Duke @ Notre Dame Plays (Video)
 

Play #1:

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/N3lER76GzH0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Play #2:

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ytaFbhQgVCU" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Play #3:

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/D-RT2NRwWxQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Peace

First of all, Dakich is an ******* and a moron!!

Secondly, thanks for posting my bluedevils.

Play 1, to me, was clearly PC. Like 100%.

Play 2: depends on which foul was being called. There is a bump as ball handler makes the curl. He gets fouled again after the gather. No shot on first foul, in the act on the 2nd.

1. Charge
2. Continuous motion

Re. the first video. This is especially applicable on the high school level. Those working on and assessing those on the NCAA level may have differing opinions.
When an official's first impulsive movement in immediate reaction to a play like this is two fists rising from the hips, there's only one call that's gonna result. Most who start with two fists rising default to a block because of the early initiation of what will become the later fist-banging-on-the-hips signal, regardless whether it was actually a charge or not.
At least on the high school level, that seems to be true.
Further reason why to insist upon the approved mechanic of a single fist in the air first, then go to the foul signal.
Anybody else find this is true?

(Come to think about it, JD Collins insisted upon that very same thing to his NCAA-M officials this preseason, didn't he?)

Play 1. Easy PC

Play 2. No shot. Very patient whistle.

Play 3. I see two hands on the back as the inside player is gathering himself to go up. Correct call in my opinion.

Play 1: Easy PC

Play 2: Shooting, correct tech though

Play 3: No foul

1. PC
2. Shooting
3. Nothing

I guess I missed the 3rd video.

No foul in that video. Was not a rebounding push.

1. is a PC 100% of the time. That shouldn't be missed at this level or even in HS. Heck, he was even "set" ;)

2. If the call was on the bump at the elbow that was one really late whistle. That looks like a shooting foul to me and I can't blame the coach for reacting the way he did.

3. No foul, but I'm sure it looked like one from the T's angle, but that is all the more reason he shouldn't make that call.

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A LATE WHISTLE!

My God, I can't BELIEVE there are officials saying this. I expect it from clueless coaches, but not from officials who, supposedly, know better.

Look at the trail -- he's ALREADY waving off the shot as the player finishes. It's obvious that he called it on the curl and had no intention of awarding shots here.

#3 -- If the T is calling a hold/push to keep the player down, I don't hate the call. I don't particularly like it, either.

That's T's call all the way.

1. PC

2. Would have been continuous motion, but the player traveled. So, no basket, award two shots.

3. Hold on blue / black.

I think you meant to say "a late whistle is what complaining fans and coaches yell at you when you are patient and see the play from start to finish". A patient whistle is a good thing.

1. PC
2. Foul by the book, sure. A good call with player driving getting below foul line with limited contact not having any effect on ball handler. No, this is not a good call at this spot on the floor. He should have let the play develop and finish!
3. no foul

#1: speaks for itself

#2: I don't see anything prior to the shooting motion

#3: Not a whistle that official should have had from that position on the floor. He was already high in the Trail, then missed the rotation. Old Center/New Trail was still in position to see that rebounding action, as was the Lead after his rotation.

#2 - I don't either, I'm only commenting on what the official seemed to call. The last replay shows how early he's wiping off the basket.

#3 - I think the old C has the better look through the two players and his trigger wasn't tripped.