Butler vs Duke - CREW

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by fiasco

LOL. Sorry, but I gotta give you a hard time for this one, seeing as though you have no earthly idea what Howard's intent was on leaning into the screen. He could have just as easily been thinking "I gotta lay this guy out so my boy can get his shot off."

Well, either way, no way that call is being made minus a premeditated decapitation.

[mutantducky]

that wasn't Howard, that was Lawrence Taylor!!!


the earlier play with Haward and Thomas) should have been an intentional foul.
Congrats Duke, players of the game Thomas* and Zoubek.

[fiasco]

Originally Posted by mutantducky

that wasn't Howard, that was Lawrence Taylor!!!


the earlier play with Haward and Hill should have been an intentional foul.
Congrats Duke, players of the game Hill and Zoubek.

Hill? Who is Hill?

[fiasco]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Well, either way, no way that call is being made minus a premeditated decapitation.

So you're saying if it had been an illegal screen it wouldn't have been called?

Would you have called it in that situation if it was illegal?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by fiasco

So you're saying if it had been an illegal screen it wouldn't have been called?

Would you have called it in that situation if it was illegal?

No, he's saying that since the screener was in position in plenty of time, the only way you call him for a foul is if he attempts to perform a cranial removal.

[fiasco]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

No, he's saying that since the screener was in position in plenty of time, the only way you call him for a foul is if he attempts to perform a cranial removal.

I dunno. Earlier, he said he hadn't even seen the play, and no way was anyone going to call anything on a Duke player getting wiped out on the last play.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by fiasco

I dunno. Earlier, he said he hadn't even seen the play, and no way was anyone going to call anything on a Duke player getting wiped out on the last play.

Sorry, but I was following the entire discussion and assumed he was making his comment with all the current information.

[grunewar]

For what it's worth (and I do only HS):

I thought the crew did well.

I thought the game was very physical.

I too was "interested' at the no calls on the "wide bases" on the screens.

I too question a few of the block/charge calls. Close. Gotta make a call.... and they did.

I was impressed how many times along the endline/sideline one official looked to the other for assistance when the ball went off someone out of bounds and got it - quickly and emphatically.

I didn't see a whole lot of chirping from either coach really. Not a fan of his, but I didn't think Coach K's antics were anything but normal last night - for any coach.

I really like the Butler Coach. Class all the way.

I LOVED watching Coach K go right up to the Coaches Box line and stop - like a dog with an invisible collar. He respected it - at least last night.

I really enjoyed the game. Because of the Team's makeup, it was about execution and shooting not dunking and smash mouth. Me likey.

My $.02.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by fiasco

So you're saying if it had been an illegal screen it wouldn't have been called?

Would you have called it in that situation if it was illegal?

I haven't bothered watching the clip. I trust JR's assessment of the play.

So, nope, I wouldn't have. Not a screen where so far we have some folks saying it was legal and a few Duke fans say it wasn't.

It would have to be so obvious an illegal screen that Mr. Butler himself would have called it.

That's just reality for this particular situation.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

It would have to be so obvious an illegal screen that Mr. Butler himself would have called it.

That's just reality for this particular situation.

To be called, it would also have to be an illegal screen that gave some kind of advantage to the screening team. This one didn't imo....legal or illegal. The player being screened wasn't really in a position to make a play on the dribbler and I also doubt very much in that situation that he wanted to get close enough to the dribbler to try anything anyway. The last thing in the world that he wants to do is take a chance on making contact from behind with a guy throwing up a 45-foot prayer.

Your point is well taken imo, Newz. Fwiw I agree that is the reality for that particular situation at that level.

[Jesse James]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

To be called, it would also have to be an illegal screen that gave some kind of advantage to the screening team. This one didn't imo....legal or illegal. The player being screened wasn't really in a position to make a play on the dribbler and I also doubt very much in that situation that he wanted to get close enough to the dribbler to try anything anyway. The last thing in the world that he wants to do is take a chance on making contact from behind with a guy throwing up a 45-foot prayer.

Your point is well taken imo, Newz. Fwiw I agree that is the reality for that particular situation at that level.

Hayward got out of the blocks better, but Singler's still a stride ahead (and to the side) of him when the contact occurs on the screen. Can't see how Singler could be considered to be out of the play.

Having said that, Mr. Butler here believes it was a good screen anyway.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

I haven't bothered watching the clip. I trust JR's assessment of the play.

So, nope, I wouldn't have. Not a screen where so far we have some folks saying it was legal and a few Duke fans say it wasn't.

It would have to be so obvious an illegal screen that Mr. Butler himself would have called it.

That's just reality for this particular situation.

Saw the play a few times at lunch today. It was a legal screen IMO.