Heo Hoon's 8-second bias. Bad call. Controversy over biased judgment before KT gas construction. What's the real thing?
Apr 15, 2025
|
|
KT won 75 to 71 after a bloody battle. One win and one loss.
The series, which was initially expected to dominate KT, was in chaos with the appearance of Markok Mathien, a foreign player replacing the Korea Gas Corporation. As KT Hammons suffered a severe slump, the two teams' semi-final series was unknown.
However, controversy over the decision arose after the second game.
There was a painful miscarriage of justice on the surface. With 3:50 left in the fourth quarter, Huh Hoon's eight-second bias (a rule that requires him to go over the half-court within eight seconds) was not pointed out.
Huh Hoon's foot did not go over the half-court until the attack time was 15 seconds.
KBL admitted. "In the process of Huh Hoon crossing the half-line, it was 15 seconds before both feet reached the offensive court. A situation in which an 8-second viralization must be declared." However, the on-site referee judged that Heo Hoon's two feet touched the front court, and it was not easy to immediately blow 8 seconds of vial. Looking at the situation when Huh Hoon crossed the half court, it happened at a close time of 16 to 15 seconds.
KBL's explanation that immediate judgment was not easy is understandable. However, if you were in doubt at the match point, you could do a video review. This part was a bummer. I've been video-reading several times within a game this season, but I haven't done this scene. It was a disappointing part of the operation at the desperate match point.
Park Joon-young's rough foul on Matien in the second quarter was also called a general foul. Park Joon-young threw himself for the ball, which overlapped with Matiang's ankle. Matien's ankle was shocked. It was a very dangerous play that could have major injuries. A general foul was called by video review. However, at least a U foul was needed. If these fouls are recognized as just regular fouls, they give you room for a clever 'quenching' toward the ace in the playoffs.
Finally, the call criteria for the first and second half were subtly different.
In the first half, the decision was complied with. Both teams had similar foul points according to physical fights and the intensity of pressure. I cut it off more strictly on hand-checking, and it was a compliance game operation.
In the second half, the judgment criteria themselves became a little loose. In the process, there were some scenes where hand-checking, which should have been called in the first half, was not called.
In the process, some argue that there were many calls that the gas corporation was at a disadvantage' and that there were home calls'. The Korea Gas Corporation will reportedly request a briefing session for the referee.
In this case, the basis for judgment according to the case-by-case is very important. I gathered a potentially controversial foul situation in the second half and asked KBL. ▶Velangel foul with 14.8 seconds left in the third quarter ▶ Whether or not a provocation technical foul will occur after Morgan's third quarter buzzer beater tip ▶ Martian attacker foul ▶ 8 minutes and 50 seconds left in the fourth quarter was questioned about Heo Hoon's 8 seconds bias (KBL recognition) with 3:50 left in the fourth quarter.(There may be other controversial situations, but in the journalist's view, there were about four.)
This article was translated by Naver AI translator.
