Duke-UNC Basket Interference?

[johnSandlin]

The call was correct. And the charge calls on Singler were correct as well.

I was happy to see Coach K get told by one official to knock it off with complaining to the officiating crew after the charge calls.

[canuckrefguy]

Originally Posted by johnSandlin

The call was correct. And the charge calls on Singler were correct as well.

The second one BARELY correct, IMO.

[Jay R]

Rule change this season


Goaltending 4-34.3. When the entire ball is above the level of the ring during a field-goal try and contacts the backboard, it is considered to be on its downward flight. In such a case, it is goaltending when that ball is touched by a player.
Rationale: Makes the difficultly of judging whether or not a try contacting the backboard is on its downward flight more discernable.
Commentary: It is sometimes difficult to determine during a try whether a ball that is above the level of the ring and contacts the backboard is on its downward flight. A ball on its downward flight during a field-goal try is one of the criteria for determining goaltending. This rules change eliminates the judgment of whether or not a ball that is above the level of the ring during a field-goal try and contacts the backboard is on its downward flight or not. If a try contacts the backboard above the level of the ring, it is considered to be on its downward flight. It is important to note that this rule only applies to a try.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Jay R

Rule change this LAST season


Goaltending 4-34.3. When the entire ball is above the level of the ring during a field-goal try and contacts the backboard, it is considered to be on its downward flight. In such a case, it is goaltending when that ball is touched by a player.
Rationale: Makes the difficultly of judging whether or not a try contacting the backboard is on its downward flight more discernable.
Commentary: It is sometimes difficult to determine during a try whether a ball that is above the level of the ring and contacts the backboard is on its downward flight. A ball on its downward flight during a field-goal try is one of the criteria for determining goaltending. This rules change eliminates the judgment of whether or not a ball that is above the level of the ring during a field-goal try and contacts the backboard is on its downward flight or not. If a try contacts the backboard above the level of the ring, it is considered to be on its downward flight. It is important to note that this rule only applies to a try.

Fixed it for ya.

This rule change appeared in the NCAA book LAST season, but the committee didn't tell anyone about it. For some reason they made a big deal about announcing the change prior to this season.

[BBall_Junkie]

The block /charge calls on Singlar were spot on. I don't think they got the call right on the Zoubek call earlier in the first half where the other UNC player accidentally landed on his "unit" after Zoubek hit the floor. IMO, he was there before Green left the floor and took it square. Any other opinions on that call?

For the most part, I agree that it was well officiated. I did like the Henderson/Hansbrough rebounding foul b/c what I saw was Henderson with a clear shot at the ball while in the air and Hansbrough pushing him while in the air with his right hand. Although the push was not 'forceful' we all know that while in the air it does not take much to alter another persons flight which resulted in Henderson losing his advantageous position. JMO though.

Again, overall pretty good job in a very tough game with a lot riding on the results in terms of Conf Tourney seeding.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by canuckrefguy

The second one BARELY correct, IMO.

How is a call NARELY correct?

And which call are you talking about?

[canuckrefguy]

Probably the same way it's "NARELY" correct - or is that "GNARLY". Tony, are you showing your surfer-dude side?

The one on the drive to the hoop where the defender jumped in with BARELY any time to spare. The slo-mo replay showed the defender had LGP, but just BARELY.

Clark Kellogg actually commented on the play, musing that there should be more "benefit of the doubt" to the offensive player, like there supposedly (?) is in the NBA. Don't think I agree, but a thoughtful comment, as opposed to his predecessor

Bottom line - I was just saying it was an awfully close play - one that's probably called a block as often as it's called a charge.