Source: ABS-CBNNews.com
Just like what I told to my close friends last night that UST can question their loss, as if on cue, the Team from Espana is now planning to protest their 68-66 loss against the Blue Eagles yesterday at the SM Mall of Asia Arena.
The game went down the wire. Ryan Buenafe, in the last seconds of the 4th Quarter, took it upon himself to propel Ateneo over UST. He aggressively attacked UST's defense. Consequently, he was a able to draw a foul and the veteran that he is, he just threw ball up in the air close to the ring as soon as he heard the ref's whistle. Coming from the weak-side, Abdul blocked the shot just like what he does regularly to prevent an and 1 play opportunity. There was a pandemonium after that as the refs declared Abdul's block attempt to be a goal tending violation. The complexion of the game suddenly changed from UST having a slim 1 point lead to Ateneo having a 2 point lead in the dying seconds of the 4th Quarter.
In the ensuing play for UST, Coach Pido decided to isolate Aljon Mariano on top of the key. He launched a desperation 3 pointer but it was a bit short. The final buzzer sounded and Ateneo grabbed the Big Win.
After the smoke has cleared, Coach Pido Jarencio of the UST Tigers is planning to file a protest based on 2 situations. (From ABS-CBNnews.com)
1. After Karim Abdul's jumper that gave UST the lead, Coach Norman Black of the Blue Eagles crossed the line as he was heading to the Officials' Table. Coach Pido said that the Refs didn't give him a technical foul. He was already given a warning for doing the same act. That could have changed the game according to Coach Pido.
2. With regard to Karim's block on Buenafe, Coach Pido said that it was a wrong call. It was clear that the ball doesn't have a chance to go in.
1 comment:
Clearly you don't know what a goaltending violation is.
FYI, Goaltending is the violation of interfering with the ball when it is on its way to the basket and it is (a) in its downward flight, (b) entirely above the rim and has the possibility of entering the basket, and (c) not touching the rim.
Here's the replay with the slo-mo at 1:22:00 http://uaapsports.studio23.tv/updates-videos-inner.html?ref=409
So, was Ryan's shot on its way to the basket? -YES.
(a) in its downward flight? -YES.
(b) entirely above the rim -YES. and HAS THE POSSIBILITY of entering the basket? - A POSSIBILITY can either mean a yes or a no. Even if the ball doesn't go in the basket, what about condition (c)?
(c) not touching the rim - Ryan's shot was going towards the rim. Had it hit the rim, Karim's block would be good and the goaltending violation call would be a fluke. However, the ball DID NOT touch the rim before Karim "blocked" it.
With regard to Norman Black's technical, I have nothing against it. Its only fair for UST to file a protest regarding that matter. But to claim that the decision on the violation was a fluke? Come on. Don't be sore losers.
Post a Comment