Cheap Shot on Singler VIDEO

[ncexnyc]

Now I'm all for letting the boys play and I have been down on my fellow Duke fans for their biased views on what is or isn't a cheapshot depending who is on the receiving end, but this play was definitely a cheapshot with a capitol C.

Bell is looking right at Kyle, you might say he's sizing him up and then raises his elbow. It's only at the last fraction of a second that he turns towards the basket.

[CBDUKE]

FO, you are correct that he didn't swing his elbow. However, look at it again and you will see that he had to lunge out to make contact with Singler.

[bhop22]

After what I've seen from Va. Tech players in the past, I would have to believe the act was intentional. There have been several questionable acts from the Hokies in the past few years.

[Newton_14]

The elbow to Singler was almost identical to the elbow in the recent FSU/Wake game. In that game, they stopped play even though none of the ref's saw the play live. The ref's huddled and watched the replay and then called a flagrant technical and tossed the FSU player out of the game.

With Singler laid out on the floor while play continued, why was there no review of the play on the monitor? This is one of my biggest gripes about ACC refs, there is no consistency in how they handle similar plays.

I agreed with the Tech on Gerald because it is supposed to be a point of emphasis and they are supposed to call a tech for the glare at the opponent, which in Gerald's case is what they did. However, I have seen players glare at their opponent after a dunk or big play numerous times this year with no call. The most recent in the Maryland game. Right after they called the double foul on Paulus and the twerp, the twerp drove the basket on Paulus and scored on him. The twerp then got right in Paulus' face with a stare down. No call. And again, no consistency.

[Jarhead]

The guy stuck out his elbow and Singler ran into it... he didn't swing it backwards like Singler did to Hansbrough. I didn't think it was vicious, but I don't know what the guy was thinking... it seemed like a really poor attempt to box out.

When did Singler do that? I remember Henderson doing it, but it was obviously a result of trying to gain possession of the ball in a scrum on the floor. Hans whasisname was right behind Henderson whose hand slipped off the ball, and with some momentum his elbow walloped whasisname. Henderson had no way of knowing who was behind him.

To the people that can't see the play as it happens, be a good sport and help the economy. Buy yourself a good HDTV and get a good DVR. Then you can watch the play over and over until your biases are proven wrong.

[Newton_14]

When did Singler do that? I remember Henderson doing it, but it was obviously a result of trying to gain possession of the ball in a scrum on the floor. Hans whasisname was right behind Henderson whose hand slipped off the ball, and with some momentum his elbow walloped whasisname. Henderson had no way of knowing who was behind him.

To the people that can't see the play as it happens, be a good sport and help the economy. Buy yourself a good HDTV and get a good DVR. Then you can watch the play over and over until your biases are proven wrong.

Or watch it over and over until you get the player correct. Dude, it was Singler that threw the elbow in the loose ball scrum with hansflop. Henderson was not in that play.

[ice-9]

This definitely looks like an intentional elbow to me. Two reasons:

1. The VT player was looking at Singler as he stuck out his elbow. I.e., he was aiming

2. Only one elbow came out -- this was no boxing out stance or any other defensive stance

Absolutely embarrassing to VT as an institution.

[Lord Ash]

Or watch it over and over until you get the player correct. Dude, it was Singler that threw the elbow in the loose ball scrum with hansflop. Henderson was not in that play.

Matter of opinion, for sure. In regular speed it seems Kyle was just grabbing for the ball and his hand slipped. Slow motion can really distort what actually happens. And Henderson was in the play, IIRC... in fact, I think maybe it was he and Kyle actually fighting for the ball, while Tyler just sort of sat there.

[flyingdutchdevil]

The elbow to Singler was almost identical to the elbow in the recent FSU/Wake game. In that game, they stopped play even though none of the ref's saw the play live. The ref's huddled and watched the replay and then called a flagrant technical and tossed the FSU player out of the game.

With Singler laid out on the floor while play continued, why was there no review of the play on the monitor? This is one of my biggest gripes about ACC refs, there is no consistency in how they handle similar plays.

I agreed with the Tech on Gerald because it is supposed to be a point of emphasis and they are supposed to call a tech for the glare at the opponent, which in Gerald's case is what they did. However, I have seen players glare at their opponent after a dunk or big play numerous times this year with no call. The most recent in the Maryland game. Right after they called the double foul on Paulus and the twerp, the twerp drove the basket on Paulus and scored on him. The twerp then got right in Paulus' face with a stare down. No call. And again, no consistency.

Great post. I absolute agree with everything in here. A surprising unbais post on this thread

[dubayuw]

I dont think Gerald or Singler on Hansborough was intentional and I don't really think this was intentional either. I watched it a few times and think that this guy just really really sucks at boxing out. Even though it wasn't intentional, IT STILL SHOULD HAVE BEEN A FLAGRANT FOUL. It was extremely dangerous and was very stupid of the Va Tech player... but not intentionl.

[Lord Ash]

I have to say, the idea of assessing a foul because of a look is about as subjective as you can be. How on earth is that even worded in the rule book? Let me see if I can find it.

[Uncle Drew]

I have to say, the idea of assessing a foul because of a look is about as subjective as you can be. How on earth is that even worded in the rule book? Let me see if I can find it.

I watched a replay of Geralds dunk and "glare" and he didn't say anything, at least not anything that could be considered English. He was roaring as he dunked and landed, then looked at the VT player while "flexing". As other posters have said, I have seen Duke players and players from every ACC school do the very same thing in games and not get called. But inconsistancy is what I have come to expect from game to game this and the last decade.

But Ash is 100% dead on about even being able to define this in a rule book. Would G have gotten the T if he had not been showing off his physique? If he had flexed for the VT cheerleaders in a flirting manner instead of the VT player would that have been a T? If he had not stared, perhaps closed his eyes and did his immitation of Hans und Frans, would that warren't a T? There have been so many plays called and not called this season where things were left up to the refs to determine intent.

[moonpie23]

this one bothers me, but not nearly as much as the pic on the Nolan thread showing the cheap pick by the MD player LEANING In and sliding to the left..

that DID turn out to be frickin' serious...


frickin' neal needs to have his frick-frack frapped...

[Uncle Drew]

this one bothers me, but not nearly as much as the pic on the Nolan thread showing the cheap pick by the MD player LEANING In and sliding to the left..

that DID turn out to be frickin' serious...


frickin' neal needs to have his frick-frack frapped...

I gotta respectfully disagree. Screens are part of the game, especially in an attempt to assist the point guard getting past half court. As a point guard (which I played) you have to be aware of the situation you're in. Neal may have leaned into Nolan but an objective person could say he was just getting ready for the impact he knew was coming. I've watched the replay of that incident seveal times and people have called out Zoubek for not calling out the screen. Frankly I don't see how Nolan didn't see Neal setting the screen, but then I have really good periphreal vision. God knows I hope Nolan ends up being okay and after three concussions if anyone can sympathize it's me. But comparing that with an elbow aimed at a guys head isn't the same.

For what it's worth the positioning of Neals' arms folded is really the only true negative I can say about that play. (The ref was right on top of it to determine whether it was a moving screen.) Different coaches teach screens and taking charges differently, both are about positioning. But refs often make their judgement calls on how a player holds their arms in both situations.

[bjornolf]

People are absolutely entitled to their opinion. However, I think any argument that this elbow wasn't intentional with an intent to injure is lost by just watching all parts of the replay closely. Watch his head, he is staring down Kyle the entire time. He adjusts his body and elbow at the last second to ensure solid contact. He had PLENTY of time to get his butt in front of Kyle if he wanted to box out, but he didn't bother. He didn't crouch and get ready. The ball has already hit the rim and one of his teammates is already gathering himself to jump for the rebound when he finally turns around AFTER contact.

As a guy whose main talent in basketball is rebounding, I know a little bit about boxing out for a rebound. If you're boxing out, you get your knees bent, your head on the ball, and you put both arms out. You get parallel to the basket, not the lane (Unless you're right under the basket on the side, which makes you parallel to both, but that isn't the case here). If your man isn't on your butt, you might then glance quickly back to see where your opponent is and readjust your position to get in his way, then look back at the rim.

This guy is skipping UP the lane away from the basket. He doesn't even know a shot has gone up. Pause it at :04. Both other Hokies in the frame are watching the shot go up. The guy who throws the elbow is sizing up Singler the entire time. He doesn't face the basket until Singler's body knocks him that way at :06, AFTER the ball has already hit the rim. He's completely parallel to the lane and facing away from the basket, towards Singler, when the elbow connects (a little later in :06). EVERY other player in the frame, duke and VT, including Singler, is looking at the ball on the rim. HE is looking at his elbow in Singler's throat. How can you rebound a ball if you aren't even looking for it?

Anyway, if you watch the replay at speed and don't watch the Hokie's head, I can see how you'd think it was just horrible rebounding technique. But if you watch his body in the first few seconds, then pause at :04 and :06, it's pretty clear what his intent was. To put his elbow in Singler's throat.

My wife, a Hokie alumna, watched this video and was disgusted. She said "that guy should be kicked off the team!" Her words, not mine.

[bjornolf]

Neal may have leaned into Nolan but an objective person could say he was just getting ready for the impact he knew was coming. I've watched the replay of that incident seveal times and people have called out Zoubek for not calling out the screen. Frankly I don't see how Nolan didn't see Neal setting the screen, but then I have really good periphreal vision.

Watch the replay in slow motion. I think Nolan DOES know he's there. Watch his body position. His left shoulder is rolled in and he ducks his head as he goes by, which is actually what gets his head hit by Neal's upper arm. He SAW where Neal was and moved to avoid Neal by trying to curl around him. If Neal doesn't lean in so far, he misses entirely. This wasn't a lean to absorb contact, it was a lean to CREATE contact. Look at Neal's body in the photo. The BACK of his head is in FRONT of his toes. You don't lean in that far to absorb contact with a smaller player, plus, he's contacting the very SIDE of Nolan's shoulder as Nolan runs right by him. Smith and Hayes are running ACROSS the lane at a VERY slight up-court angle when contact is made, then Hayes turns up-court. Neal is standing parallel to the foul line. By this positioning, The only place Smith would have run into Neal was directly in the right shoulder, NOT the middle of the chest. Hayes is just turning up-court IN the photo, but he hasn't when contact is initiated, which is just before the photo. You can see he's just planting his right foot to turn up-court in the photo. I think Nolan DID see him and tried to avoid him, and actually ended up making the contact worse. If Neal's arms are down and he doesn't lean, his screen misses completely. I don't think Neal was trying to hurt him. I think this is a classic moving screen. He realized at the last second that he was going to miss, so he leaned in to make contact. Just my opinion.

[KenTankerous]

Regardless of the intent or flagrancy of the elbow, this no-call speaks to a troubling turn in college ball toward a much more physical game. How does a player go down that hard after the ball has been gathered in and the refs first don't even notice, then let play continue?

Too much hockey in my basketball of late, too much hockey.

[Chard]

Why isn't more attention being paid to this? There has got to be someone in the Athletic department that is bringing this to the attention of the ACC.

It is not just this one egregious instance. Over the past few weeks we've seen some serious lack of officiating acumen when it comes to protecting the players.

When I see this stuff happening I can't help but think of Duke @ GT back in the 2001 season. A GT player had done something along the lines of what we've seen recently. Running back down court after a made basket, Boozer laid a big old elbow right in the face of that GT player to let him know that plays like that aren't going to be tolerated. Now, I'm not advocating for Duke to get down to Virginia Tech's or Maryland's' level but at some point you have to let other teams know that you won't let those type of "plays" continue; a message if you will.

Should it ever get to that point? How do we avoid something like that? Duke makes a public attempt to shine a light on this type of play. If anything, DBR should have a front page story based solely on the VT clothesline of Singler. Just linking to a story about "Duke gets all the calls debunked" won't do it. There should be a picture of the moment of contact on the front page! Coach K should address this in his media address this week. I feel this strongly about it. That play was assault and battery in the guise of tough play on the court. Duke doesn't want to come across as a bunch of whiners but as an institution you have to respond publicly in order to protect your student athletes. It is apparent that ACC officiating isn't.

[BlueintheFace]

Why isn't more attention being paid to this? There has got to be someone in the Athletic department that is bringing this to the attention of the ACC.

I have thought about it, and I do not want Duke to say a darn thing. Va Tech has Carolina at home next. Perhaps the Duke staff has had the same thought...

[Chard]

I have thought about it, and I do not want Duke to say a darn thing. Va Tech has Carolina at home next. Perhaps the Duke staff has had the same thought...

Well...okay, wait until after that game.