Penn State and Minnesota sequence starting at 4:08 second half.
 

Thoughts on the contact on the Penn state side of the floor but my main question was what are people's thoughts on the the trails mechanic just after the 4:00 play. Thanks.

L (Kitts) was right on the play. He didn't look too happy with Boroski taking the call.

Boroski had a really rough game. Called a completely phantom lane violation at a critical time. I'm not sure how calls like that are missed. It happened with :55 left in the 2nd half if someone wants to get video.

While we are at it. Lane violation Penn State-Minnesota 58 seconds left second half
 

Talking heads said that it was "stunningly bad." I actually thought it was a good call.

Why didn't you like the lane violation, or more correctly disconcertion?

Some of you may be able to browse to the plays (3:56 and 0:55 second half) here: ESPN3 -- Penn State vs. Minnesota

I agree. Disconcerting Action and the talking heads did not have a clue.

MTD, Sr.


P.S. And for those of you who want to know why I am up at the hour of the morning. Our dog sleeps on the floor on the "better half's" side of the bed. BUT!! When he wants to go outside, he wakes me up, :eek:!

For everyone's information this was called a lane violation on Penn State #10, not disconcertion by Penn State #23 or any other player. In the replay from behind the shooter we can clearly see #10 (lowest block opposite L and T, left side from that angle) move his right foot into the offensive players lane space. #23 even has time to move his foot back into his own space before the release of the FT.

I did not see PSU-10's lane violation but PSU-23's Disconcertion was so obvious.

MTD, Sr.

He clearly called a lane violation on Blue 10, not disconcertion.

Actually, Kitts didn't put himself in a good position to see the foul by stopping where he did. Boroski had the angle to see between the players.

It wasn't phantom, but it was minor. I would not come from the T on a free throw to get something that obscure.

Because, as noted, he didn't call disconcertion. He called a lane violation on #10. Maybe I missed it, but I certainly didn't see #10 enter the lane early.

[QUOTE=ILRef80;926974]L (Kitts) was right on the play. He didn't look too happy with Boroski taking the call.QUOTE]

That is ABSOLUTELY A FOUL. Kitts was "straightlined" and couldn't see the foul. If Kitts is mad at anyone....he should be mad at himself for ONCE AGAIN not being in position to see a play in his area. (That's a pretty common theme when he officiates).

Yeah, I wonder why the Trail was looking there and then why he felt the need to call that. Maybe just let Lead take the backlash for missing that.

It's a Division 1 game with Division 1 athletes. I think anyone would be behind the play, not just Kitts. Hell, look at the play right before. The Trail running to new Lead got stuck in the same spot Kitts did, and probably missed a foul at the other end.