• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

MBB Game 27: WF at Duke -- Tuesday 7 pm: ESPN

Y’all expect Alondes to box out Mark Williams? Walton had to help on Banchero otherwise that was an easy layup
 
morrison2951 said:
Yep. I was more upset at Wake's failure to put butts on dook players under the goal.

Box out and maybe we get the over the back call and we're shooting FT's for the win....

"Nah, probably not in here." :(
Click to expand...

Lol. Go for the rebound and they win the game on the FT line. The sooner the refs ended the game, the sooner they could make sure the owner of their souls was ok.
 
rolldeacz said:
Well, then it was pretty clearly the incorrect call which is doubly troublesome given that they overturned the call on the court (despite the scoreboard operator for some reason counting the 2 pts prior to replay)
Click to expand...

Yeah, I did not know that rule, would've expected it to be considered a player gathering the ball. So, yeah, seems we got hosed. Surprised face.
 
Shooshmoo said:
Yeah, I did not know that rule, would've expected it to be considered a player gathering the ball. So, yeah, seems we got hosed. Surprised face.
Click to expand...

I think if Williams would have controlled the ball with this left hand, and then while maintaining possession brought it over to his right hand and dunked it - the play would have been fine. That would have been gathering the ball. But he and/or Moore clearly tipped it - then there was no possession before Williams touched it once gain when it was over the cylinder.
 
Watched the replay and I honestly don't see the other guy tipping it before it was dunked. That said, I still don't think there is any conclusive angle that bails Duke out and makes that a bucket.
 
Bubble Boy said:
I think if Williams would have controlled the ball with this left hand, and then while maintaining possession brought it over to his right hand and dunked it - the play would have been fine. That would have been gathering the ball. But he and/or Moore clearly tipped it - then there was no possession before Williams touched it once gain when it was over the cylinder.
Click to expand...

Judge for yourself, but looks pretty clear to me that Williams got his hand in front of Moore's. Moore never touched it as near as I can tell.
 
Quote Originally Posted by morrison2951 View Post
Yep. I was more upset at Wake's failure to put butts on dook players under the goal.

Box out and maybe we get the over the back call and we're shooting FT's for the win....

"Nah, probably not in here."
Click to expand...

The saddest part of that entirely fair and accurate quip by Forbes was the reaction of the reporters. They all laughed. And, I guess it was funny in a gallows humor sort of way. Even more so, it shed light on what everyone knows, on how pathetic the ACC is with its chicken shit, playing favorites, bush-league officials. And that's not funny, that's disgusting.

The last basket was an obvious goaltend. It looked like a goaltend in real-time, it looked even more like a goaltend on replay. The ball was clearly tipped back over the cylinder by either Moore or Williams before Williams handled the ball for a goaltend.

As far as blocking out is concerned, Duke's Williams was blocked out by Manman. The Duke player climbed his back by placing his elbow on Manman's shoulder and keeping him from jumping. No wonder he got so high. A clear-cut case of push-off or over the back. You can check the replay. The refs missed two different, clear Duke violations, by the same player, in their rush to award Duke the win. Any way you look at it, this was bush league, incompetence as a cover for favoring Duke.
 
Last edited:
 
sailordeac said:
The saddest part of that entirely fair and accurate quip by Forbes was the reaction of the reporters. They all laughed. And, I guess it was funny in a gallows humor sort of way. Even more so, it shed light on what everyone knows, on how pathetic the ACC is with its chicken shit, playing favorites, bush-league officials. And that's not funny, that's disgusting.
Click to expand...

I gave Conor some grief about having a journalistic responsibility to discuss the ref stuff, especially in the first half.
 
would be interesting to tally up fouls in all the games played at Cameron this year and see what the disparity is.
 
saus21 said:
would be interesting to tally up fouls in all the games played at Cameron this year and see what the disparity is.
Click to expand...

I think it would definitely favor Duke. However, the point, often missed, is not the number of fouls but the timing of the fouls that are called. The refs know when they can break the back of the opponent and it can only take ONE call at a crucial point in the game. Look at last night as a prime example. It only took ONE CALL to put our best player on the bench with 3 fouls for a good part of the 1st half. They know this. I've seen it for years and have little hope of it ever changing. The ACC has gotten away with this garbage for decades. My hope (a fool's hope) is that the new ACC Commissioner, being an outsider, will clean this up. But, I give it 5% chance. Too much $$$ on the table.
 
Last edited:
TenaciousKory said:
Click to expand...

...

Deac83 said:
I'll be the first one to complain about dook, but I did go back (as ESPN with all their technology never showed it again) and look at it. The dook player looked more like he was trying to take a charge then Monsanto tried to avoid him but ran into his knee. The base line ref was in a perfect position to see that action since it was right in front of him.

If was a foul, but I can't say it was a body check like we've seen in the past.
Click to expand...
 
saus21 said:
would be interesting to tally up fouls in all the games played at Cameron this year and see what the disparity is.
Click to expand...

FT attempts tell a way better story. Duke often gets a lot of late no-shot touch falls called against them to even up the foul count. Then their idiot lemming fans talk about how even it was called.
 
ConnorEl said:
I’m going to say that the view from behind the backboard is not appropriate to use to determine if that last putback was or wasn’t within the cylinder. Announcers seemed to think so…hope the officials didn’t use that viewing angle as determinative.
Click to expand...

I was yelling about this - the top down angle from behind the backboard is the worst angle to use, they were showing the vertical gap of the ball above the rim and saying it proved the ball was out of the cylinder - literally the wrong perspective!
 
Seems pretty clear that the ball did come out of the cylinder and I don't think Moore touched it. But, if the rule is that a player can't tip the ball to themselves and then score from over the cylinder, it's a bad call.
 
really stings to lose a game on an obvious bad call like that, particularly with an NCAA bid on the line

we need to either go 4-0 over the next 4 games, or 4-0 to close the season in Brooklyn
 
Shooshmoo said:
Seems pretty clear that the ball did come out of the cylinder and I don't think Moore touched it. But, if the rule is that a player can't tip the ball to themselves and then score from over the cylinder, it's a bad call.
Click to expand...

that is the rule
 
TheAbster said:
I think it would definitely favor Duke. However, the point, often missed, is not the number of fouls but the timing of the fouls that are called. The refs know when they can break the back of the opponent and it can only take ONE call at a crucial point in the game. Look at last night as a prime example. It only took ONE CALL to put our best player on the bench with 3 fouls for a good part of the 1st half. They know this. I've seen it for years and have little hope of it ever changing. The ACC has gotten away with this garbage for decades. My hope (a fool's hope) is that the new ACC Commissioner, being an outsider, will clean this up. But, I give it 5% chance. Too much $$$ on the table.
Click to expand...

I'm not ready to say that the refs are intentionally doing it to break Duke's opponent's back; however, it is amazing how they always seem to call a couple of touch fouls 35 feet away from the goal where the Duke player is not impeded in any way - but let Duke go the whole game with playing overly physical defense. And then those fouls end up leading to a key player eventually getting foul trouble and/or give Duke FTs at a key part of the game.
 
Bubble Boy said:
I'm not ready to say that the refs are intentionally doing it to break Duke's opponent's back; however, it is amazing how they always seem to call a couple of touch fouls 35 feet away from the goal where the Duke player is not impeded in any way - but let Duke go the whole game with playing overly physical defense. And then those fouls end up leading to a key player eventually getting foul trouble and/or give Duke FTs at a key part of the game.
Click to expand...

It's intimidation and home-crowd pressure. Don't think it's a coincidence we got a fairer shake in the 2nd half when K was gone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top