VIDEO: Wild Wisconsin finish

[ballgame99]

I don't see that screen being illegal, his base may have been a hair wide, but not enough to justify a call here. It looks like red got fouled on the shot attempt, but I like the PC call on the other end. Looked like good defense.

With the little conference and then no foul call did the crew maybe determine the foul occured after the buzzer? Since the official just signals no shot and then walks off that would make sense.

Too bad no sound, that place looks like it was rockin!

[billyu2]

Originally Posted by ballgame99

I don't see that screen being illegal, his base may have been a hair wide, but not enough to justify a call here. It looks like red got fouled on the shot attempt, but I like the PC call on the other end. Looked like good defense.

With the little conference and then no foul call did the crew maybe determine the foul occured after the buzzer? Since the official just signals no shot and then walks off that would make sense.

Too bad no sound, that place looks like it was rockin!

If you can stop the video within the frames of :15 the screener is facing the opponent and his base is perfect. He then extends the foot and leg out at least another foot into the path of the moving defender. If your definition of "a hair" is 12 inches then that is a pretty liberal definition. It only takes a few inches of an extended shoulder, elbow, hip, knee or leg to knock an opponent off-stride, or in this case, to the floor.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by billyu2

If you can stop the video within the frames of :15 the screener is facing the opponent and his base is perfect. He then extends the foot and leg out at least another foot into the path of the moving defender. If your definition of "a hair" is 12 inches then that is a pretty liberal definition. It only takes a few inches of an extended shoulder, elbow, hip, knee or leg to knock an opponent off-stride, or in this case, to the floor.

If you have to stop the video to that level to prove something, it was not that obvious as you stated. And the contact is with the torso, not an extended foot or arm. The screen was simply not seen and why the contact mostly took place. I did not see the screener go out of his way to contact the defender (which is more of my standard to call an illegal screen) so that the screened player would run into him.

Peace