PDA

View Full Version : UE protests FEU win



paralusi
07-28-2008, 08:38 AM
UE protests FEU win


By Jasmine W. Payo
Philippine Daily Inquirer

Posted date: July 27, 2008


MANILA, Philippines--A technical error in the closing minutes of the game will be the main contention of University of the East in its formal game protest to the UAAP.
Brenn Perez, UE's representative to the UAAP board, submitted an official protest letter to commissioner Chito Narvasa Sunday night to contest the game the Warriors narrowly lost to the Far Eastern Tamaraws, 71-69, last Saturday.

"We're basing the protest on a technical error," said coach Dindo Pumaren.

In the letter, the Warriors cited the Marlon Adolfo jumper that was counted as a scored basket in the final three minutes even after the 24-second shot clock expired.

The Warriors filed the protest along with spliced videos of the alleged technical lapse that determined the outcome of the game.

A P100,000 bond will also be posted by UE on Monday, a new league rule for teams that put a game under protest.

Narvasa has until Monday night to decide on the complaint. If the protest gets turned down, UE may still appeal to the UAAP board.

Unless the protest is upheld, the Tamaraws remain at third place with a 4-1 record, while the Warriors dropped to fourth at 3-3.

"If their protest is granted, that means the P100,000 will be returned," said Narvasa. "If they lose the protest, the P100,000 is forfeited in favor of the UAAP."

The game proved too emotional for the Tamaraws as they rallied behind wounded teammate Mac Baracael, the star forward shot by an unknown assailant Thursday night near the FEU gym.

Adolfo's basket pushed the Tamaraws within a point, 62-61, late in the game.

With the contest deadlocked at 66, Andy Barroca scored on a go-ahead basket to lift the Tamaraws to 68-66 with 36 seconds left. Aldrech Ramos later sank two buffer free throws off an Elmer Espiritu foul for a 70-66 lead with nine ticks remaining.

The Warriors again threatened within a point at 2.8 seconds, 70-69, following a Hans Thiele triple.

Forced to stop the game clock, the Warriors fouled Barroca, who grabbed a key rebound after missing the second of his two free throws to preserve the Tamaraws' two-point lead in the dwindling seconds.

"All the games should be won on the hardcourt," said Narvasa. "If it's a technical matter, it's part of the game. Unless of course that technical matter really affected the game. If it's a technical call, a judgment call or a referee's call, it's very very hard to reverse the outcome. The offense must be really serious."

bchoter
07-28-2008, 09:54 AM
These brothers are cut of the same mold.

bigfreeze_bibby
07-28-2008, 10:06 AM
It's a valid protest if the basis will be counting of Marlon Adolfo's shot which have cut the lead to 62-61. Expired na ang shot clock nun and hindi na dapat counted yung basket.

31gna
07-28-2008, 10:14 AM
eto na naman tayo sa "won on the hardcourt" at "affected the outcome of the game" ni Narvasa hahaha

bluewing
07-28-2008, 10:19 AM
akala ko nag-protesta dahil incomplete players ang FEU.

iba talaga tong magkapatid na to... iba!

nastrans
07-28-2008, 10:56 AM
And if you notice the FEU crowd, pagkascore ni Adolfo wala man lang roar from the crowd tahimik sila parang aminado na shot clock violation.

Pagtapos ng lull biglang sabi ni Manlapaz..MARLON ADOLFO!

eustacia
07-28-2008, 11:00 AM
I wonder, if the shot-clock violation happened to the team you support, would you have let it go or would you have considered a protest? Especially since the shot clock violation was, in my opinion, very clear.

sa_pula
07-28-2008, 11:23 AM
naabutan na ba talaga ng shot clock violation yung tira ni adolfo? kung ganon ang bobo naman ng mga refs kung hindi nila napansin yon eh pinanood pa nila yung replay para tignan kung 3 o 2 points sa lang yung tira..kung violation nga yung tira ni adolfo dapat talaga iprotest yung laro siguro naman kung sa team nyo rin yun nangyari ganon din maiisip nyo...

Joescoundrel
07-28-2008, 11:26 AM
In the replays the shotclock had clearly expired. That shot by Adolfo should not have counted.

How do FIBA rules look at incidents like this? If a referee - rightly or wrongly - counts a basket after the expiration of a shotclock, and it is not in the last two minutes, does the referee's decision - rightly or wrongly - still stand?

I ask because I've always had this impression that under FIBA rules generally any decision by the referee during the game is deemed - in the language of lawyers - final and executory not subject to reconsideration or appeal.

bluewing
07-28-2008, 12:10 PM
In the replays the shotclock had clearly expired. That shot by Adolfo should not have counted.

How do FIBA rules look at incidents like this? If a referee - rightly or wrongly - counts a basket after the expiration of a shotclock, and it is not in the last two minutes, does the referee's decision - rightly or wrongly - still stand?




ang alam ko nga, manong... pag mga ganyang pangyayari, let-go na yon. kaya nga may tinatawag na "breaks of the game eh." kumbaga, yung erring refs and officials na lang ang yariin ng technical committee after. pero to actually order a re-play of the game would be a waste.

kung last shot siguro, pwede i-replay-replay. but then again, as manong KC pointed out before, sa sobrang hybrid ng UAAP rules, ang daming wiggle space for improv.

nastrans
07-28-2008, 12:20 PM
Matanung lang? Yung Junjun Cabatu na buzzer-beater against UE in 2003 was reversed instead of being replayed tapos 2005 yung kay Cholo Villanueva na buzzer-beater to send the game into OT was replayed, anu ba yung mga rulings na yan wala bang consistency or binago ang rules regarding those questionable calls?

RockLobster
07-28-2008, 12:29 PM
If the refs reviewed the shot during the game to check whether it was a two or a three, and missed the shotclock violation, then the protest seems reasonable, though that doesn't mean it should be upheld outright. But if the refs simple did not call the violation, then it's an irreversible judgement call.

About the inconsistencies in ruling on protests, well, that's the UAAP board's legacy. Consistently inconsistent.

Mateen Cleaves
07-28-2008, 12:31 PM
ang alam ko nga, manong... pag mga ganyang pangyayari, let-go na yon. kaya nga may tinatawag na "breaks of the game eh." kumbaga, yung erring refs and officials na lang ang yariin ng technical committee after. pero to actually order a re-play of the game would be a waste.


Kumbaga, ang makukuha na lang ng UE kapalit ng kanilang P100,000 ay isang malambing na... sowweee! :)

Kung sa akin lang, tagilid ang UE. Pasado pa rin sa akin as "judgment call" yung issue ng counted vs. not counted. Pa-consuelo na lang sa UE yung i-ban for the rest of the tournament yung officiating crew.

bchoter
07-28-2008, 12:36 PM
A make up call a few games after :D

Sweet nga

atenean_blooded
07-28-2008, 12:47 PM
Matanung lang? Yung Junjun Cabatu na buzzer-beater against UE in 2003 was reversed instead of being replayed tapos 2005 yung kay Cholo Villanueva na buzzer-beater to send the game into OT was replayed, anu ba yung mga rulings na yan wala bang consistency or binago ang rules regarding those questionable calls?


2003 = Pre-NABRO.

2004-onwards = NABRO BULOK.

Baka kaya iba ang application ng rules. :)

gfy
07-28-2008, 12:50 PM
Doesn't the challenge rule apply only in the last 2 minutes? 0r just like in the NFL one is entitled to it throughout the game, albeit just one per half (correct me if I am wrong - it's been a while since I watched on TV a football game).

Kid Cubao
07-28-2008, 12:51 PM
i think the only ones up for review at this time are the last-second field goals.

nastrans
07-28-2008, 01:26 PM
Challenge rule applies all the time but it has to be challenged DURING the said quarter and also three-point shot lang ata ang ichachallenge.

The_Big_Cat
07-28-2008, 01:33 PM
Doesn't the challenge rule apply only in the last 2 minutes? 0r just like in the NFL one is entitled to it throughout the game, albeit just one per half (correct me if I am wrong - it's been a while since I watched on TV a football game).

Yes. There is a challenge rule. But you could not challenge if it happened in the last two minutes of the 4th quarter.
In this case, UE claimed it happened somewhere the 3-minute mark. Dapat doon pa lang nag challenge na sila.

Arellano and the rest of UE played lackluster that day.
I think FEU's win should stay.

Kid Cubao
07-28-2008, 01:38 PM
Challenge rule applies all the time but it has to be challenged DURING the said quarter and also three-point shot lang ata ang ichachallenge.

exactamento, nastrans. under the new UAAP guidelines, a coach can challenge that shotclock beater immediately after the refs rule it a field goal. what happens is a video review by the refs and table officials, kung saan pag-aaralan nga kung counted o hindi. now if the challenge is upheld, the field goal will not count. on the other hand, if the challenge proves that the refs made the right call after all, then the protesting team will be penalized with a loss of a timeout.

gfy
07-28-2008, 04:00 PM
Now this is getting confusing. Suppose that Adolfo shot happened in the first quarter where it wasn't really that critical yet. And FEU won by 1 point in the end. Since it "affected the outcome of the game" will they reverse the win? They should have these automatic video reviews only in the last 2 minutes if a coach asks for it. A coach can't always ask for video reviews all the time. If I recall, in the NFL a coach can challenge but loses a timeout if the challenge is not upheld.

easter
07-28-2008, 04:15 PM
Challenge rule applies all the time but it has to be challenged DURING the said quarter and also three-point shot lang ata ang ichachallenge.


Why didn't UE challenge it right there and then?

bchoter
07-28-2008, 04:15 PM
My bad. It appears UE has basis (no matter what the outcome of this thread is). My anti-Pumaren (you can;t blame me, we're 0-2 so far... demet!) tendencies got the better of me.

Kid Cubao
07-28-2008, 04:19 PM
Challenge rule applies all the time but it has to be challenged DURING the said quarter and also three-point shot lang ata ang ichachallenge.


Why didn't UE challenge it right there and then?

kaya nga babay P100,000 ang kalalabasan ng protesta nila. dindo pumaren was wrongly advised here.

The_Big_Cat
07-28-2008, 04:24 PM
Challenge rule applies all the time but it has to be challenged DURING the said quarter and also three-point shot lang ata ang ichachallenge.


Why didn't UE challenge it right there and then?

Yes. They should have challenged it right away.
Adolfo made two crucial shot clock beating field goals. The first was a two-pointer and *the second was a 3-point shot.
The 3-point shot was counted as a two-pointer but during a deadball, the refs conferred with each other together with the technical committe and counted it as a 3-point shot.

UE should have used that deadball to verify and challenged the Adolfo field goal.

In the NFL, teams have a monitoring team watching from the TV coverage. Now if they notice irregularities, they notify the coaching staff and that's when the time the coach throws a "red flag" to challenge the irregular play.

bluewing
07-28-2008, 05:16 PM
ipagbawal na kasi yung mga protest.

nawiwili yung iba dyan eh.

kung may reklamo, ipa-suspend nyo yung ref.

nastrans
07-28-2008, 07:27 PM
The challenge rule does not review baskets if it is A SHOT CLOCK VIOLATION OR NOT, it is only if IS A THREE-POINTER OR TWO-POINTER.

UE was protesting the basket Adolfo made when he spinned and made a two-pointer with 3:31 to make it a 62-61 game. Clearly, UE can't challenge that basket dahil ang isyu doon ay hindi kung 2-pointer or 3-pointer.

The Adolfo three was made with 2:07 left which made it a tied ballgame, FEU challenged it and was upheld.

gfy
07-28-2008, 09:17 PM
^ What's the basis then of UE's protest? I am sure they did their homework and wouldn't risk forfeiting 100K.

nastrans
07-28-2008, 09:50 PM
They are contesting that the shot Adolfo made with three minutes left didn't count because of a 24-second violation.

Dark Knight
07-28-2008, 11:08 PM
I'll leave this discussion to you guys because you all know which team im rooting for.

If they order a replay of the game, so be it. But not reverse the outcome. If Adolfo's shot is nullified, it would be a tied ballgame and maybe, the league should order an overtime game. Only the extra 5 minutes.

Howard the Duck
07-28-2008, 11:13 PM
I'll leave this discussion to you guys because you all know which team im rooting for.

If they order a replay of the game, so be it. But not reverse the outcome. If Adolfo's shot is nullified, it would be a tied ballgame and maybe, the league should order an overtime game. Only the extra 5 minutes.



kung may replay man, do it after the adolfo's "basket." like, they'll inbound the ball with the exact same time remaining after adolfo's shot.

atsaka di ba kung fouled out/buzzer beaters/ lang ang may replay? ganoon ang nangyari sa recent ATL-MIA game ah.

atenean_blooded
07-29-2008, 12:39 AM
ipagbawal na kasi yung mga protest.

nawiwili yung iba dyan eh.

kung may reklamo, ipa-suspend nyo yung ref.


Ang harsh harsh mo naman. :)

Sabay babanatan ng "SUSPENDED!" pagdating sa susunod na game? ;D



When UE protested the game against La Salle a few years ago, I actually sided with La Salle. The reasoning is simple. If Dindo Pumaren really believed that his team was being cheated by the officials, he should have simply told his boys to pack up and leave. Don't bother playing in the overtime period, hoping that you'll win, only to protest once you've clearly lost. I was actually very happy that La Salle won that replay (a few minutes of which I caught at the Blue Eagle Gym before heading home from school for that day).

Okay, so teams are given 24 hours after every game to file a protest. This is probably more than enough time to gather what passes as evidence before the Commissioner or the UAAP board, especially if the bad call/non-call/alleged violation was something that materially affected the outcome of the games, or was an obviously gross display of negligence (like knowingly fielding an ineligible player). But of course, I'd like to think that these rules are here for a reason, and should not be pushed to being absurd (like turning clear defeats into victories and vice-versa). And that people are expected to take care of their business with proper diligence--meaning if they spot a violation during the game, they should call for a time out (or something like that) and raise hell about it then and there, especially if the violation is something they could have been reasonably expected to notice during the game.

Now, about UE protesting the FEU win. I really enjoyed watching this game, but I also have to agree: Adolfo's shot should not have counted, but that's just my opinion. Did it affect the outcome of the game? By sheer arithmetic, it does, if all we go by is the score. But this wasn't a buzzer-beating, game-winning shot that would have decided the final score. Without a doubt, the shot's not being counted would have changed the complexion of the game. But I don't know if that falls within the ambit of the challenge rules.

Bottom line: The creatures at fault were they referees. It was their poor judgment that put an otherwise splendid game in this mess.

augustine
07-29-2008, 08:00 AM
Bottom line: The creatures at fault were they referees. It was their poor judgment that put an otherwise splendid game in this mess.


I agree with everything you wrote except the conclusion. The fault was not with the refs. It was with the 24-second clock timer, who failed to buzz in a timely manner when the clock turned "00". In fact, Dindo ran to the timer immediately and told him "pindutin mo!" while gesturing in a pressing motion with his thumb. He called a time-out right after to seek redress.

I hate NABRO as much as the next guy, but they can"t be faulted when the buzzer sounded late. I can't ascribe a deliberate error on the part of the shot clock operator. Human error. This should have been no worse a "missed call" than the refs not calling a traveling infraction or 3-second violation on that play. Kudos to Marlon for making the shot.

The game result should stand. It was the best game of the season. So far.

Mateen Cleaves
07-29-2008, 08:29 AM
Hindi ba automatic naman na nagba-buzzer pag-expire ng shot or game clock?

augustine
07-29-2008, 08:38 AM
it depends on the equipment. But 24 second clocks usually come with an "override" to allow the operator to switch off the buzzer in case it's no longer needed, as when possession changes hands or the ball hits the ring. Otherwise the buzzer becomes disruptive to the continuity of play.

easter
07-29-2008, 09:04 AM
^ Di ba refs usually ask the timekeeper in situations like this kung counted nga ba? So ultimately, it is the responsibility pf those taking care of the shot clock.

gfy
07-29-2008, 09:10 AM
^ That's what I was telling people. The timer should have been consulted by the referees because only referees can make calls.

Kid Cubao
07-29-2008, 09:24 AM
^ Di ba refs usually ask the timekeeper in situations like this kung counted nga ba? So ultimately, it is the responsibility pf those taking care of the shot clock.

actually hindi. the timekeeper is solely responsible for the game time, not the shot clock, and is certainly not in any position to make judgment calls. there is a separate operator for the 24-second shot clock, and neither is he vested with the authority to make judgment calls.

heto yung nakalagay sa FIBA rule book:

Art. 49 Timer: Duties
49.1 The timer shall be provided with a game clock and a stopwatch and shall:
• Measure playing time, time-outs and intervals of play.
• Ensure that a signal sounds very loudly and automatically at the end of playing time in a period.
• Use any means possible to notify the officials immediately if his signal fails to sound or is not heard.
• Notify the teams and the officials at least three (3) minutes before the third period is to start.

49.2 The timer shall measure playing time as follows:
• Starting the game clock when:
▬ During a jump ball, the ball is legally tapped by a jumper.
▬ After a last or only free throw is unsuccessful and the ball continues to be live, the ball touches or is touched by a player on the playing court.
▬ During a throw-in, the ball touches or is touched by a player on the playing court.
• Stopping the game clock when:
▬ Time expires at the end of playing time for a period.
▬ An official blows his whistle while the ball is live.
▬ A field goal is scored against a team which has requested a time-out.
▬ A field goal is scored in the last two (2) minutes of the fourth period and in the last two (2) minutes of any extra period.
▬ The twenty-four second device signal sounds while a team is in control of the ball.

49.3 The timer shall measure a time-out as follows:
• Starting the timing device immediately when the official gives the time-out signal.
• Sounding his signal when fifty (50) seconds of the time-out have elapsed.
• Sounding his signal when the time-out has ended.

49.4 The timer shall measure an interval of play as follows:
• Starting the timing device immediately when a previous period has ended.
• Sounding his signal before the first and third period when three (3) minutes, one (1) minute and thirty (30) seconds remain until the beginning of the period.
• Sounding his signal before the second, fourth and each extra period when thirty (30) seconds remain until the beginning of the period.
• Sounding his signal and simultaneously stopping the timing device immediately when an interval of play has ended

Art. 50 Twenty-four second operator: Duties
The twenty-four second operator shall be provided with a twenty-four second device and operate it so that it shall be:

50.1 Started or restarted whenever a team gains control of a live ball on the playing court.

50.2 Stopped and reset to twenty-four (24) seconds, with no display visible, as soon as:
• An official blows his whistle for a foul or violation.
• A ball on a shot for a field goal or on a pass enters the basket.
• A shot for a field goal touches the ring unless the ball lodges on the basket support.
• The game is stopped because of an action connected with the team not in control of the ball.
• The game is stopped because of an action not connected with either team, unless the opponents would be placed at a disadvantage.

50.3 Reset to twenty-four (24) seconds with the display visible and restarted as soon as a team gains control of a live ball on the playing court.
The mere touching of the ball by an opponent does not start a new twenty-four second period if the other team remains in control of the ball.

50.4 Stopped, but not reset to twenty-four (24) seconds, when the same team that previously had control of the ball is awarded a throw-in as a result of:

• A ball having gone out-of-bounds.
• A player of the same team having been injured.
• A jump ball situation.
• A double foul.
• A cancellation of equal penalties against the teams.

50.5 Stopped and switched off when a team gains control of a live ball on the playing court, and there are fewer than twenty-four (24) seconds remaining on the game clock in any period.
The twenty-four second device signal does not stop the game clock or the game, nor cause the ball to become dead, unless a team is in a control of the ball.

atenean_blooded
07-29-2008, 10:37 AM
augustine:

I was writing under the presumption that the buzzer automatically sounded when the shot clock expired. Thanks for pointing that out.

Howard the Duck
07-29-2008, 12:58 PM
parang mas OK pa pala ang barangay league sa amin :D

The_Big_Cat
07-29-2008, 01:44 PM
In the last PBL conference, whenever situations like that arises, they usually correct it right away during the game. Si Butch Maniego ang in-charge doon.

FEU was at the back end of two "suspicious" calls in the DLSU game that they could have won. Last week, there was the Baracael incident and now this. This will not go well for the FEU community if the win gets reversed.

rifleman
07-29-2008, 01:49 PM
Malalagyan ng * yung win ng UE if ever manalo sila sa protest. ;D

aarreza
07-29-2008, 02:19 PM
For UE, what a difference a year makes... from 6-0 last year to 3-3 this year... could end the 1st round at 3-4 as they face the streaking Archers on Saturday....

dioning
07-29-2008, 05:02 PM
basta may pumaren may protesta

atenista_comm
07-29-2008, 05:19 PM
UE protest not upheld.

bchoter
07-29-2008, 05:20 PM
Will they elevate it to the board?

nastrans
07-29-2008, 05:57 PM
Most likely.

The_Big_Cat
07-29-2008, 06:18 PM
Charge to experience na lang yan.

UE played poorly that game. They were outrebounded and outhustled.
Whether they have counted or not the Adolfo field goal, I think FEU could have still won that game.

Howard the Duck
07-29-2008, 07:26 PM
there were 2 shots by adolfo bet. 2:00 and 4:00:
- between 2:50 and 3:29 when adolfo cut the lead to one, 61-62, and
- between 2:30 and 2:00 when adolfo made a long 2 to cut the lead to one, 63-64.

wilhelm
07-29-2008, 07:48 PM
Sayang naman yung 100,000 na bond.

THE ONLOOKER
07-29-2008, 09:16 PM
Speaking of protests, Adamson is also placing the game versus UST under investigation.

I believe they are blasting one of the refs who officiated that game.

Howard the Duck
07-29-2008, 09:50 PM
it seems that the 2008 collegiate season is on track for having the most number of protests :o

atenean_blooded
07-29-2008, 09:54 PM
it seems that the 2008 collegiate season is on track for having the most number of protests* :o


Sa susnod, may sponsor na yan, together with the Pigrolac Baboy na Tawag of the Game if NABRO still officiates (hopefully not).

THE ONLOOKER
07-29-2008, 09:57 PM
it seems that the 2008 collegiate season is on track for having the most number of protests :o


I hope the number of UAAP related violence will end on Baracael. :-\

Aba dapat bayaran ako ng Pigrolac diyan sa "Baboy na Tawag of the Game". Bahala sila, baka kopyahin ng Purina ang concept pag hindi tinuloy. ;D

pablohoney
07-29-2008, 10:04 PM
Speaking of protests, Adamson is also placing the game versus UST under investigation.

I believe they are blasting one of the refs who officiated that game.


Bad precedent, IMHO.
Lahat ng close games pwede nang iprotesta.

(Assuming na sa 3-pointer pa rin ni Tata Bautista ang issue). ;)

Bad officiating? I thought it was UST who had a lot of those,
especially during the last 2-3 minutes of the game and in overtime. ???

RockLobster
07-29-2008, 10:49 PM
^Oo nga. Napanood ko yung laro. Hindi ko man napansin yung mga tawag ng refs, no question Bautista's three turned the game around for UST. And Adamson still had a chance to win the game, but they couldn't. It was the game and the breaks, nothing more.

Siyet, me and my big mouth. Kami pa naman ang kalaban sa Sabado. Tiyak, kami ang mapagbubuntunan nito! ;D

5FootCarrot
07-30-2008, 07:39 AM
Aba dapat bayaran ako ng Pigrolac diyan sa "Baboy na Tawag of the Game". Bahala sila, baka kopyahin ng Purina ang concept pag hindi tinuloy.* ;D


Maybe Purina can sponsor the "Son of a B!+(# Referee of the Game" Award ;D OK, back to your regular programming...

bluetruck
07-30-2008, 07:41 AM
Will they elevate it to the board?


basta involved ang pumaren, you can count on it!

Kid Cubao
07-30-2008, 08:14 AM
^^ devil's advocate: if they are planning to elevate it to the board, i just hope they are ready with an entirely different set of arguments to contest the ruling, otherwise the UAAP board will just move to concur with the earlier decision. and most of all, i hope coach dindo gets the best advice next time.

paralusi
07-30-2008, 08:38 AM
Narvasa vetoes protest; UE appeals to UAAP board

By Jasmine W. Payo
Philippine Daily Inquirer

Posted date: July 30, 2008

MANILA, Philippines—University of the East will elevate its case to the UAAP board after commissioner Chito Narvasa on Tuesday junked the Warriors’ protest of the game it narrowly lost to the Far Eastern University Tamaraws.

UE officials, led by league representatives Carmelita Mateo and Brenn Perez, decided to file an appeal moments after receiving Narvasa’s seven-page decision in which the commissioner concluded that the protest had “no basis and merit.”

Narvasa also said the Tamaraws’ 71-69 victory last Saturday would “remain as is and recorded as official.”

The Warriors will submit a formal letter to the UAAP board on Wednesday.

“We need to resolve the issue before Sunday, before the start of the second round,” said board secretary-treasurer Herc Callanta of host University of the Philippines.

In his decision, Narvasa said he discussed with the concerned referees and officials the Warriors’ contention that there was a “clear violation of the FIBA regulation on the 24-second shot clock rule” in the disputed game’s last three minutes.

The Warriors had claimed that the shot of FEU’s Marlon Adolfo should not have counted because it came when “the time flashed on the game clock was 3:03 or two seconds beyond the 24-second shot clock rule.”

But Narvasa responded that the “alleged error was committed far away from the end of the game” and the Warriors had “enough opportunity to overcome or rise above the disadvantage resulting from the error.”

Narvasa stressed in the letter, addressed to UE coach Dindo Pumaren, that the incident “did not determine the outcome of the game.”

“Being also a previous basketball player and coach, like you, we both know that the game of basketball is a game of adjustment,” Narvasa wrote. “We also both know that the result of the game is not determined in the last three minutes, especially in a tightly contested ball game.”

The Warriors, who paid the required P100,000 cash bond in filing the protest, had also asked why the game clock stopped at 3:03 after the basket was counted. It noted that if Adolfo’s basket was indeed counted, the game should have continued.

But Narvasa countered that “assuming that there was a technical error, this had been already corrected by the referees, a judgment call, which therefore cannot be subjected anymore to any alteration or change by any party.”

The_Big_Cat
07-30-2008, 08:57 AM
Narvasa vetoes protest; UE appeals to UAAP board
By Jasmine W. Payo
Philippine Daily Inquirer

Posted date: July 30, 2008

But Narvasa responded that the “alleged error was committed far away from the end of the game” and the Warriors had “enough opportunity to overcome or rise above the disadvantage resulting from the error.”

Narvasa stressed in the letter, addressed to UE coach Dindo Pumaren, that the incident “did not determine the outcome of the game.”

Tumpak!

thadzonline
07-30-2008, 09:41 AM
in my understanding, they still had many chances to win it after that event..It did not directly affect the outcome of the game, tama si Narvasa diyan

eustacia
07-30-2008, 09:55 AM
In a game as close as that one, every single basket affects the outcome. Had the shot not been counted, UE would have had the opportunity to extend the lead, and we don't know what will happen from there.

GHRanger
07-30-2008, 10:08 AM
This has to be a record!
2 protests in 1 week. All involving our intelligent (or lack thereof) referees.

atenista_comm
07-30-2008, 10:14 AM
I just find it odd that La Salle supporters are now joining the Ateneo supporters in the anti-NABRO stance. How things change.... From ridiculing us last year with all their hilarious and out-of-this-world posts at apcom (saying that the Ateneo is always about excuses, etc), they now have come to terms that there is something foolish with NABRO. A slow journey to an epiphany, indeed.


This is a certified UAAP oddity.

bg_eagle
07-30-2008, 10:18 AM
In a game as close as that one, every single basket affects the outcome. Had the shot not been counted, UE would have had the opportunity to extend the lead, and we don't know what will happen from there.




True... but we have to let some judgment calls slip. As earlier mentioned, in a close game, every play in a close game at any time of the game will technically affect the outcome of the game and an erroneous call on a shot clock violation is no different from an erroneous foul call or non-call for that matter.The point is, such erroneous calls are included in the game of basketball. The best teams generally win despite these erroneous call because they find a way to win it. As Narvasa put it, they still had the opportunity to adjust to the situation. Apparently, they didn't.

I really don't care who wins. Its too early in the season to speculate who I would want to stay on top. But IMHO, UE should have never filed the appeal. Sayang yung 100k and either way, they wouldn't feel good with the outcome, whatever the outcome. They should have just put the money to better use.

But thats just me.

thadzonline
07-30-2008, 10:30 AM
In a game as close as that one, every single basket affects the outcome. Had the shot not been counted, UE would have had the opportunity to extend the lead, and we don't know what will happen from there.




True... but we have to let some judgment calls slip. As earlier mentioned, in a close game, every play in a close game at any time of the game will technically affect the outcome of the game and an erroneous call on a shot clock violation is no different from an erroneous foul call or non-call for that matter.The point is, such erroneous calls are included in the game of basketball. The best teams generally win despite these erroneous call because they find a way to win it. As Narvasa put it, they still had the opportunity to adjust to the situation. Apparently, they didn't.

I really don't care who wins. Its too early in the season to speculate who I would want to stay on top. But IMHO, UE should have never filed the appeal. Sayang yung 100k and either way, they wouldn't feel good with the outcome, whatever the outcome. They should have just put the money to better use.

But thats just me.


you just took it right out so I wouldn't bother a long post thanks ;D...

Jump_Shooter
07-30-2008, 02:29 PM
I just find it odd that La Salle supporters are now joining the Ateneo supporters in the anti-NABRO stance.* How things change.... From ridiculing us last year with all their hilarious and out-of-this-world posts at apcom (saying that the Ateneo is always about excuses, etc), they now have come to terms that there is something foolish with NABRO.* A slow journey to an epiphany, indeed.*


This is a certified UAAP oddity.


I don't want any bashing to begin here in this forum so this early I'm issuing a warning on atenista_comm. If you have issues with stuff posted in ap.com then I suggest you bring them up in that site. I know you're probably going to say that your posts over there are always being deleted, but that's really not my problem.

atenista_comm
07-30-2008, 02:53 PM
I just find it odd that La Salle supporters are now joining the Ateneo supporters in the anti-NABRO stance.* How things change.... From ridiculing us last year with all their hilarious and out-of-this-world posts at apcom (saying that the Ateneo is always about excuses, etc), they now have come to terms that there is something foolish with NABRO.* A slow journey to an epiphany, indeed.*


This is a certified UAAP oddity.


I don't want any bashing to begin here in this forum so this early I'm issuing a warning on atenista_comm. If you have issues with stuff posted in ap.com then I suggest you bring them up in that site. I know you're probably going to say that your posts over there are always being deleted, but that's really not my problem.


My apologies, Mr./Ms. Moderator.*

I wrote the above post in reference to earlier posts in this thread that mentioned about how this particular UAAP season has become a record-breaking one in terms of oddities (protests, assassination attempt, etc).* To be fair, it's not just La Salle supporters who are the newly converted NABRO-haters, it's almost everyone now.* Just voicing out my observation.* They have joined the Ateneans' crusade against NABRO.

And I have no intentions of bashing anyone.* Those days are over. :)


PS: Mr./Ms. Jumpshooter, how'd you know that my posts in apcom are always deleted? :) :P ???

Fried Green Tomato
07-30-2008, 03:12 PM
I just find it odd that La Salle supporters are now joining the Ateneo supporters in the anti-NABRO stance.* How things change.... From ridiculing us last year with all their hilarious and out-of-this-world posts at apcom (saying that the Ateneo is always about excuses, etc), they now have come to terms that there is something foolish with NABRO.* A slow journey to an epiphany, indeed.*


This is a certified UAAP oddity.


OT:

... and that's the problem when you dwell too much on a known inadequacy. How about adjusting for a change.

The opinions made by our members regarding the officiating for this season are their opinions and it doesnt necessarily mean that it is already the general consensus of all.

No argument to the point that for this season officiating has dramatically deteriorated but we still adhere to the reasoning that the only solution to address the problem during a game is for our team to adjust to the present situation - kung puro manipis ang tawag ng refs sa game then it is up to our players to make the necessary changes in order to deter committing the same mistake.

While we may see howls of protests from the supporters during and after the game, the team already has this built-in mentality when it comes to poor officiating - if you get affected by the poor officiating and you don't adjust your plays during the game then better be prepared for a no win situation.

Whether we like it or not, poor officiating & the bad refs are going to stay for as long as the uaap board retains their services. Yes, we are bothered and somewhat affected but our lives don't revolve year in and year out with inadequacy. They may do their worst during the game but we will still play, play and play and not get affected.

atenista_comm
07-30-2008, 03:17 PM
I just find it odd that La Salle supporters are now joining the Ateneo supporters in the anti-NABRO stance.* How things change.... From ridiculing us last year with all their hilarious and out-of-this-world posts at apcom (saying that the Ateneo is always about excuses, etc), they now have come to terms that there is something foolish with NABRO.* A slow journey to an epiphany, indeed.*


This is a certified UAAP oddity.


OT:

xxxx

Whether we like it or not, poor officiating & the bad refs are going to stay for as long as the uaap board retains their services. Yes, we are bothered and somewhat affected but our lives don't revolve year in and year out with inadequacy. They may do their worst during the game but we will still play, play and play and not get affected.


In a very rare moment, I must say that I do agree with your last paragraph.*

Jump_Shooter
07-30-2008, 03:19 PM
I just find it odd that La Salle supporters are now joining the Ateneo supporters in the anti-NABRO stance.* How things change.... From ridiculing us last year with all their hilarious and out-of-this-world posts at apcom (saying that the Ateneo is always about excuses, etc), they now have come to terms that there is something foolish with NABRO.* A slow journey to an epiphany, indeed.*


This is a certified UAAP oddity.


I don't want any bashing to begin here in this forum so this early I'm issuing a warning on atenista_comm. If you have issues with stuff posted in ap.com then I suggest you bring them up in that site. I know you're probably going to say that your posts over there are always being deleted, but that's really not my problem.


My apologies, Mr./Ms. Moderator.*

I wrote the above post in reference to earlier posts in this thread that mentioned about how this particular UAAP season has become a record-breaking one in terms of oddities (protests, assassination attempt, etc).* To be fair, it's not just La Salle supporters who are the newly converted NABRO-haters, it's almost everyone now.* Just voicing out my observation.* They have joined the Ateneans' crusade against NABRO.

And I have no intentions of bashing anyone.* Those days are over. :)


PS:* Mr./Ms. Jumpshooter, how'd you know that my posts in apcom are always deleted? :)* :P ???


It's Mister. I sometimes lurk over at ap.com, that's why I know your posts are deleted over there. And no, I'm not form La Salle.

Now, I believe the topic is about UE's protest.

atenean_blooded
07-31-2008, 12:04 AM
I just find it odd that La Salle supporters are now joining the Ateneo supporters in the anti-NABRO stance.* How things change.... From ridiculing us last year with all their hilarious and out-of-this-world posts at apcom (saying that the Ateneo is always about excuses, etc), they now have come to terms that there is something foolish with NABRO.* A slow journey to an epiphany, indeed.*


This is a certified UAAP oddity.


OT:

xxxx

Whether we like it or not, poor officiating & the bad refs are going to stay for as long as the uaap board retains their services. Yes, we are bothered and somewhat affected but our lives don't revolve year in and year out with inadequacy. They may do their worst during the game but we will still play, play and play and not get affected.


In a very rare moment, I must say that I do agree with your last paragraph.*


Now THIS, my friends, is a UAAP oddity.



On-topic:


Any timetable for the Board decision on the protest?

stonecold316
07-31-2008, 01:59 AM
Matira na lang ang matibay sa UAAP Season 71.

Tama, mag adjust na lang sa refs calls kaysa puro tayo angal. Lahat naman ng teams eh apektado ng maling tawag ng NABRO refs. Syempre, kung ang team mo ang nakinabang sa maling tawag sa kabila, matutuwa ka. Pero kung team mo ang naagrabiyado, I'm sure magagalit ka.

Basta, may the best team win regardless of how bad the officiating is this year.
;) ;) ;)

zuuuper
07-31-2008, 02:09 PM
the asterisk remark of montinola regarding the dlsu vs feu game is being used now against him in the feu vs ue game. bilis ng karma ;D

The_Big_Cat
07-31-2008, 02:26 PM
On-topic:


Any timetable for the Board decision on the protest?

From the news: Before the end of the first round of eliminations.

GHRanger
07-31-2008, 03:06 PM
^ That would be Sunday then.

glock23
07-31-2008, 03:29 PM
I just find it odd that La Salle supporters are now joining the Ateneo supporters in the anti-NABRO stance. How things change.... From ridiculing us last year with all their hilarious and out-of-this-world posts at apcom (saying that the Ateneo is always about excuses, etc), they now have come to terms that there is something foolish with NABRO. A slow journey to an epiphany, indeed.


This is a certified UAAP oddity.


We have always been wary of NABRO but not to the point of blaming them for the games we lose. There lies the big difference. If you said that we are anti- NARVASA, then i would have to agree with you.

atenista_comm
08-01-2008, 10:57 AM
I just find it odd that La Salle supporters are now joining the Ateneo supporters in the anti-NABRO stance. How things change.... From ridiculing us last year with all their hilarious and out-of-this-world posts at apcom (saying that the Ateneo is always about excuses, etc), they now have come to terms that there is something foolish with NABRO. A slow journey to an epiphany, indeed.


This is a certified UAAP oddity.


We have always been wary of NABRO but not to the point of blaming them for the games we lose. There lies the big difference. If you said that we are anti- NARVASA, then i would have to agree with you.


As said in Team RP, truth-accountability-reform (TAR).

Who will take the lead for TAR? :) Can we at least pressure our board reps to make a stand in this seemingly sinister way of game officiating?


O kuntento na ba tayong lahat?

glock23
08-01-2008, 02:33 PM
I just find it odd that La Salle supporters are now joining the Ateneo supporters in the anti-NABRO stance. How things change.... From ridiculing us last year with all their hilarious and out-of-this-world posts at apcom (saying that the Ateneo is always about excuses, etc), they now have come to terms that there is something foolish with NABRO. A slow journey to an epiphany, indeed.


This is a certified UAAP oddity.


We have always been wary of NABRO but not to the point of blaming them for the games we lose. There lies the big difference. If you said that we are anti- NARVASA, then i would have to agree with you.


As said in Team RP, truth-accountability-reform (TAR).

Who will take the lead for TAR? :) Can we at least pressure our board reps to make a stand in this seemingly sinister way of game officiating?


O kuntento na ba tayong lahat?


i agree with you that all board reps should pressure the people behind the officiating. And while they're at it maybe they could also do some soul searching and maybe see the light that some of them are the ones causing this decay in the UAAP. Kaya lang sa kapal ng apog ng iba sa kanila mukang mahihirapan tayo. ;D TAR has to happen NOW!

atenista_comm
08-01-2008, 03:34 PM
I just find it odd that La Salle supporters are now joining the Ateneo supporters in the anti-NABRO stance. How things change.... From ridiculing us last year with all their hilarious and out-of-this-world posts at apcom (saying that the Ateneo is always about excuses, etc), they now have come to terms that there is something foolish with NABRO. A slow journey to an epiphany, indeed.


This is a certified UAAP oddity.


We have always been wary of NABRO but not to the point of blaming them for the games we lose. There lies the big difference. If you said that we are anti- NARVASA, then i would have to agree with you.


As said in Team RP, truth-accountability-reform (TAR).

Who will take the lead for TAR? :) Can we at least pressure our board reps to make a stand in this seemingly sinister way of game officiating?


O kuntento na ba tayong lahat?


i agree with you that all board reps should pressure the people behind the officiating. And while they're at it maybe they could also do some soul searching and maybe see the light that some of them are the ones causing this decay in the UAAP. Kaya lang sa kapal ng apog ng iba sa kanila mukang mahihirapan tayo. ;D TAR has to happen NOW!



If this continues to happen, then protests will be a very common thing. What is a 100 grand for high-profile varsity basketball teams, right?

TAR! TAR! TAR! :D

TAR, NOW NA! :D

atenean_blooded
08-01-2008, 03:59 PM
Who's hosting next year?

Maybe all schools adversely affected by the bad officiating can come up with a common banner near the end of the season.

Two words lang:





"GOODBYE, NABRO."

atenista_comm
08-01-2008, 04:29 PM
Who's hosting next year?

Maybe all schools adversely affected by the bad officiating can come up with a common banner near the end of the season.

Two words lang:





"GOODBYE, NABRO."


FEU is hosting next year.

atenean_blooded
08-01-2008, 05:12 PM
Who's hosting next year?

Maybe all schools adversely affected by the bad officiating can come up with a common banner near the end of the season.

Two words lang:





"GOODBYE, NABRO."


FEU is hosting next year.


Kaya pala. :)

paralusi
08-04-2008, 12:40 PM
HUMAN ERROR : UAAP rejects UE protest

By Jasmine W. Payo
Philippine Daily Inquirer

Posted date: August 04, 2008

MANILA, Philippines—A day after a rousing victory over defending champion De La Salle University, University of the East lost a battle in the UAAP board room.

Saying that all teams have “to live by the errors committed by officials,” league officials turned down the Warriors’ protest over a technical violation committed during a recent loss to the Far Eastern University Tamaraws.

“While the board sees some valid points raised by UE, the board also saw the human error [in the game],” league secretary treasurer Herc Callanta said Sunday.

“There’s always that possibility of officials committing human error. That’s normal. Officials are not infallible.”

The Warriors claimed that FEU should not have scored a basket through Marlon Adolfo late in the game due to a 24-second shot clock violation in the match they narrowly lost to the Tamaraws, 71-69, on July 26.

“There was a voting; I’m not at liberty to reveal how the voting went, but it was a majority,” said Callanta after a two-hour meeting presided by UAAP president Sergio Cao.

Philippine Daily Inquirer sources said La Salle and Ateneo de Manila University voted to uphold UE’s protest, while Adamson University, University of Santo Tomas and National University voted against it.

“We’re disappointed, but we have to abide by the board’s decision,” said UE coach Dindo Pumaren. “But we still believe that a technical error happened during the game and it should’ve been corrected. They said it did not affect the outcome of the game, but in a close game like that, every basket counted.”

atenean_blooded
08-04-2008, 12:56 PM
Human error?

So how does that work with NABRO, e hayup yung mga yun?

bluetruck
08-04-2008, 09:03 PM
isnt it that the league has a mechanism for that particular error to be corrected during the game?

Howard the Duck
08-05-2008, 02:32 AM
isnt it that the league has a mechanism for that particular error to be corrected during the game?

i think either:
1. AdU didn't go to that route
2. There was no mechanism for that type of error.

either way, in the 2007 jones cup, the refs/table officials effed up on the shot clock in one RP game. the opponent loud blasted the officials to no avail. he wasn't teched, though