouldn-t-have-counted/ar-AA1kU84I
 
M

Moose Stuff

Active Member
I defy anyone to prove definitively that his heel was on the ground right there. Had that gone to review I’m almost certain it gets a “call on the floor stands” judgement. How is it any different than the “Max was in” Baylor game??? Yes, I know the call went the other way in that game but it 100% shouldn’t have.
 
Last edited:
Hoosierfrog

Hoosierfrog

Tier 1
Animated GIF
 
KillerFrog InD KitchenSink

KillerFrog InD KitchenSink

Active Member
Moose Stuff said:
I defy anyone to prove definitively that his heel was on the ground right there. Had that gone to review I’m almost certain it gets a “call on the floor stands” judgement. How is it any different than the “Max was in” Baylor game??? Yes, I know the call went the other way in that game but it 100% shouldn’t have.
Click to expand...
I wondered about the heel being up the whole time but the angle from the front was definitive he landed heel first and then it came up. You’re right you never know how they would have called it but I would have called him out based on what I’ve seen.

I do agree that the headline should read “could not be reviewed” not “shouldn’t have counted” since we can’t be 100% sure how they would have ruled (unless the refs said to the coaches he was out but they couldn’t change it because of the rules)- I can’t make out all that was said.
 
Last edited:
Dogfrog

Dogfrog

Active Member
Moose Stuff said:
I defy anyone to prove definitively that his heel was on the ground right there. Had that gone to review I’m almost certain it gets a “call on the floor stands” judgement. How is it any different than the “Max was in” Baylor game??? Yes, I know the call went the other way in that game but it 100% shouldn’t have.
Click to expand...
Yea it looked like his heel was outside the line but above the line, not on the ground.
 
This Ain't Chopped Liver

This Ain't Chopped Liver

Active Member
This mattered a heckuva lot more in the 2nd round of the tourney two seasons ago, jeepers. Should have been two free throws for the win over the #1 seed at the end of regulation with the Frogs advancing to the second weekend for the Sweet Sixteen. I carry chips.
“After Sunday night’s second-round thriller between No. 1 Arizona and No. 9 TCU ended in an 85–80 overtime victory for the Wildcats, all eyes were directed at the NCAA’s officiating once again.”

 
Last edited:
FrogAbroad

FrogAbroad

Full Member
Dutch hit it squarely. NCAA made the rules, NCAA through its approved enforcement arm applied the rules. If the paying membership wants more "upon further review" clauses in the rules, fine...make them through the NCAA's channels. Meanwhile, TCU benefited from an official's inability to see everything real-time that multiple television cameras can pick up with repeated, close-up and slo-mo views. TCU is not, never has been, and never will be the only team to so benefit. It's the nature of sports. Live with it or move along.
 

Latest posts

Top