I guess Auburn got f'd on the double dribble no call. Tough titty.

Go Va!

Been a good tournament with lots of close games and Duke now watching from home. Great tournament.

The finishes of the last 2 Virginia Games have been insane. karma is rewarding Bennett for being so classy when Virginia lost to a #16 seed last year.

KenBurnski said:

---

....and Duke now watching from home.....

---

...and waiting for penalties related to Nike scandal.

Premature Confederacy pride.

Tom Izzo's abuse of Aaron Henry was the act of a bully and a coward
Etan Thomas

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2019/apr/06/tom-izzo-aaron-henry-abuse-michigan-state?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

It will still be an all-Confederacy final. Texass Tech shot well and Michigan State didn't.

I won't even go to the double dribble, because it would be making excuses. Let me focus on the play with 1.5 secs. left. The foul was marginal but can be justified by technical factors. Defender was pretty straight up, but his motion toward the shooter leaned him in. So yes, it could be called a foul, and it was.

But to me it was in no way flagrant. it should have been an end of game No Call, and when you think about it the UVa player, Guy, had the opportunity to win the game with his shot, but he missed. Game over to me. But the ref saved his arse and awarded three FTs. I just don't like the refs playing that big of a roll. By the way, I wanted UVa to win as well. I just hate this cr*p in sports where the refs determine the winners and losers.

And to boot, Guy who missed the shot, completed all three FTs. Pretty impressive. I will root for TT in the final.

Worst take ever, wasn't a flagrant foul

SBGold said:

---

Worst take ever, wasn't a flagrant foul

---

Since when does something need to be flagrant to be a foul. It was an obvious foul. It would have been called 100/100 times at any other point of the game. It was the right call.

It was a foul, but that is not called 100 out of 100.
I will point out Guy's own reaction after the play, he pulled his jersey over his face in disgust at missing and losing for his team, he didn't look to the ref for "I was fouled". His instant reaction was not recognizing that he was fouled. A teammate helped him see the light. Watch the replay. It wasn't obvious to us, or him.
But, it was a foul, and the ref made the right call.

Basketball, I often say, is THE worst game to officiate. They are a huge part of the game, and I grow weary of people who do not accept this unfortunate factor in contests. It is what it is. All. Game. Long.

You want to focus on the missed double dribble? The final whistle?
It's just stupid to boil it all down to that.
Luck is involved.
And also, we learn, bribes and scandals.
But for the most part the players and refs try to do their best. Sometimes it works out, other times not.

For Guy, it worked out when he stepped to the line and buried 3 FT's.
That's the dream we all play out in our heads at practice for years.
Did you enjoy that bit of drama?
I did.

If Bruce Pearl had complained about the missed double dribble call at the next stop of play, would it have been reviewable. I presume not, but I don't know.

I also don't know that he did not complain about it. But if he didn't, he should have as it could have resulted in an overlook of the last three-point foul call.

concordtom said:

---

...I will point out Guy's own reaction after the play, he pulled his jersey over his face in disgust at missing and losing for his team, he didn't look to the ref for "I was fouled". His instant reaction was not recognizing that he was fouled....

---

A kid that takes accountability and self blames even when it is not his fault is the kind of kid that goes to the line and knocks down 3 in a row with a Final Four game on the line. Rare these days in a "He did it" culture.

BTW, the foul converted that 3 point shot into an impossible to make fade-away by pushing the shooter's body toward the baseline while he was in the air during his shooting motion.

Guy stated this is wrong. He heard the foul call and his reaction was not disgust but him focusing for the free throws. It's in an article on ESPN about how he had to make the 3 free throws

tequila4kapp said:

---

SBGold said:

---

Worst take ever, wasn't a flagrant foul

---

Since when does something need to be flagrant to be a foul. It was an obvious foul. It would have been called 100/100 times at any other point of the game. It was the right call.

---

I agree it was a foul that probably would have been called 80% of the time; however, the game very likely would have been over if the obvious double dribble was called. Possession to Au, no uVa shot, no foul, no FT's, game over . . . Au advances.

A great game and I was pulling for uVa.

xCoach Dick Bennett was not in attendance, but young Coach Bennett said xDB will probably offer critical comments about uVa's playing poor defensively against Au.

Whatever.

tequila4kapp said:

---

SBGold said:

---

Worst take ever, wasn't a flagrant foul

---

Since when does something need to be flagrant to be a foul. It was an obvious foul. It would have been called 100/100 times at any other point of the game. It was the right call.

---

It definitely turned out to be the right call, and along with almost every drive to the hoop there "could" be a foul called, I just question the timing (knowing it does not need to be flagrant to be a foul) but the player, Guy got a rushed shot off and it mostly missed because of the "rush" not the contact as I saw it. I cannot/will not deny it could be called a foul, but just feel Guy had his chance on a miracle shot and missed.

It did effect the shot. Just have someone push you (even slightly) as you try a 3 pointer. That doesn't mean that a great (or lucky) player can't overcome the push and make the shot. It is interesting to me that the refs operate in a let-them-play mode during the final four games, so when they make a correct but not visually obvious to the crowd call on this shot it becomes controversial.

Bottom line is that if you're a defender and you make contact with a shooter, you can't complain if a foul is called. if you want to be sure that a foul won't be called, stay far enough away that you don't make contact.

OdontoBear66 said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

SBGold said:

---

Worst take ever, wasn't a flagrant foul

---

Since when does something need to be flagrant to be a foul. It was an obvious foul. It would have been called 100/100 times at any other point of the game. It was the right call.

---

It definitely turned out to be the right call, and along with almost every drive to the hoop there "could" be a foul called, I just question the timing (knowing it does not need to be flagrant to be a foul) but the player, Guy got a rushed shot off and it mostly missed because of the "rush" not the contact as I saw it. I cannot/will not deny it could be called a foul, but just feel Guy had his chance on a miracle shot and missed.

---

Without that contact, Guy makes that shot AT LEAST a third of the time. I recommend watching a few replays and watching Guy hit a few threes before commenting on this again. Calling it a miracle shot sans foul is an absurd take with no basis in reality.

OdontoBear66 said:

---

I won't even go to the double dribble, because it would be making excuses. Let me focus on the play with 1.5 secs. left. The foul was marginal but can be justified by technical factors. Defender was pretty straight up, but his motion toward the shooter leaned him in. So yes, it could be called a foul, and it was.

But to me it was in no way flagrant. it should have been an end of game No Call, and when you think about it the UVa player, Guy, had the opportunity to win the game with his shot, but he missed. Game over to me. But the ref saved his arse and awarded three FTs. I just don't like the refs playing that big of a roll. By the way, I wanted UVa to win as well. I just hate this cr*p in sports where the refs determine the winners and losers.

And to boot, Guy who missed the shot, completed all three FTs. Pretty impressive. I will root for TT in the final.

---

I have to disagree. You are conflating two things: 1) It is unfortunate that such a big game was decided by a foul call, 2) It was a foul and should have been called and the ref should be commended for having the guts to make the right call.

A non-call is just as much as a call in having the ref decide the game. It was a foul. It wasn't ticky tack. It was a clear foul that effected the shot. Any "that's a shame" felling should be directed at the player who unfortunately made a bad defensive play and created the situation.

blungld said:

---

OdontoBear66 said:

---

I won't even go to the double dribble, because it would be making excuses. Let me focus on the play with 1.5 secs. left. The foul was marginal but can be justified by technical factors. Defender was pretty straight up, but his motion toward the shooter leaned him in. So yes, it could be called a foul, and it was.

But to me it was in no way flagrant. it should have been an end of game No Call, and when you think about it the UVa player, Guy, had the opportunity to win the game with his shot, but he missed. Game over to me. But the ref saved his arse and awarded three FTs. I just don't like the refs playing that big of a roll. By the way, I wanted UVa to win as well. I just hate this cr*p in sports where the refs determine the winners and losers.

And to boot, Guy who missed the shot, completed all three FTs. Pretty impressive. I will root for TT in the final.

---

I have to disagree. You are conflating two things: 1) It is unfortunate that such a big game was decided by a foul call, 2) It was a foul and should have been called and the ref should be commended for having the guts to make the right call.

A non-call is just as much as a call in having the ref decide the game. It was a foul. It wasn't ticky tack. It was a clear foul that effected the shot. Any "that's a shame" felling should be directed at the player who unfortunately made a bad defensive play and created the situation.

---

Ditto. Never foul someone shooting a three in a situation like this. Shooter usually has better odds of making 2 out of 3 FTs than he does of making the shot, and his odds of making all 3 FTs are as good as the odds he had of making the FG, unless he is an above 40% shooter from that range. And his odds of making a three include both guarded and wide open situations, so his odds of making a three when he is guarded are usually lower than his overall average percentage of shooting threes. Defender made a mistake fouling, and it properly cost his team a one out of two chance at a NCAA title. It varies with individual abilities. I might risk a foul with Jordan Mathews, but I'd never take a chance of fouling Jerome Randle. He would make all three FTs more times than not.

SFCityBear said:

---

blungld said:

---

OdontoBear66 said:

---

I won't even go to the double dribble, because it would be making excuses. Let me focus on the play with 1.5 secs. left. The foul was marginal but can be justified by technical factors. Defender was pretty straight up, but his motion toward the shooter leaned him in. So yes, it could be called a foul, and it was.

But to me it was in no way flagrant. it should have been an end of game No Call, and when you think about it the UVa player, Guy, had the opportunity to win the game with his shot, but he missed. Game over to me. But the ref saved his arse and awarded three FTs. I just don't like the refs playing that big of a roll. By the way, I wanted UVa to win as well. I just hate this cr*p in sports where the refs determine the winners and losers.

And to boot, Guy who missed the shot, completed all three FTs. Pretty impressive. I will root for TT in the final.

---

I have to disagree. You are conflating two things: 1) It is unfortunate that such a big game was decided by a foul call, 2) It was a foul and should have been called and the ref should be commended for having the guts to make the right call.

A non-call is just as much as a call in having the ref decide the game. It was a foul. It wasn't ticky tack. It was a clear foul that effected the shot. Any "that's a shame" felling should be directed at the player who unfortunately made a bad defensive play and created the situation.

---

Ditto. Never foul someone shooting a three in a situation like this. Shooter usually has better odds of making 2 out of 3 FTs than he does of making the shot, and his odds of making all 3 FTs are as good as the odds he had of making the FG, unless he is an above 40% shooter from that range. And his odds of making a three include both guarded and wide open situations, so his odds of making a three when he is guarded are usually lower than his overall average percentage of shooting threes. Defender made a mistake fouling, and it properly cost his team a one out of two chance at a NCAA title. It varies with individual abilities. I might risk a foul with Jordan Mathews, but I'd never take a chance of fouling Jerome Randle. He would make all three FTs more times than not.

---

I completely agree. The sad thing is that the defender did not aggressively try to block the shot but seemed to try to hold up and avoid contact, but his body's momentum carried him into the shooter's lower body. I feel sorry for the kid, but it was a foul.

What the F is on my TV right now? Not the national anthem. Not America the Beautiful? Seriously Did they accidentally put on the grammies?