The coach did go crazy! He was jumping all over the court. If they were confident of their no call, I think the coach and bench personnel's actions would have been deserving of a technical. But since they weren't sure if they missed the call they let it go.

I had a similar play, although it was not a transition play. A1 drives to the basket and is fouled by B1. A1 releases the ball and B2 blocks the ball while it's on the way down. I was Lead and called the initial foul. I stood there with my fist up, thinking "T's got the GT, right? Um, guess not. C will pick it up, I'm sure. Uh, no. Ok, then. . ." Tweet! I didn't like it, but had to get it.

After the game, the C and T both said what you said. They saw it, but got surprised and just didn't blow the whistle.

Ah, the benefits of TiVo. It was goaltending.

BTW, both the center AND the trail called it -- one replay showed the play from the baseline and you can see the trail also immediately signaling the goaltending.

I'm confused now. Are you guys talking about the NOT CALLED goaltending on Brandon Roy during the UCONN/Wash game or are you talking about the BC/Nova goaltending at the end of the game?

Sorry. I saw both and mixed them up.

They were BOTH goaltending, one called, one not. I TiVoed both of them and the no call in UConn/U-Dub was clearly missed -- it was coming down when blocked. The announcers were right on top of it and for once they were right. Of course, that is one call most easily made from a chair on the sidelines.

The BC/Nova GT was a good call, nailed by both the T and the C.

I thought it was GT, but I'm at home sitting on my couch. Anyone besides me think this game was a perfect example of one coach getting into the officials heads early and getting benefit of the calls late because of it? I'm really undecided about that, but that game is the first one in a really long time where I felt the officials did not do a very good job, and I'm thinking Calhoun had a lot to do with that.

YOU GUYS ARE TALKING ABOUT TWO DIFFERENT PLAYS!!!!!!!!!

This thread is about the GT that was not called in the UConn-Washington game.

It is not about the GT call that was correctly made in the Nove-BC game.

I thought it was obviously goaltending live. (Talking about UConn/Wash here.) On the first tivo replay, I wasn't so sure. On the second tivo reply, I thought it was just barely goaltending.

The camera angle, though, is a little funky. It's below the ball, and I think that distorts things.

Bottom line -- probably GT.

Tough game for that crew. Announcers made it worse. I can take them questioning calls, but when they say things about giving a T for "showing up the ref," I cringe.

On the BC play, clearly goaltending, and it looked pretty clear the goal would have scored but for the goaltending, which makes it a heady play by the BC player. Pick it out of the basket and pray they miss it.

Pizanno,

He DID go ballistic. Play was so frantic that the officials or camera could not focus on him.

Mulk

My fault. I was talking about the BC/Nova game.... it was real late whenever I read the thread... sorry everyone.

Even though it was very close to being GT in real time, I thought it was close enough that it was probably a good "no call". After seeing it replayed several times in slow motion I was convinced the shot was at the top of its arc and I did not see that it had started its downward tragectory. Afterwards, I thought it was a good play to let go... :cool:

Just start a poll...

I started a new thread with a pole. You can read it here.