Maui Invitational Video Plays (Marq vs VCU)
 

Play #1:
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/wxPSUkpGxcA" frameborder="0" gesture="media" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Play #2:
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Vr0p03ADH4A" frameborder="0" gesture="media" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Play #3:
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/OyDVF9pr0Qo" frameborder="0" gesture="media" allowfullscreen></iframe>


Play #4:
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/cFbMY1ZIn0Y" frameborder="0" gesture="media" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Peace

1) Clearly illegal

2) Definitely not GT -- might be BI ;) But, although the player contacted the backboard, I don't see that it meets the definition.

3) Good job by L in not running away. If there had been previous issues, could have closed in.

4) Backing up shouldn't matter. This might have been a block anyway.

Play 1: Definitely Illegal...should be called every time.

Play 2: He actually blocked the ball while it was on the way up and before it hit the board. Given that, I'd ignore any subsequent contact with the board itself.

Play 3: Good nothing. The defender got tangled up in the shooter's teammates as he was stepping away. They were just going to help their teammate up. Something to watch to make sure it doesn't escalate, but ultimately nothing there.

Play 4: Falling back is irrelevant. He got there with 2 feet down and got his body in the path. This was really close but I believe it should have been a charge.

Play 1: Illegal screen

Play 2: Nothing, backboard slap was incidental to the blocked shot attempt and did not cause the backboard and ring to move while the ball was on the ring. Plus it can't be goaltending anyway JRut, you know that. Could only be BI.

Play 3: Big man steps on opponents foot, falls off balance, and steps back to save himself. Nothing.

Play 4: Block