Ohio v. Syracuse
 

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/wbNYJotc8YI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

The defender arrived late.
The defender did manage to keep his right foot outside the restricted area when stepping into his position.
I don't understand how the Lead calls this from the opposite side of the lane with the secondary defender coming from the C's side. How could the Lead possibly have the best look at this?

This has been a constant pet peeve of mine in NCAAM. A few years ago they hammered into our heads in NCAAW that as the L we shouldn't normally be primary on calls across the lane because we'll get them wrong more than 50% of the time.

Even if the L in this play managed to call it correctly I'd have to question where he'd been looking when the play started if he was able to see the defender clearly.

Agreed.

I could not possibly agree more. And I think 50% is a low number.

Lead missed the earlier foul on the defender on his side of the lane which allowed him to close on the driver. LGP not there IMO. Might have been a game changer as well, since it swung the momentum.

I understand this was a block, but it sure looks close enough to me that a coach no excuse for getting stupid on it.

+1

Basically a hair splitter, although an easy one to make - because we presumably ref the defense...in our primary - can't understand why Boeheim lost his lid over this one.

I couldn't agree more with this. The C has a much, much better look at his side of the paint.

I have no problem with the call. The right foot is there and he is mostly in front of the shooter. If I am going to error, it is going to be on a PC foul not a block. And if I have to slow it down to determine, then I am really happy with this call.

Peace

The problem with the Lead making the call on this play is that he never closed down and pinched the paint. He's out of position, IMO.

And it is an RA play. B2's right heel was on the arc when A1 went airborne.

Can you clip the block call made against Kansas in the game with UNC at 3:58 remaining of the 2nd half and post it for comparison with this charge?

I think I know which play you are talking about Nevada. I think that should have been a PC against UNC. Ohio St. play should have been a block, regardless of RA implications.

I don't understand lots of things I see like this - regularly - in NCAAM games.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/2pyOV99wKqI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Clear block on the first one. And like most of you said, I would have stayed away as the L on that one. C has the first best look.

I don't have anything in the Kansas v. UNC game. That's either a PC or a no call, but I liked the way the ref'ing crew handled that one much better. The C held his signal nicely. The L sold his call effectively. I just happen to disagree with the judgement, but I liked everything else.

Syr. charge (as called) was a block. It wasn't even that close. The lead was out of position and completely booted it.

The Kansas block (as called) was a charge. The defender was in position a LONG time before the shooter got there.

Both these plays were incorrectly called.

Agreed on both counts, but at least in the Kansas game the Lead was in position to see the play.

Jim B had good reason to be upset - that play was a block. Shouldn't the C have had a whistle on this play? I would bet that the C had a better look at the play than the L did.

I don't know what Jim did to be issued the T. I'd hope that he was given a bit more rope when such a call was kicked.

In the other video, it's about as clear as a PC as possible.

Probably couldn't tell, but I would bet Jim B got so upset because the call came from where it did. If that call comes from L does he still get that upset? Guessing no.

On the second one, even through my black and gold colored Mizzou glasses, that is a charge. L was in perfect position for it too.

Syracuse play
 

The call did come from the Lead. But the Lead did not position himself to referee that play.

If I read Boeheim's lips correctly he seemed to be arguing that the defender was in the restricted area, which the replays show that he (barely) wasn't.

My question for the esteemed members of this board is why was this game called so much tighter than every other game this weekend? I think that most of the calls that they made were technically correct, but certainly the threshold of what was a foul and what was merely incidental contact was very low in this game compared to the rest of the tourney.

Thoughts?