Added: 4 years ago
From: mikek201
Views: 47,377
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (92)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • SupremeVerticalJump,YouTube head by the 10 foot basketball rim!SuperNaturalJump2012, YouTube, Over 5 feet floating in the air!! My Head by a 12&1/2 foot ceiling! UltraVerticalJump,YouTube,Real­­ly soon I'll be eye level with the rim! SuperVerticalJump,YouTube,the video cam by itself is magically following the incredible 4 feet vertical!UltraHighJump2012,you­­tube, close by 12&1/2 foot rim!UltraStarJump2012 &SuperStarJump3rd, youtube 4 feet vertical! Soon my head will be over the rim!

  • /watch?v=hqrsx0_dSBs

    Look at his man !

    Josh Shipp another game winning shot against Turkey Basketball Playoff Finals Game 5 ( Galatasaray vs Fenerbahçe )

  • josh shit.hahahha

  • Just revisiting this. The rule (Rule 7 - Art 3) was modified starting in 2008-9. Sounds to me that the NCAA wanted to ensure that this kind of fiasco wouldn't happen again. Here's the latest wording:

    "The ball shall be out of bounds when **any part of the ball** passes over the backboard from any direction."

  • aw u still mad

  • FUCLA

  • @beastmode1702 FUCUNT!!!!!!!

  • fuc. ucla

  • Sounds like he says Josh Sh*t at 0:21

  • tjtfrg

  • i was there baby

  • It seems like no matter the lead is against UCLA they still win. What a team

  • @almega20026 It helps when the refs allow them to break the rules and look the other way.

  • scoreboard

  • I don't see any definitive visual evidence that the ball actually passed "over" the backboard.  It was shot from behind the backboard, but according to the rule as stated by bblower, that is not illegal. I don't think the refs could tell for sure that it went over the backboard on its way to the hoop.

  • College football is boring. College basketball is better.

  • Lets see here...March Madness vs the Motor City Bowl?? Hmmm I dont know

  • what the hell kind of comparison is that? maybe if you watched the usc-texas 06 national championship game or the boise state-oklahoma 07 fiesta bowl, you would see why america craves college football more than college basketball. don't get me wrong. i still like college basketball, and march madness for that matter. just not as much as the BCS (one game means everything).

  • UCLA kicks ass dude Standford sucks dick...

  • Looks like stanford bit the dust and UCLA is still in it.

  • Bull Shit... Your team sucks, whatever it is. And it's easy for haters to say that a team won't win. 3:1 odds on that one. Kansas is the weakest of the 4 remaining teams and the rest are even. Maybe Memphis is the the strongest. Maybe not. We'll see. Whatever the case, UCLA makes Stanford and Cal look like girls' league...And always has.

  • UCLA went further

  • i didnt see it and im confused on how that was so cool

  • Everyone knows you can't shoot over the backboard

  • Larry Bird did. Why cant he

  • This from the NCAA 2007 rulebook. It is not legal. It is the same in the NBA, I checked

    Art. 3. The ball shall be out of bounds when it passes over the backboard

    from any direction.

  • Later in the game they took Bird's shot away.

  • <-- ucla homer. fun game to watch, ill take the W = D. and Love's 3 pointer was about as clutch as you can get. not to mention how my beloved bruins sure do know how to close out games. Pac-10 champs in overall conference and tournament = D. time for the madness.

  • all luck

  • out of bounds or not out of bounds, that is just spectacular, by the way it wasnt shot from the back of the backboard it was shot from the corner of the backboard

  • check out my video response to the cal ucla game tell me what you think..

  • A hot over the backboard is legal as long as it doesnt hit the back of the backboard or some other object that is out of bounds (e.g, the shot clock)

  • Incorrect - a shot over the back board is out of bounds to the other team. The rule has been quoted ad infinitum so I don't see how you can argue otherwise.

  • i was at this game. its retarded that people keep bringing up that rule, it was made so that wilt chamberlain's teammates couldnt lob the ball over the top of the backboard and get it to him above everyone else. it wasn't designed to take away a brilliant shot. its a moot point anyways. the ball actually did go over the corner, not the top of the backboard.

    if you're gonna gripe about that game, blame it on the refs for not calling that foul. give credit to josh shipp for a ridiculous play.

  • its still a pretty damn sweet shot.

  • I am not going to lie, I swear that this game was rigged.

  • your right. the refs made ucla come back from double digits,and they made ucla box out cal to get the crucial rebounds. and dont forget how they made kevin love make that 3 pointer. I also wouldnt put it past the refs to froce shipp to make an insanely difficult shot with 2 secs left.. your an intelligent person

  • No - the refs just gave UCLA the points that won them the game. Plain and simple. Shipp's shot would have been awesome in a game of HORSE. It just shouldn't have counted in an NCAA Basketball game.

  • great shot..... the ball was off of a cal player off that last play GO WATCH IN HD (although im not saying it wasnt a foul)... Go Bruins!!

  • I posted a video on the end of this game watch it and tell me what you think..

  • What I think is that you are a UCLA homer unable to accept the fact that your team got a gift from the refs, so you are trying to convince everyone it didn't happen and that this is all an ESPN plot to demean your beloved Bruins. Unfortunately, a lot of people saw the game and know the truth so give it a rest.

  • It really helps more when you speak for countless people and points out that everyone who disagrees with you has emotional attachments, doesn't it?

    I felt the Stanford foul call was a gift.

    Again, if you and the "lots of people" actually check, similiar shots "over the corner" has been ruled legal at past occasions. Listen to the comments of people who made the rules and in charge of interpreting it. If you are interested in the game and truth, keep an open mind and not boxed by wording.

  • Yeah - things like rules should never get in the way of a game.

  • lol, the ref said it went partially over the backboard? hhahahaha, partially still means that it did. if someone passed me the ball and i partially stepped out of bounce, that still means i stepped out of bounce. bad call.

  • this is so gay. I hate UCLA with a freaking passion. This should not be legit. And this shows us how tight the pac-10 really is. Nobody gives Arizona or Cal any credit. Or even Washington State as a matter of fact. That should have been out of bounds...

    GO COUGS

  • i thought the ball "appeared" to be last touched by a bruin too from the live camera. then when they showed the replay from the opposite side you can clearly see westbrook bat the ball towards center court and it does go in that direction until anderson lunges at the ball pushing it out of bounds, shipp swips at it but the third angle confirms he doesn't come close to touching it, i know the espn guy has a lot of games to cover but at least watch more than one replay before making a statement

  • mrk it can cross the side or diagonal of the backboard and be legal. THe ball has to be fully over the back to be illegal.

  • For college? Cause on this play everyone on both teams realized this shot should not have been allowed.

    I understand it is illegal in the pros too.

    I thought, it was legal in the pros unless it touched the top of the backboard.

    So now I need a rules junkie to post both rules on this, NCAA and pro.

    Thank you, for your respectful reply.

  • Over the backboard is also illegal in the pros, not just if it touched the backboard.

    On Shipp's shot it only went "partially" over the board. At least that's ref's ruling on the field. It's not the first time this has happened. Oregon @ UCLA in 1984 game was ruled legal the same way. I'm sure if you read around you'll find other similiar shots as well.

  • By the way, Hank Nichols, the NCAA's national coordinator of men's officiating just gave his comment. This rule was originally implemented and nicknamed called the "Wilt Chamberlain rule". People used to lob passes over the backboard to Wilt, who would catch and put it in the basket with ease. That move was basically undefendable. Hank commented was that the rule's purpose wasn't to stop a jump shot.

    That being said, people needs to define "over" in the rule better.

  • Um, no it doesn't. Be happy your Bruins got a gift but don't pretend like you know the rules.

  • I'm sure you know the rules better than others can pretend. You can look up the coordinator yourself and send him the note about how to interpret the rule.

    Spirit of the rule: No violation

    Wording of the rule: Maybe

    Past ruling/precedence: no violation

  • Bill McCabe, PAC 10 coodinator of officials, has already stated that a shot over the backboard is not legal. No need to send him a note about it.

    Spirit of the rule: No points for the shot

    Wording of the rule: No points for the shot

    Past/ruling precedence: No points for the shot (ask Larry Bird).

    Give it up - your team got a gift horse, quit looking in its mouth.

  • Bill McCabe said said a shot over the backboard is not legal, but he also agreed that the shot was too close to call.

    Hank Nichols has been the national NCAA coordinator for over 20 years, agreed that the shot should count. Even THE HEAD PERSON in charge of the NCAA national rules and interpretation saids the shot was legal by its wording.

    You should really go replace their jobs

    Past/ruling: Check Oregon@UCLA game 1984. Same play was ruled exactly same, "the ball just sailed over the corner"

  • Bill McCabe did not say that he agreed the shot was too close to call - he said Dave Libbey told him that and he accepted it. He did not say it was the right call. Additionally,Hank Nichols did not agree that the shot should count,he only said the rule was intended to keep players from trying to use the backboard as a screen for a shot. You should work in PR - you're great at twisting the facts to suit your argument.

  • Bill McCabe said that Dave Libbey told him that it was too close and he accepted. Isn't it the same as he agreed?

    Hank Nichols said the rule is not made to stop Shipp's shot. Isn't that means he agreed?

    Okay.... hurry up and send the job application.

  • Look - believe what you want, but look at the responses on this page. The only ones who think the shot was legal are Bruin fans. Just about everyone else in the country believes otherwise. They also believe the Bruins intentionally fouled Anderson and got away with it. It's probably a damn ESPN conspiracy against you guys. Get over it.

  • Yes, you have the entire country behind you as you justifiable represent. You are the world.

    Too bad you weren't the referee at the game. I'm sure you could've easy made the right call, then go take over Hank Nichols' job.

    By the way... goldenblogs dot blogsome dot com/2008/03/09/video-review/

  • Answer to q1 - No

    Answer to q2 - No

    And Dave Libbey, the head referee, is the one who should start sending applications because I doubt he'll be working any Pac10 games after this season.

  • And just because a bad call was made 20 some odd years ago does not make the same wrong call correct. You're really reaching here - accept that your beloved Bruins got a gift from the refs - it happens you know.

  • The Wilt Chamberlain rule was made a lot more than 20 years ago, but you're still hanging on the archaic wording right?

  • oh my god. you idiots. you havent watched the past 20 games the first time ucla starts to get calls you bag on them. secondly shipps was a legal shot it was over the side of the backboard. for it to be illegal it was to be fully over the back which it wasnt. thirdly when collison was chargin down the court on the stanford game u say i t waas a clean block. fine but then call the charge when there guy lowers his shoulders and tries to tackle love when hes ben set for 10 seconds.

  • UCLA's got a great team. There's no doubt about that. But the simple matter of fact is, they didn't win the last two games, at least not with the help from officials.

  • Wow, I live on the east coast but luckily watched UCLA play Arizona and Cal in the last week thanks to CBS. Also, everyone in the nation saw the stanford highlights. My question, how much is UCLA paying the pac 10 refs? Is there some sort of deal between them? They should have lost their last three games, not won them. what a joke

  • I just posted a video on my thoughts about this game watch it and tell me what u think....

  • I just posted a video on my thoughts about this game watch it and tell me what u think....

  • thats crazy! I cant believe he made that

  • thats crazy! I cant believe he made that

  • UCLA fans are such homers... Wow, the refs must have been paid or stupid not to call that back. It was so obvious.

  • thats a petty thing t o make an argument on.

    im sure there were plenty of botched calls earlier in the game, just without the urgency of being at the end.

  • Even the refs admitted it "crossed the corner" of the backboard, making it illegal.

    I believe in the pro game, that shot is legal,

    but not in college.

  • Yes the shot was legal, the refs didnt blow shit in THIS game. They did however make a shit call against Stanford on that foul. And also stop quoting the damn rule you read on Yahoo this morning. Every knows as long as it doesnt touch anything it can go over the backboard.

  • Uhhhhh....where have you been. Every news outlet has stated the shot was not legal.

  • Regardless of what all you haters say, UCLA has made it to two final fours in a row. I agree that they'll have to play much better and hopefully dominate the Pac-10 tourney and the first 2-3 rounds of the NCAAs but they are the best and most exciting team right now. The last two games/comebacks remind me of the Gonzaga comeback a couple of years ago. That's what the NCAA's are all about. So the haters can chew on that

  • NCAA Rule 7, Section 1, Article 3 states "The ball shall be out of bounds when it passes over the backboard from any direction."

  • You guys obviously don't know the game.....It is legal as long as it doesn't touch the top of the backboard.....

  • obviously you don't know the game buddy...it is illegal if the ball comes from behind the backboard. it would be considered out of bounds. they counted this shot because the officials said it was too close to judge and that play is not reviewable.

  • you might want to review the rules yourself before you start talking about who knows the game.

    NCAA Rule 7, Section 1, Article 3 states "The ball shall be out of bounds when it passes over the backboard from any direction."

  • too bad it's an illegal shot.

  • play horse

  • lol, two consecutive games where the refs bail out ucla and hand them the win. first the god awful foul call vs standford, then the horrible no call against anderson for foul, then the miracle shot from shipp u see above, which should not have even counted because it was shot from behind the backboard and went over, must be niced to get bailed out every game.

  • Great Shot but it shouldn't count, you can't shoot from behind the backboard. The officials really blew that one. That could cost Cal a tournament spot

  • I was thinking the same thing, I don't know if it is allowed under amateur rules but when Larry Bird did that over the backboard shot in the NBA it wasn't counted.

  • o mann that was sweet

  • that was an awesome game

  • yahoo this better be good if not you trick me again

  • amazing shot.

    Cal is a bunch of losers.

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more