FEU protests loss to Ateneo

MANILA, Philippines – Far Eastern University has placed its losing game to Ateneo under protest, citing the "misapplication of UAAP rules on video replay" in belatedly reviewing a crucial basket by Eagle Von Pessumal in the fourth quarter of the match that went into overtime.

UAAP Commissioner Andy Jao received the protest letter Monday and said he will "study the protest and release a decision soon."

In the letter to Jao, FEU coach Nash Racela claimed ground rules  were violated when officials reviewed Pessumal's two-pointer from the corner three minutes after the conversion and ruled it a trey.  With it, the Eagles crept to within two points, eventually forcing overtime and winning, 68-64.

Racela stressed that Rule 4 of the UAAP's video replay ground rules only allows a review of whether a shot is a two-pointer or a triple "at the first dead ball opportunity, time out and before end of period concerned, as the case may be."

Pessumal made the long shot with 3:20 left and the Tams protested that officials let the first dead ball situation - at the 2:07 mark when G-Boy Babilonia fouled Anthony Hargrove and sent him to the line with 2:07 left - pass before reviewing.

The review was made as Mike Tolomia was to take his charities with 27 seconds left in regulation and the score at 58-56 for FEU. It was announced a triple and the count was adjusted to 58-57. Tolomia split his charities and Kiefer Ravena later cashed in on his FTs to tie the count, 59-59.

"Why was the decision to review done AFTER four dead ball opportunities? The only time the officials were allowed to review was in the first dead ball opportunity and that happened with 2:07 left. The game should have been stopped at this point for the video replay review," FEU said.

Racela also asked a copy of the video the technical group used in reviewing the Pessumal basket, maintaining the video of broadcaster ABS-CBN "does not show clearly if the shot was a 2 or 3." In such case, he cited Rule 5, which says "the referees' decision when the shot was made will stay."

"A protest is valid when it based on technicality which affected the outcome of the game. We are protesting the misapplication of the UAAP rules on video replay, which is clearly a technicality and not in any way a judgment matter on the part of the officials. This grave error determined the outcome of the game," said Racela.