Jeff,

Look at the replay from floor level and tell there was no contact.

YouTube - Sweet 16: Kansas vs. Michigan State

Dude, I have watched this play multiple times. I watched a better it on NCAA OnDemand which had a better picture and same angles, no contact.

And let us say there was contact for argument sake. The MSU player did nothing illegal. The Kansas player was running from behind the MSU player has a right and he tried to jump around him. That is not a foul. If anything it was tangled feet with two players trying to go in the same direction. Then again, I saw no contact on the HD version. They even slowed this down more times than on the YouTube version and there was no contact.

Peace

As mentioned before - Lead came a heck of a long way to make a call that no one can even agree there was contact on.

Like I told Rich - not an elephant.

Or, Jay - as those CIS guys like to say "not for God and country". :)

You'll notice that the Trail was NOT about to call a violation, and Kansas would have retained the ball anyway (just to throw another angle into this argument :D)

Three people in a row comment on my post...notice I did say "not that this play in particular qualifies..."

I just hate hearing this as an absolute, like we should have blinders on everywhere except our primaries.

I think it was a stretch and, worse, a guess. I wouldn't have reached on this one, no way.

I do not think anyone has used this as an absolute (at least in this discussion). My point is if you are going to get something that far out of your area, you have got to be right. You cannot have a call that people are going to debate the validity of the call and your partners completely pass when they would be the usual calling officials. In my experience when an official comes that far, they are usually wrong. Or at least they have their partners wondering what the hell they just called.

Peace

I have never said there was a foul in any of my posts. all I'm saying is that there is definite contact between #2 of MSU and KU player. The KU player is running towards the ball and his right leg goes way behind his left leg. That does not happen naturally. #2 for MSU stuck out his leg and contact was made. Should it be a foul? Should the lead have called it? That's why they make the big bucks. But there was contact.

Not in my opinion.

It does if you are lunging to get around someone and you lose your balance. I have seen people fall before in and out of sports and they did not come in contact with people. The situations I have seen people fall necessarily happen by them running.

Once again, he did not step out his leg to stop the Kansas player to do anything. If anything I doubt seriously he even saw the player. I think he was going after the ball and realized he did not need to leave the thrower or any other player for defensive position. If anything, the Kansas player initiated contact with him. He has a right to his position on the floor. Not sure how anyone can justify a foul on a player that was ahead of the player coming up their back.

There was? :D

Peace

That's it. That's the key to this whole thing, because that's all you can really see from the angles we have. I don't think anybody could have called a foul based on the look from either side. I would sure like to see a shot of this play from the endline.

That would be great except for 4-29-2: "A personal foul shall be a foul committed by a player that involves illegal contact with an opponent while the ball is live."

Watching this play a few times now, I have yet to see any contact.

Hey, Dexter. Nice to have you posting again. Hope you are doing well. :)

I don't know if it will alter your opinion, but humor me by going back and reading what I wrote in posts #11 and #27, and usung the video link provided therein to see if you can pick-up the clipping of the foot that I mention. It is difficult to see from the given angle and without super slow-mo, but I do believe that it is there and caused the trip.

Nevada-

I'm with you on this play. I believe that KU15 had his heal clipped by MSU2 which caused KU15 to trip over his own feet. I thought that watching the play live. Here is how I would break it down: KU15 runs towards the division line with MSU1 trailing him (no contact occurs until they are both on the floor at the end of the play). MSU2, who presumably is "guarding" the inbounder (KU15), backs up towards the three point line. KU 45 comes and tries to set a screen on MSU1. So MSU2, MSU1, KU15, and KU45 all converge about the same time in a small place. I contend that MSU2's left leg makes contact with KU15's right foot. KU15's left foot then comes down and the contact causes KU15's right foot to swing behind his left leg. It's the classic soccer trip as someone mentioned.

I'm shocked there is this much discussion on this one play.

-Josh

Hmmmm....now who was that person? Could someone help me remember? ;) :)

BTW I believe that mick has provided an excellent account of the action of MSU #2 during this play.

Good description, Josh.
The place we differ is noted and my opinion comes from the only replay that CBS showed from the "looking down" camera.
After #15's left foot had cleared, I still contend that #2's left foot was moving laterally and that #15's right foot hit the back or side of #2's calf/ankle causing the ricocheted #15 right foot to make contact with #15 left foot. :)

I wish they would just post all the angles for our sake lol

-Josh

Some supervisors are just idiots-get the call right, especially in a big game like this-damn the out of primary thought.

The lead (enline ref) absolutely, without a doubt, can go to his grave-has the best look (angle) on this play. The c is straight lined, the trail has an angle the might not allow him to see contact.

If I can't be 22-23 feet at an approximately 90 degree angle, see a trip and not call it, I do not belong on that floor. That view is easy as pie to see and call. Professional umpires make bang bang calls at 1b often in the 18-21 range all day. This is not much more. That ref had a great angle, the best angle of any 3 on the court.

Now, a college ref (and somenone mentioned it in another post) said concerning rythym, balance, speed and quickness: If one happens, you might have a foul, if two happen, you have a foul. This is concerning contact. So in our case, do we have one or two, first of all. Second, is the contact illegal. If we have yes to 2 of 4 and a yes to illegal contact, we have a foul.

From what I say from you tube, balance, rythym and speed are all affected. Did it happen cause he messed up or contact by the MSU player. That simple; all the other stuff is nonsense. Player going to get the inbounds is the play.