MBB: Duke 76, Georgetown 67 Post-Game Thread

[Bob Green]

Place your game thoughts here. A very solid win.

[JDev]

Great win. So many quality performances: G's electric first half and solid all-around game, Singler's unquestioned toughness, Scheyer played well, Paulus's intensity, even Plumlee gave some very good minutes. Outstanding performance.

[godukerocks]

Paulus and Henderson had great games. A big turning point I think was the Monroe tech for his fourth foul.

[geraldsneighbor]

Henderson and Singler are grown men. Paulus and Smith played great. Very small line-up that defended challenged and frustrated G'town too much. Jon is so underrated on defense. He does way more then shoot the ball.

[kaufmjo]

Excellent composure down the stretch in face of a Gtown run. Gman is a huge asset for us to have again and has that ability to take over a game. Liked Paulus' fire, albeit with some of the historical errors in years past. Singler is just awesome to watch - he's getting some support this year that will help with his physical and mental stamina down the stretch. Great game by the good guys - now switching to watch the Wake/Clemson game

[DukieInBrasil]

yes, Bob, a very solid win. Great game from G, again. A great game from Kyle as well, though only on the boards, his offense was quite a bit off. Greg stepped up and gave us a really nice boost there in the 2nd half. Nolan had a solid if un-spectacular game. Although Miles gave us a nice jolt in the 1st half, i have to say that our post production in this game, aside from Kyle, was, um, on the verge of pathetic. The initial Box shows that we out-rebounded GTown, that in and of itself is impressive.
Great showing in a very important game!!!

[norduck]

Place your game thoughts here. A very solid win.


Glad for Plumlee !!

[cascadedevil]

I love this team. Different players are stepping up every game. I cannot remember a season where the man of the match could easily be one of 8 different players. More and more, they are dominating on defense and just taking what the other team gives them on offense. Fantastic coaching job by K. The small line up played great.

[rsvman]

Sweet win against a very tough opponent, the kind a team might face in the Sweet Sixteen or even the Elite Eight.

Hustle was outstanding, especially on the boards. Superb coaching (as always).

[Ian]

Aside from the obvious that has already been covered.

Glad to see Plumlee get minutes and produce in those minutes.

Of course it was mainly due to the uninspired showing by LT and Z. That's really disappointing.

[Coballs]

Great W. Nice that Monroe's first (and likely only) trip to CIS should be a memorable one....for all the wrong reasons. Basically, his immaturity cost his team a chance at winning this game.
Nice to see Plum get some run and contribute. It's too bad that we're not seeing more from Zoubs and LT at this point. Hopefully they'll come around. It looks like McClure has taken a bunch of LT's minutes.
Doubt that it's going to happen, but one could make a case that Paulus has earned his place back in the starting lineup.

[CarterTheGreat]

I love the small lineup with basically 5 guards on the floor. And, like others, I wonder what Monroe said to get t'd up??

[Jumbo]

Great win, great toughness, great maturity. And we saw some cool developments from Coach K, including:

-McClure starting over Zoubek, couple with limited playing time for Zoubs and LT. This could have been done for either of two reasons -- the strategy of defending Georgetown's Princeton-style offense or to send a message to Brian and Lance -- but whatever the motivation, it served both purposes. We defended very well against the Hoyas' attack, and hopefully this motivates Brian and Lance to step up their games. Lance has struggled for quite a few games in a row, in fact, but that hasn't been noticed in all the other discussions going on. Time to turn it on.

-Mass substitutions at the first TV timeout. We saw this last year in the ACC Tourney, when K basically did a Blue/White swap. This time, only Singler stayed in as Paulus, Pocius, Williams and Zoubs replaced the other starters. Nice way to give everyone a taste early.

-Plumlee stepped up. This is cool for two reasons. 1) K wasn't afraid to go to him when other guys were struggling. 2) Plumlee was ready and responded with excellent D, an inside presence, and even one ugly, yet effective, jumper. That's depth, folks. When the team needed Miles, he was ready. Even if he doesn't get in the next game, we know he's capable of contributing should hte need arise later in the year.

-More of the small lineup. We've only really seen it at the end of games for FT shooting, but against Georgetown's offense (and the Hoyas' own relative lack of size), K was able to use the Paulus-Smith-Scheyer-Henderson-Singler group more often. Those guys performed well. It again showed that we can adapt/adjust our style/lineup based on the opponent.

I love the way this team is developing. It was great to see Greg playing with confidence again. It was great to see Jon impacting the game in every other way even though his jumper is still off. It was great to see Kyle play like a man on the boards. It was great to see Gerald heat up -- now he needs to learn how to score within the flow, instead of just going iso, stalling the offense, and occasionally tossing up bad shots.

I'm really happy about this. You all should be, too. Enjoy days like this -- it's a long time between April and November.

[DukieInBrasil]

Great W. Nice that Monroe's first (and likely only) trip to CIS should be a memorable one....for all the wrong reasons. Basically, his immaturity cost his team a chance at winning this game.
Nice to see Plum get some run and contribute. It's too bad that we're not seeing more from Zoubs and LT at this point. Hopefully they'll come around. It looks like McClure has taken a bunch of LT's minutes.
Doubt that it's going to happen, but one could make a case that Paulus has earned his place back in the starting lineup.

Paulus did not make a case for being back int he starting line-up. He made a case for being a valuable man off the bench. He hit some nice shots and played with aplomb.
I was very surprised at the lack of PT for both Z and LT, they both seem to be retrogressing after very inspiring play in the OOC.
Our small line-up seemed to frustrate G´Town´s size and we took advantage on the boards too, outrebounding them by about 3.

[Kedsy]

Doubt that it's going to happen, but one could make a case that Paulus has earned his place back in the starting lineup.

Oh, come on. He played a great game and I hope he continues doing it off the bench like that, but Nolan played well too and his defense is still significantly better. And that's what's most important for this team.

[MB in MD]

Some very nice things out of this game:

containing a very potent offensive team (did you see all those GT buckets down the stretch against really good defense?!);

adapting to the game situation with an unconventional lineup that got us some good matchups

continued development of G as a go to guy

Singler as a beast even though his shot was way off

lots of poise, managing G'town's runs

...and a real contribution from Greg

But those guys are good; I'd hate to face them again in the tourney because they'd have all the intangibles, having played without Monroe for half the game

-
and a quick hello to the board; I've been a reader for years but never bothered to register. It's always fun and as so many people note, the quality of what's here compared to a lot of other stuff out there is very refreshing

[jipops]

We had absolutely no answer for Greg Monroe, that kid is a true talent. Fortunately he put himself in foul trouble and Gtown suffered. Great 1st half by G and another workman like performance from Singler who just dominated the glass.

Anybody catch the beautiful play generated by Scheyer where he drove the baseline with his left, dished to Singler who finished with his left? May have looked like a simple play but I had to replay it again on DVR just to re-watch such a nice illustration of beautiful basketball. That play took great skill from two players. Terrific D from Smith as well.

[jpfrizzle]

Go DUKE ! ! ! ! I was on the edge of seat every minute of the game!

Earlier I jumped the gun and thought Monroe was benched, very disappointed in that. Kinda had the impression, being benched was gonna be his 'welcoming celebration'. Oh well.

Everybody played a great game!

Who's Next!?!

[Ders24]

I''m pretty sure - although not positive - that Monroe didn't say anything. I think it was actually a fan behind him. Awesome win, very enjoyable to be at, I won't be talking for a few days.

[DownEastDevil]

Singler is a man - Even though he was a little off on his shot he never quits on a play. He does all the little things that makes sure the team stays in the game.

[Lord Ash]

Great game... nice to see us step up the ENTIRE game and never lose a HAIR of intensity. We looked GREAT.

Also, wonderful management of the bench by K. Guys looked intense and hungry and ready the entire time. Best bench management I can remember from K.

[Coballs]

I''m pretty sure - although not positive - that Monroe didn't say anything. I think it was actually a fan behind him. Awesome win, very enjoyable to be at, I won't be talking for a few days.

Who knows? But the announcers did comment that one of the Georgetown assistants appeared to attempt to take the blame for the T, which suggests that Monroe did open his yap.

[JDev]

I am wondering if Plumlee's quality minutes are a sign that he is working himself into the regular rotation. I know that is a difficult conclusion to jump to after one game, but he is a different player and could potentially bring different things than Z and Lance. Truthfully, he seems to be something of a cross between the two in a sense (i.e. bigger than LT and more athletic than Z). It will be interesting to see what happens. Could just be a blip on the radar, or it could be a sign of things to come.

[MChambers]

-Plumlee stepped up. This is cool for two reasons. 1) K wasn't afraid to go to him when other guys were struggling. 2) Plumlee was ready and responded with excellent D, an inside presence, and even one ugly, yet effective, jumper. That's depth, folks. When the team needed Miles, he was ready. Even if he doesn't get in the next game, we know he's capable of contributing should hte need arise later in the year.

-More of the small lineup. We've only really seen it at the end of games for FT shooting, but against Georgetown's offense (and the Hoyas' own relative lack of size), K was able to use the Paulus-Smith-Scheyer-Henderson-Singler group more often. Those guys performed well. It again showed that we can adapt/adjust our style/lineup based on the opponent.


I'm really happy about this. You all should be, too. Enjoy days like this -- it's a long time between April and November.

This was a great win, but I came here expecting to see concerns about Kyle wearing down, we don't have any bigs!

It was fascinating to see Plumlee (my son, who is 14, said "who is that" when Plumlee came in). I didn't think his jumper looked that bad, he made his free throws, and he played good defense on Monroe (helped G draw Monroe's 3rd). He still doesn't always know where to be (missed Singler's pass that would have been a dunk, was late on a rotation), but overall he played fine. Greg Anthony (who did a good job) noted that Plumlee is big and mobile enough to play Monroe. Hope Plumlee keeps improving and we see more of him soon.

It was nice to Paulus shoot better, but he really can't buy a break from the refs on defense.

Henderson was awesome.

[weezie]

A good friend called at the end of the game....he's a tarhole fan (I struggle to constantly forgive him but he did play their many years ago as a benchwarmer) but a fair Duke supporter, too, when we aren't playing each other. After complimenting Duke's great play today he pointed out that Duke's team obviously likes each other, unlike his 'holes who are rumored to barely be able to tolerate their teammates. It sure looks like he is right, our team is beginning to enjoy the benefits of trusting each other.

[bjornolf]

I thought that Wattad guy was pretty clever. He's one of those players that gets under your skin and does something to you that forces you to react, then gets the foul on the response. There are a lot of guys like that in the NFL. He did it to Singler for KS's fourth when he strangled him with his own shirt, then screamed for a foul when KS dumped him. Then he did it to McClure, creating contact then flopping for McClure's fourth. He flopped a BUNCH of times during the game, including that one GH drive where GH didn't even touch him (didn't get the call there, but man was he loud hitting the floor with a slap). He even has that perfect smirk you just want to smear all over the ground. He's fun to watch, I'll give him that. Very manipulative. Reminds me of some other players I've seen in the past. ;)

[FireOgilvie]

I am wondering if Plumlee's quality minutes are a sign that he is working himself into the regular rotation. I know that is a difficult conclusion to jump to after one game, but he is a different player and could potentially bring different things than Z and Lance. Truthfully, he seems to be something of a cross between the two in a sense (i.e. bigger than LT and more athletic than Z). It will be interesting to see what happens. Could just be a blip on the radar, or it could be a sign of things to come.


Plumlee is definitely a mix of the best attributes between both of them: size and mobility. Lance has been completely ineffective the last few games. He really disappears on the floor. I wish Plumlee would get into the conference games more. I don't want 10 minutes a game, but an average of 5 couldn't hurt.

[77devil]

Also, wonderful management of the bench by K.

With one exception-should have subbed for Kyle when he got his 3rd and Duke was up by 16. I was yelling at the screen for K to take him out. I guess he didn't listen to me but even K is not perfect, just practically perfect.

[JDev]

Plumlee is definitely a mix of the best attributes between both of them: size and mobility. Lance has been completely ineffective the last few games. He really disappears on the floor. I wish Plumlee would get into the conference games more. I don't want 10 minutes a game, but an average of 5 couldn't hurt.

It can only be a good thing that Plumlee played well against a Final Four- quality team on a national stage. That has to be great for his confidence, and perhaps just as important, the coach's and team's confidence in him.

[77devil]

This was a great win, but I came here expecting to see concerns about Kyle wearing down, we don't have any bigs!

Dude, you have been beating this issue like a dead horse on multiple threads. Let it go.

[grossbus]

all in all a solid W.

a lot of good stuff.

i know the delay game has it's supporters and detractors. as long as it works, i can stand the stress, but when the ball winds up in mcclure's hands with less than 5 seconds left on the shot clock, it isn't working well. :)

it is interesting to me that marty has gotten minutes in the first half of each of the last two games, did OK, but did not get in in the second half.

[HateCarolina]

Dude, you have been beating this issue like a dead horse on multiple threads. Let it go.

Hey 77Devil...I think its definitely a valid issue that K needs to watch out for. I was at the GT game on Wednesday and Kyle was gassed for much of the second half...37 minutes for a bigger guy is going to take its toll.

[grossbus]

"Lance has struggled for quite a few games in a row, in fact, but that hasn't been noticed in all the other discussions going on."

well, i noticed it but my post GT game post got deleted. :) he seems to have regressed to the running around out of control style that characterized his freshman season.

[Jumbo]

Hey 77Devil...I think its definitely a valid issue that K needs to watch out for. I was at the GT game on Wednesday and Kyle was gassed for much of the second half...37 minutes for a bigger guy is going to take its toll.

Didn't take its toll today. Kyle played his best ball down the stretch. It's amazing that anyone can be focusing on this ridiculous issue right now, instead of enjoying a big win. Absolutely silly.

[calltheobvious]

Didn't take its toll today. Kyle played his best ball down the stretch. It's amazing that anyone can be focusing on this ridiculous issue right now, instead of enjoying a big win. Absolutely silly.

Kyle's a freak. This is the second game in a row that his face has seemed to betray intense fatigue, and yet he has shot significantly better in the second half than the first half.

Looks like he's learning to play tired, which is something K has talked about for a long time. Or maybe his face is just weird. Either way, no complaints. I really enjoyed watching this game and this team.

[roywhite]

"Lance has struggled for quite a few games in a row, in fact, but that hasn't been noticed in all the other discussions going on."

well, i noticed it but my post GT game post got deleted. :) he seems to have regressed to the running around out of control style that characterized his freshman season.

Lance and Zoubs...come on, join the fun. Don't you want to be part of some great things happening?

Whether by negative motivation (rear end on the bench) or positive motivation (this is a great team and I want to help), these guys will respond and get back to the kind of play that the team needs.

[SupaDave]

Of course it was mainly due to the uninspired showing by LT and Z. That's really disappointing.

Should be encouraging - we've got DEPTH...

[DukeWarhead]

This is one of those wins that identify a season and everyone needs to really just soak it in. K made a big deal before the season started about enjoying each win and not letting expectations take anything away from that. The close Rhode Island win, the blow-out of Xavier, and now this very complete, satifying win over the toughest opponent yet are the stops along the journey that we need to celebrate. Hopefully ,the players are taking the time to enjoy each win, too. They are becoming one of the great Duke teams - not there yet - but getting there. But then again, the point is not to compare them to other Duke teams, but to enjoy what they have accomplished so far and appreciate the hard work that brought them here. Good thing is, I think this team is doing just that and aren't worried about outside expectations.
It's been a great ride, so far. I'm looking forward to the rest....

[TwoDukeTattoos]

I loved that 11 guys saw time in the early going. And I loved that Plumlee was used more.

[FireOgilvie]

Gerald's playing style is very similar to Kobe Bryant's on offense. Lots of ISO and jump shots. He definitely has a pro-style game. If G can consistently hit his mid-range jumpshots, he'll be unstoppable.

[Cell-R]

Wow, what a great game by Duke.

I'm beginning to expect Henderson to shoot the lights out. Hopefully he keeps it up!

Singler. Beast.

Smith, solid performance from what I noticed. Nothing too flashy to stand out.

Paulus! Those threes were great. I love the emotion he had on the court. It seemed as if the team was playing better with him at the point on this particular day.

Plumlee. Wow, I knew he was supposed to be good, but then I began to think he might be a little overrated. His performance wasn't phenomenal but it was pretty dang good considering his position. Freshman playing for the #2 team in the nation against an extremely good #12 Georgetown team who recently lit up Syracuse. On top of that Plumlee has gotten very little PT in conference games so far.

Excellent defensive showing by Scheyer.

[Uncle Drew]

1. Great win, against a quality oponent. It was nice to see Duke adapt and make match up problems for Georgetown. And it was really nice seeing Duke not back down from a tough, gritty, physical big east team. I have seen a few previous Duke teams in a few games get "punked" by phyisical play. After several phyisical games this season I don't see THIS Duke team backing down from anyone. (And actually dishing out a lot more than they take.)

2. While I love seeing Henderson go off (he's going to be a decent player one of these days :rolleyes:.) you know NBA scouts are watching. In the last two games he has had inbounds dunks where he was so high it looked like he was dunking down into the basket. God I wish I could jump like that one time in my life. It really doesn't seem humanly possible to those of us that are ground bound. There are times I think he gets into trying to impose his will against the other player guarding him. But some of us have been saying for a couple years we need a go to guy. I think we have several on this team, and you can pencil in Henderson as one of them.

3. Yes the post play particularly on the offensive end was a tad bit diappointing. That being said when the ball got in and around the rim via penetration or an offensive rebound I thought Duke as a team did well.

4. While I respect the opinions of the recuiting experts on here. And I am glad to have who we have now and the players we have coming. Anyone who says missing out on Monroe wasn't a big miss is nuts. What's done is done now, and I'm glad we were able to show him the error of his ways. But I think it was clear with Monroe in the game Georgetown was a different team and a much harder team for Duke to match up with. I couldn't help but think about THIS Duke team with him thrown into the equation at how freakin' awesome they would be. But like people said when he dissed Duke, we will be fine. (He's probably one and done anyway.) But with all due respect anyone who put his tallent equal to McRoberts or a lesser player was off their rocker. He has twice the post presence than Josh has now.

5. I enjoyed having Greg Anthony announcing the game. Having played Duke twice in his career I can't recall ever hearing him call a game at Duke. He finally got to see the legacy of a dynasty in person as opposed to a fly by night champion like UNLV. :D

6. Seth Davis is a Duke grad????!!! I would have put the guy in the Duke-hater camp. When they said he went to Duke I almost had to find a defibrillator.

7. We can debate who should be starting point guard and all that jazz for the rest of the season. But Greg made some huge plays today and really fired up the intensity. I'm not sure he and Smith in the game at the same time isn't even more dangerous than seperate. A GGGGC line up looked pretty good today.

[dukelifer]

This Duke team is a very good counter punching team. They play a bit to the level of their opponents but find a way to keep themselves close and don't panic. They seem to get a flurry in from time to time and hit their throws when needed. I am not sure Duke still has the inside players to compete with the teams with elite big men- but counterpunchers can do their damage other ways. Singler has an amazing feel for the game. He is an outstanding rebounder for his size- which is more about understanding where the ball is going to come off the rim and getting to the spot- than it is about jumping high. G is playing well although his feel for the game and game situations is still not there. That said- he is taking better advantage of his gifts. Paulus gave Duke a big lift today. He is what he is but he is a tough kid and likes to mix it up. Scheyer picks his spots- it would be great if he could be a bit more consistent with his shooting but I think that will come. Still he brings a lot to the table each night. Smith is coming along but still not quite comfortable. Still his D is good and consistent. The big hole right now is in the Center position. Since conference play started, the three headed center has not been very good. Duke needs them to be much better. Perhaps with some more game experience, Plumlee could be that guy- but someone needs to step up to get garbage shots and get some more bounds. With all that said, the counterpunching team continues to win. Some more tests coming up.

[beltwayBD]

My two cents, such as it is:

Loved seeing Greg get worked up. I don't know if the camera caught it, but did anyone see Greg slap the floor? You can't beat that!

I really enjoyed Plumlee's minutes, especially the defense. It doesn't really show on the stat sheet, but I think he stymied Monroe at a key point. However, unlike a few others, I'm not ready to write of Lance and Zoub yet. They have both given us quality minutes this season, and Zoub in particular has shown more poise and committed fewer mistakes. They will be role players against particular teams and will be able to deliver, just like we hope Miles will be able to deliver as well. He certainly showed promise today.

Kyle, G and Jon. As a triumvirate, they are becoming even more dependable. The real core of this team. Love it. G has been on fire the last three games. I think we're all glad that his confidence has come back.


Question: Who is the guy on Nolan Smith's tattoo? Is that what the big pad was covering up last year? For some reason I didn't really notice it until now.

[dyedwab]

Here is what Coach K said about Plumlee

"Plumlee came in and did a great job for us. We have a versatile team, and we should be able to use our personnel to match up against someone the way we did, and that’s why we did it."

this is why we our depth is a force multiplier. Dave can come in and defend at every position. Kyle can play both inside and outside. John, Greg, and Nolan can all bring the ball up the floor. It awesome.

Great, great win...

...and quick other thought, how weird is it to see a Georgetown team with this much offensive power. They certainly are not the father's Hoyas.

[DukeBlood]

Question: Who is the guy on Nolan Smith's tattoo? Is that what the big pad was covering up last year? For some reason I didn't really notice it until now.

It's of his father. Derek Smith.

His arm wasn't covered up last year because of the tattoo, but because he bad a bruise that wouldn't go away. Anyway, ESPN.com ran a article last year on Nolan Smith. I couldn't find it or else i would of posted it. Great great article.

[beltwayBD]

It's of his father. Derek Smith.

His arm wasn't covered up last year because of the tattoo, but because he bad a bruise that wouldn't go away. Anyway, ESPN.com ran a article last year on Nolan Smith. I couldn't find it or else i would of posted it. Great great article.

Great, thanks.

[Skitzle]

I think there are 2 fantastic things about this game and one disheartening one

1) Consistency. Duke didn't really hit a drought, didn't really hit a defensive lull. They just played Duke basketball for 40 solid min and won. Same with the GT game.

2) Plumlee: In his first significant minutes of 2009 he contributed. I was starting to be concerned with his lack of play. Now, you can see that he has a role on this team helping to guard some of the more "difficult"/versatile opponents big men.

And the bad

1) Lance Thomas needs to step it up. I still have faith in him, he had the best non-conference we've ever seen him play. I still believe he's better than he's playing, but he's going to need to show it soon.

It's too long till Wednesday...

[micah75]

5. I enjoyed having Greg Anthony announcing the game. Having played Duke twice in his career I can't recall ever hearing him call a game at Duke. He finally got to see the legacy of a dynasty in person as opposed to a fly by night champion like UNLV. :D

Count me as one who also enjoyed Greg Anthony call Duke's game. Especially given that he was involved in one of Duke's all-time classic wins way back when. It's refreshing when someone new comes in to CIS, similar to the NBA crew from last week. You get a whole different perspective.

Anyway, a very good game against a strong team. At first I thought Zoubek was injured when I saw that he didn't start. Now I see that it was most likely intended to send a message. Great to see that the team can go small, even with Kyle in foul trouble, and still seal the deal.

Also, very nice to see us go 11 deep in the 1st half. You never know when we might go to OT and guys like Marty and Miles will have already had a "taste" of the rhythm of the game, should foul trouble become an issue with
the starters.

[JDev]

Does this give Duke more quality wins than anyone in the country? They have beaten RPI top 50 teams Georgetown, Xavier, Davidson, and Purdue, and a few just outside the top 50: Virginia Tech, FSU, and Southern Illinois, all in the top 65. I think Michigan is probably tournament bound and will ultimately be a good win. That being said, the RPI right now doesn't mean a whole lot (Georgia Tech is currently higher than Wake Forest for example). However, that doesn't change the fact that Duke has played as good a schedule thus far as anyone, and they have won all of them but one (which was a rematch).

[Oriole Way]

This was the most impressive win of the year against what I consider the most talented opponent we've faced yet. I was very surprised and impressed that we shot so well against a tough defense.

I was very happy to see Plumlee come off the bench early and have a positive impact, even for just a few plays. Williams also hit his only shot. I still think we'll be a better team if those two get more minutes going forward, but I can't criticize the team's performance or K for how he managed the game today.

Paulus seems to be getting better/healthier, which is also very important. He has the ability to change a game on the offensive side when he hits a couple of 3's, especially at home, where he galvanizes the crowd. As others have mentioned, if he can be effective as a scorer coming off the bench, we become deeper and more dangerous.

I wonder if Smith is still bothered by his knee injury. During the first half, he looked a little lackluster, but in the second half he became a little more active. There was a drive he had for an easy layup in the mid-to-late second half which I would like to see more of. Why can't he look for that more consistently? If he can work on that aspect of his game, we would drastically improve offensively. I would like to see him work on driving into the line more often, and looking to score or set up his teammates on the wings. I have little doubt he has the ability to do it consistently, but I wonder why he does it so little. Hope he gets a little more assertive in that regard. But he played a fine game, which was all we needed because Henderson was the man today.

Speaking of G, he really took over offensively. It's great to have two players who can create their own shot so effectively, like Gerald and Singler can. As Anthony pointed out a couple of times, Singler is such a great player because he impacts the game even when his shot isn't falling, which it hasn't for a few games now. He's a great rebounder and gives us a toughness many of our teams have lacked over the past few years. I would still like to see Kyle take less 3's and drive to the rim more, in order to make his game more efficient. But he was a beast today.

I was very worried about this game because our offense had been in such a funk. There are still things to work on, but I was very impressed by the effort and execution today. Hopefully we can continue to improve as the season progresses.

Great win.

[jv001]

Gerald is playing like we expected him to at the beginning of the year. Kyle is a stud and is afraid of nothing. Diving 3 or 4 rows into the stands. Jon played a great floor game, 11pts, 5 assists, 1 TO and 3 steals. His defense is really good and no one notices. Zoubs & Lance did not play much and it looks like Miles is going to get some of their mins. He showed up well today. Nolan played very good D and did not hurt us. Greg is beginning to look more like the player we know he can be. I like this team. Go Duke!

[Saratoga2]

During parts of the game with Monroe in the game, we seemed to settle for the three and Singler and Scheyer weren't hitting again. This is not our best basketball strategy and it is the one we used when losing to Michigan. Fortunately, we altered the approach and also Monroe had to sit, at which time we attacked the basket.

Henderson, Singler and Scheyer were the same dependable players. Smith is also getting to that elite category, leaving us with the post as a weakness.

Paulus played better and his scores were important, but he still gets beat on defense often enough to be a problem. It was his best game and he is showing improvement.

Zoubek appeared to be unable to handle Monroe as his speed may have been a problem.

I disagree with Jumbo if his take means that he didn't think other posters on this board have not noticed and commented on Thomas's regression of late. I see the following:
1. Thomas is a decent athlete and has a reasonable ability to receive and pass the ball. He should be able to help with defense and offense if he is playing his best.
2. He seems to have been missing on help defense over many games this year, seemingly out of position to help.
3. His rebounding has been weak compared to Singler, a person his size.
4. My take on his worst issue is that he seems to think if being aggressive is a good trait, being super aggressive is better. He judgment on taking fouls has been poor.

I have been wondering why Plumlee didn't get more minutes, as he has a size advantage, iss mobile and probably is a better scorer than Thomas. I trust coach K and accept his judgment on this, but perhaps there will be something coming from this game where coach K modifies his lineup.

[3rd Dukie]

Henderson and Singler are grown men. Paulus and Smith played great. Very small line-up that defended challenged and frustrated G'town too much. Jon is so underrated on defense. He does way more then shoot the ball.

I COMPLETELY agree with you about Jon. Very underrated total game.

[jaimedun34]

Does this give Duke more quality wins than anyone in the country? They have beaten RPI top 50 teams Georgetown, Xavier, Davidson, and Purdue, and a few just outside the top 50: Virginia Tech, FSU, and Southern Illinois, all in the top 65. I think Michigan is probably tournament bound and will ultimately be a good win. That being said, the RPI right now doesn't mean a whole lot (Georgia Tech is currently higher than Wake Forest for example). However, that doesn't change the fact that Duke has played as good a schedule thus far as anyone, and they have won all of them but one (which was a rematch).

Rhode Island is just 11-6, but they've had close games with Villanova, Ok State and Xavier. Not as much of a patsy as I had expected!

I think Nolan Smith is still learning how to balance his responsibilities as a point guard and his ability to score. He's more Ewing than Duhon. He's not there yet, but he'll be better by March.

[jv001]

Well how long will it be b4 we hear, "well Georgetown is really not that good". That's what some people said after we beat Purdue and Xavier. I really like our team and if we play well, we can beat anyone. Go Duke!

[should_be_working]

I'm very impressed this season with our apparent preparation for big games. In the three big games we have had this season (Xavier, Purdue, and Georgetown) we have been emotionally and physically ready. We've seemed to have put together our most "complete" games against our highest level opponents, and that to me bodes well for march. Very solid and gutty performance today, and it was nice to see the ACC take care of the Big east.

[joey0403p]

Well - I'm very upset about the outcome of the game. but congrats on a good win to you guys.

I'm curious if anyone on the board was at the game and has any idea about the T on Monroe. What is being speculated on the g town boards is that a fan behind the bench said something - and the ref's incorrectly attributed it to monroe. of course here it is being speculated that monroe did say something to get him the tech.

not sure the real story will ever come out - just wondering if anyone here has any insight.

i think that was the biggest play in the game. we were clearly a MUCH better team today with monroe on the floor than when he was not. and it appeared as though we would close the gap in the second half. too bad - would have been a much better game (at least for me) if it had been close the entire second half.

its certainly a good win for you all - but I wouldn't be too worried at all if we met again in march. I think on a neutral court this is a much closer game.

[JDev]

Well - I'm very upset about the outcome of the game. but congrats on a good win to you guys.

I'm curious if anyone on the board was at the game and has any idea about the T on Monroe. What is being speculated on the g town boards is that a fan behind the bench said something - and the ref's incorrectly attributed it to monroe. of course here it is being speculated that monroe did say something to get him the tech.

not sure the real story will ever come out - just wondering if anyone here has any insight.

i think that was the biggest play in the game. we were clearly a MUCH better team today with monroe on the floor than when he was not. and it appeared as though we would close the gap in the second half. too bad - would have been a much better game (at least for me) if it had been close the entire second half.

its certainly a good win for you all - but I wouldn't be too worried at all if we met again in march. I think on a neutral court this is a much closer game.

Keep in mind Duke battled some foul trouble as well, with Singler picking up his fourth after a good acting job somewhere around the 8 minute mark or so if I remember correctly. The fact is Duke is a really good team, and regardless of what anyone says, every team that plays them in March is not going to be looking foward to it. As for the question, the GU bench seemed to be arguing that the mouthing off came from just behind the bench, but I guess no one really knows but Monroe.

[CLT Devil]

This is one of those wins that identify a season and everyone needs to really just soak it in. K made a big deal before the season started about enjoying each win and not letting expectations take anything away from that. The close Rhode Island win, the blow-out of Xavier, and now this very complete, satifying win over the toughest opponent yet are the stops along the journey that we need to celebrate. Hopefully ,the players are taking the time to enjoy each win, too. They are becoming one of the great Duke teams - not there yet - but getting there. But then again, the point is not to compare them to other Duke teams, but to enjoy what they have accomplished so far and appreciate the hard work that brought them here. Good thing is, I think this team is doing just that and aren't worried about outside expectations.
It's been a great ride, so far. I'm looking forward to the rest....

Good words...been a fun year already, looking forward to where this team can go...great defensive team.

Very happy with the play of Plumlee...hope he gets more, I think he can be a better threat than Lance/Zoubs rotation. Great overall game.

Is it just me, or are all of our games a streetfight? I used to think teams would try to punk us down thinking Duke is soft. This year it seems like we provoke and get under teams' skin...have you seen Kyle talking after every made basket or Paulus not backing down to ANYONE? I like the fact we can be physical with the best of them, great season so far.

[joey0403p]

I'm not saying we def win on a neutral court. I'm saying that being at home helped you guys today. No?

Apparently there is an AP article out there now with monroe denying he said anything. Of course we will never know the truth. Monroe will deny, the ref doesn't even do interviews, and if it was a Fan behind the bench its not like they are going to come out and admit it.

My problem with it is... unless the ref is 100% sure its 1 person, why not give it to the bench? i'd just like the ref to come out and say... i was 100% it was monroe. or I was not 100% but i thought it was him. whatever - just comment on it.

I have a feeling knowing the kind of guy JT III is, and knowing (a little) the kind of person Monroe is - if monroe said something and screwed up - he would have owned up to it. geting caught up in the moment is one thing - but JTIII is a classy guy he demands class from his players.

[JDev]

I'm not saying we def win on a neutral court. I'm saying that being at home helped you guys today. No?

Apparently there is an AP article out there now with monroe denying he said anything. Of course we will never know the truth. Monroe will deny, the ref doesn't even do interviews, and if it was a Fan behind the bench its not like they are going to come out and admit it.

My problem with it is... unless the ref is 100% sure its 1 person, why not give it to the bench? i'd just like the ref to come out and say... i was 100% it was monroe. or I was not 100% but i thought it was him. whatever - just comment on it.

I have a feeling knowing the kind of guy JT III is, and knowing (a little) the kind of person Monroe is - if monroe said something and screwed up - he would have owned up to it. geting caught up in the moment is one thing - but JTIII is a classy guy he demands class from his players.

No doubt about JTIII. I guess that in the ref's mind, he felt he was sure of who made the comment. Maybe the ref was wrong, but I bet he felt that he was right and making the right call. I guess ultimately all we know is that something was said. If nothing got said, regardless of who said it, it would not have been an issue I suppose. Whoever the guilty party happens to be, maybe they will learn to watch what they say.

[joey0403p]

No doubt about JTIII. I guess that in the ref's mind, he felt he was sure of who made the comment. Maybe the ref was wrong, but I bet he felt that he was right and making the right call. I guess ultimately all we know is that something was said. If nothing got said, regardless of who said it, it would not have been an issue I suppose. Whoever the guilty party happens to be, maybe they will learn to watch what they say.

I hear what you are saying - just hard to swallow if it was someone behind the bench. as fans we say some stupid things in the heat of a game. I know i have before.

anyways now that pitt lost - you guys will get number 1. we'll end up 1 and 4 in the east region in the ncaa - and we'll see you in boston.

[JDev]

No doubt. If the situation was reversed I'm sure I wouldn't be thrilled by the mere thought that it might have been someone not invovled in the game. As far as the later meeting, I think that one of the things that the tournament selection commitee tries to do is avoid rematches whenever possible prior to the Final Four. I know that doesn't always work, but they try.

[SMO]

I'm not saying we def win on a neutral court. I'm saying that being at home helped you guys today. No?


I totally agree with this sentiment. As happy as I was with the win and the quality of play, this could be a tighter game outside of CIS.

BTW, are the G'town fans concerned at all about Monroe's minutes and that he might wear down, especially being a freshman?

[MChambers]

we'll end up 1 and 4 in the east region in the ncaa - and we'll see you in boston.

I think Georgetown is better than a 4 seed. I expect them to be a 1, 2, or 3.

[77devil]

I think Georgetown is better than a 4 seed. I expect them to be a 1, 2, or 3.

A one seed in March with 4 losses to date. I don't think so.

[moonpie23]

monroe would have gotten the 4th foul on his own, without the T....he got the first three easily enough by making freshman mistakes..

i was over at the hoyas board and man, ALL they can talk about is the T, like it lost the game for them...


guess a big face-full of henderson with some paulas hot-sauce and a cup of missed free throws were just side items...

[-jk]

I hear what you are saying - just hard to swallow if it was someone behind the bench. as fans we say some stupid things in the heat of a game. I know i have before.

anyways now that pitt lost - you guys will get number 1. we'll end up 1 and 4 in the east region in the ncaa - and we'll see you in boston.

I was sitting across from the GU bench. The ref's body language showed that he certainly believed it was Monroe. And Monroe seemed surprised. No telling what actually happened, though I believe the ref will have to report it to the ACC. And we'll never see the report.

I have a friend who won't sit behind the Duke bench for just that risk.

-jk

[DevilCastDownfromDurham]

I am ecstatic. Georgetown is a GREAT team and we had to play an amazing game to win. G and Kyle were both outstanding and it was great to see Greg take the next step in getting his mojo back and Miles step in when we needed him. This is one to savor.

A few notes:

- Monroe is the real deal. If he had come to Duke we'd be an overwhelming team right now. Once he gets his bearings and cuts down of frosh mistakes (whatever you think about the T he really struggled with handling the intensity and pressure of the game) he will be a serious NPOY candidate and lottery pick. Georgetown got a good one and I hope they are enjoying him.

- We have so many guys who can be great even on off nights. Kyle, Jon, G, and Nolan have all had bad shooting games where they still dominated long stretches of a game. This is something to be really proud of and augurs well for the future.

- With the possible exception of the euro-flopper mentioned above, I was very impressed with every aspect of Georgetown. They play such a smart and tough game, reflecting a very classy leader. I have tons of respect for what JTIII is building there. It's great to see this sort of program succeed.

- Greg's emotion is so galvanizing. It's been extremely enjoyable to see him break out a bit and the entire team seems feed off of his enthusiasm. This team seems to have a chemistry and camaraderie that is extremely rare, and it's really fun to watch.

- Folks need to cut Z and Lance some slack. They remain works in progress and this wasn't the game for them to shine. They will both be important going forward and they're both giving everything they have with great attitudes.

- Big ups to the stall/delay game. We milked almost 8 minutes and basically held an 8-10 point lead the entire time. We didn't always score, but our D made it work very well. Folks like to jump on the delay, but it was a major success for us tonight.

As Jumbo said, let's really enjoy this one. This was a BIG TIME game and a huge win. Savor it a little.

[ForeverBlowingBubbles]

I think its worth pointing out that one of the best plays of the game was Marty penetrating the Georgetown defense with ease and dishing it off to E-Will who got in behind the D and finished in traffic.

[JDev]

I think its worth pointing out that one of the best plays of the game was Marty penetrating the Georgetown defense with ease and dishing it off to E-Will who got in behind the D and finished in traffic.

I know we have a Man of the Match thread, but I think it might be interesting to have a "Play of the Game" thread after games. I know I would enjoy seeing what people thought was the biggest play of the game. I might get brave and start one.

[Hancock 4 Duke]

I am glad I didnt bet on this game, I would've lost. They were favored by 9, and won by 9. I bet in those last 5 secs that Hendo held it, the gamblers were yelling "SHOOT IT SHOOT IT!". They probably got mad.

[buddy]

The G'town folks are quite worked up about Monroe's technical. But he played 13 minutes in the first half, picking up 3 fouls (all common). We made our run at the end of the half, I expect with him largely on the bench. His T was his 4th foul, but he still played 15 minutes in the second half. Now maybe he became passive with four fouls, but it certainly didn't keep him out of the game for appreciable minutes. Given that his "aggressive" play in the first half led to a foul every four minutes, it is likely that "aggressive" play in the second half would have led to the same result.

I sit on the other side, so I couldn't tell if it was Monroe or a fan right behind him. Monroe acted shocked, and there was some finger pointing amongst the fans behind the bench. But the fans were G'town fans. Presusmably big boosters and/or parents/friends of players. If Monroe didn't say anything, and one of them did, they should never be allowed to attend another game. When you are privileged to sit behind the bench you become a de facto team member whether you know it or not.

He looks like a good player. But note that despite 6-7 from the field he did not get to the line, did turn the ball over four times, but did have four assists. A nice workmanlike performance for 28 minutes of play. I wouldn't make too much of any time he may have missed over the technical (at most five minutes).

[Jumbo]

Great post by Diddy.

Gerald's playing style is very similar to Kobe Bryant's on offense. Lots of ISO and jump shots. He definitely has a pro-style game. If G can consistently hit his mid-range jumpshots, he'll be unstoppable.

I still think the comments/expectations about Gerald are too extreme. He is not unstoppable. He is not anything close to a sure-fire, big-time, NBA scorer yet. He is not Kobe Bryant. He is barely 6'4", still has an inconsistent jumper and handle, still doesn't go left especially well and still needs to improve his vision.

I love what he has been doing lately, except for the occasional forced shot. But I think his play should speak for himself, and there's no need for some of the hyperbole accompanying it. G is becoming a very, very good college player. He still has plenty of holes to improve, though.

[Ian]

He can use some improvement in decision making still. I wish he would stop dribbling the ball for 10 seconds and then take a jump shot with a hand in the face. Either take him man off the dribble or pass the ball.

[FireOgilvie]

I still think the comments/expectations about Gerald are too extreme. He is not unstoppable. He is not anything close to a sure-fire, big-time, NBA scorer yet. He is not Kobe Bryant. He is barely 6'4", still has an inconsistent jumper and handle, still doesn't go left especially well and still needs to improve his vision.

I love what he has been doing lately, except for the occasional forced shot. But I think his play should speak for himself, and there's no need for some of the hyperbole accompanying it. G is becoming a very, very good college player. He still has plenty of holes to improve, though.

I meant in college. Also, no one that I've seen has ever said he is a sure-fire, big-time NBA scorer. No one said he was Kobe Bryant. I said his playing style is similar, which it is.

[greybeard]

Georgetown got 2 points from its starting guards (Chris Wright was shut down completely by Smith who took right out of his game as the leader of the offense; Wright made one circus shot early in the second half for his two points that impressed JTIII so much that he got yanked), the freshman guard scored six but gave the ball away at least three times in the open court leading to at least 3 points, and oh, Summers, who played very well, was 5 for 10 from the foul line.

"The flopper," as you guys call Omar, came in and stopped G's incredible run, cooled him off. I thought that Singler played extremely hard and rough. While Omar had grabbed his shirt while the two were entangled on a rebound going to neither of them, Singler's swing at Omar had to be called. I thought Omar gave Duke trouble with his defense, which I predicted, and that Summers and Freeman competed very well, especially against Singler inside.

The T, not to mention the foul that precipitated it, changed the momentum completely, and lead to a run by Duke that put the game away. The foul call against Simms could easily have gone the other way or been a none call, in which case the second never comes close to hampening. As for the T itself, the Ref should not have made that call; his back was turned, Georgetown had closed to four or five, he had just made a "judgment call that went against them in a hostel arena. If a "bad" comment was made, he should have keep walking and made like he didn't hear it. This was a heated basketball comment, his authority was not openly questioned, let the kids decide it. Terrible call if you ar interested in seeing a ball game.

The call leads to two by Scheyer. I don't recall if Duke scored on that possession but they did go on something like a 15 to 2 run, all but ending the game. Shame to have two calls back to back have such an impact.

BTW, if my recollection is right, none of Monroe's three fouls occurred within 10 feet of either basket, or while he was trying to block a shot, or while he was trying to get a rebound, or while he was trying to shoot. Freshman misstakes? Too easy an answer.

Duke played really well, and I believe would have won the game anyway, see the first paragraph especially, but in my opinion the refs ruined the game.

I thought that, given how he had struggled with his shot up til then, Singler's willingness to take the 3 when Georgetown had started a small run late and hit it was the potg.

McClure on Monroe, now how much do you think Georgetown practiced for that? I think it scared them. How they didn't call a time out, put Monroe down low and say throw it to him high escapes me. My guess, GTIII probably thought that is exactly what K wanted him to do, and had an answer. K did a good coaching job, better than that, great.

Glad to see that G got rid of that subtle rotation in his torso that was lousing up his shot. Don't mention it.

[Bob Green]

Duke played really well, and I believe would have won the game anyway, see the first paragraph especially, but in my opinion the refs ruined the game.

Normally, I respect your opinion but in this instance I believe you are aligning yourself with the standard "Duke gets all the calls" mantra of the Main Stream Media. Duke won in a physical contest and the refs did a satisfactory job of keeping things under control. Duke did not get all the calls as is evidenced by the disparity in free throw shots attempted and the "T" on Monroe was not the deciding factor. Duke outplayed Georgetown on the court and Krzyzkewski outcoached JTIII on the sidelines. This is where I should insert the ubiquitous "IMHO" but instead I'll say, "Enough said!"

[greybeard]

Normally, I respect your opinion but in this instance I believe you are aligning yourself with the standard "Duke gets all the calls" mantra of the Main Stream Media. Duke won in a physical contest and the refs did a satisfactory job of keeping things under control. Duke did not get all the calls as is evidenced by the disparity in free throw shots attempted and the "T" on Monroe was not the deciding factor. Duke outplayed Georgetown on the court and Krzyzkewski outcoached JTIII on the sidelines. This is where I should insert the ubiquitous "IMHO" but instead I'll say, "Enough said!"

You can't read. I said that I thought that Duke outplayed Georgetown; they completely, as in absolutely shut down Georgetown's backcourt which was probably in negative numbers if you take into account the terrible open field turnovers Duke forced. They also took Summers' legs away. While I thought he played a great game, he missed 5 of 10 from the line, because they worked them to death.

I thought that the call against Singler was a correct one. I thought that the call that preceeded the T was an iffy one. And I thought that the T itself was a wrong one.

As for the calls against Monroe, I am not a fan of the offensive foul call away from the basket. I feel that they detract from the game. There were three of them made in the first half against a star player. None of the plays themselves influenced anything, caused an advantage to Monroe or his team. If I saw it wrong as to one, that might be the case. I thought it unfortunate that the refs changed the game in this way and calling the T.

You don't fine. I think that the game was not what I took the time to see.

I thought the placement of McClure on Monroe was very effective and probably helped confuse a very, very confused Chris Wright who was taken completely out of his game. That was huge. Sapp scored zero points and from what I could tell did nothing of note anywhere. The freshman came back in the second half and played some ball but nothing to write home about. This I think was huge. That, and talking Summers' legs away, I also think his shooting percentage went way down, were enough to win the game for Duke, which had a solid but not great game offensively except for Gerald who was terrific.

Would the game have been closer if Monroe had not been taken out of the game by these calls, yes. Would I have enjoyed the game more if that were the case, yes. If that had happened and Duke still won, I should think that even you would have enjoyed the game more.

That was my point, and I stand by it. There was nothing else about the refereeing that I had an issue with.

Charging calls away from the basket that do not influence play drive me nuts. A T on a player in the circumstances presented here was insane and drove me nuts. Made the contest much less the great game I had hoped to see. End of story. Nothing more intended or implied.

[Bob Green]

You can't read.

Wow! I've been accused of a lot of things over the years but being illiterate is a new one. I was attempting to engage in civil discourse with you as I believe you are making too much out of the fouls on Monroe. If my tone was overbearing, I apologize.

[hurleyfor3]

I'm posting from Bangkok. CNN World showed Henderson's dunk. It was named the World Sport Play of the Day. That means it was the most impressive sports play IN THE WHOLE WORLD yesterday, beating out any number of soccer plays. And good God, there is a LOT of soccer on teevee here, so that's pretty impressive.

[DevilCastDownfromDurham]

Great game all around.

[MChambers]

A one seed in March with 4 losses to date. I don't think so.

I said a 1, 2, or 3. Not just a 1. Don't know what I did to make you mad, but I'd appreciate you cooling down a bit.

[MChambers]

No doubt about JTIII. I guess that in the ref's mind, he felt he was sure of who made the comment. Maybe the ref was wrong, but I bet he felt that he was right and making the right call. I guess ultimately all we know is that something was said. If nothing got said, regardless of who said it, it would not have been an issue I suppose. Whoever the guilty party happens to be, maybe they will learn to watch what they say.

Monroe was quite animated in reacting some of his fouls, particularly his first and third. That surprised me, because I had read about how calm he was for a freshman, and those foul calls were good calls. That might have influenced the refs on the technical. Obviously, I have no idea whether he said anything or not.

[MChambers]

As for the T itself, the Ref should not have made that call; his back was turned, Georgetown had closed to four or five, he had just made a "judgment call that went against them in a hostel arena. If a "bad" comment was made, he should have keep walking and made like he didn't hear it. This was a heated basketball comment, his authority was not openly questioned, let the kids decide it. Terrible call if you ar interested in seeing a ball game.

Greybeard, I respectfully disagree on this one. We just don't know what Monroe did. As I just pointed out in another post, Monroe had been very animated in questioning his first and third fouls, very surprising given that the calls were correct calls. That makes me wonder if he in fact said something to the ref. I agree that the technical took away from the game, but I don't know if that was the ref's fault or Monroe's.

Love the rest of your post. I had not thought about what a great job Smith did on Wright. On Wattad, I think the refs should have reined him in much earlier, but he was effective, so I guess he deserves credit. I'm glad he's not on our team, however, and if I'm reffing a game I'd watch him closely.

[Virginian]

If the ref who T-ed up Monroe had been an ACC ref, I think there would be smoke rising over Georgetown this morning.

The way Monroe was playing (and I'm not knocking the kid -- he's REALLY good and fun to watch), I'm pretty sure he would have gotten at least four fouls at some point during the game.

As for Georgetown fans, let 'em suffer and fume. Maybe they can meet up with their Md. buddies in bars all around D.C. and grumble in their beers.

Gosh, I'm sounding bitter again.

[dukemsu]

In my opinion, the fact that we are debating whether or not Monroe's "star" status illuminates a big part of the problem with officiating in college basketball.

Monroe has been playing college basketball for about three months. What exactly has he done to warrant "star" status? He's had some good games. So? His offensive fouls could be considered borderline but they were still fouls. I don't think his demonstrative moaining after the calls helped him in the officials' eyes, either. Remember Hurley's freshman year when K put together the tape of his expressive behavior? In Monroe's case, he needs to learn to control his body as he's markedly bigger and stronger than almost everyone. Greg Oden had to learn the same painful lesson in his only season, in which he spent large portions of sitting on the pine in foul trouble.

I have never understood why some players (Duke included) are believed to be worthy of levity from the rules. To me, if you're an excellent player, you shouldn't need additional advantages from the guys in stripes.

On to the game. Duke showed a lot of toughness in a game where their bigs were passengers. G continues to shine, although I'm a bit worried about his dominance of the ball on offense. That's a fine line to walk though as his game depends on having the room to be creative. Singler continues to show his aggressiveness and toughness. Jon and Nolan had their moments.

This team does have its weaknesses, but I love their ability to exploit those of their opponents and I love how much fun they seem to be having. That I thought was exemplified best by Greg, not only through the 26 footer and the floor slap but also how he rushed into the crowd to retrieve the flying Singler. These guys like each other a lot.

That's important.

dukemsu

[MChambers]

This team does have its weaknesses, but I love their ability to exploit those of their opponents and I love how much fun they seem to be having. That I thought was exemplified best by Greg, not only through the 26 footer and the floor slap but also how he rushed into the crowd to retrieve the flying Singler. These guys like each other a lot.

That's important.

dukemsu

I think there was another post pointing out Duke's closeness and contrasting to those guys a few miles away wearing faded light blue uniforms. Although I'm glad Duke's players like each other, and I do think it helps a little, I've got to point out that lots of teams have done just fine without that closeness, like the 1991-1992 Duke team and the Oakland As of the 1970s.

[greybeard]

Wow! I've been accused of a lot of things over the years but being illiterate is a new one. I was attempting to engage in civil discourse with you as I believe you are making too much out of the fouls on Monroe. If my tone was overbearing, I apologize.

I thought that your tone and suggestion that I was dragging out the old canard about "Duke's getting all the calls" was unfair.

I explained what I found disappointing about the referee calls that I thought lessened the contest but made clear "Duke played really well, and I believe would have won the game anyway, see the first paragraph especially, but in my opinion the refs ruined the game." I also gave K his props, especially for that McClure move; whether he outcoached JTIII I do not know. The game was won mostly in the backcourt; Singler's 16 boards were also extremely important.

It was late and perhaps there is an appropriate sensativity to the issue of referee bias (which I dont think was my point at all) that kicked in. At the same time, I new that I was treading on sensative territory and had tried to me careful and thought I had achieved it. Sorry if I was a bit chippy in response.

Except for the issue of whether the game was diminished by Monroe's four fouls, none of which were consequential except that they were called (you usually expect a few of them but, oh well, Singler got two in tangles with Omar), and whether K outcoached JTIII, we are very much on the same page.

By the way, and this is included here but not meant to be in response to anything you said, a word about Omar. I predicted that he might play a big role before the game and he did. Against most players, you can maneuver them off balance and push past them by going through the outside portion of their body on the side that has been destablized. You try that with Omar and you run into a brick wall. It is an odd and extraordinary asset. The kid, in my opinion, really helped keep Georgetown in the game to the extent they were. If he did not cool down Gerald in the first half, the game might have been over. He caused Duke the kind of problems that McClure causes most teams, especially problems for Singler. The thing about the kid that I find remarkable is that he does not play dirty, push into guys legs, try to overbody them. He is just 100 percent focused, sponateous in going after what he sees on the floor, and build like a brick S#$* house.

Good game, Duke played great, but for the reason I stated, I don't think that you can call this a "great" win.

[Jumbo]

I meant in college. Also, no one that I've seen has ever said he is a sure-fire, big-time NBA scorer. No one said he was Kobe Bryant. I said his playing style is similar, which it is.

Not, it really isn't. They can both jump really high. Kobe is one of the two best players in the world. No one in college has a similar "playing style."

[dukemsu]

I think there was another post pointing out Duke's closeness and contrasting to those guys a few miles away wearing faded light blue uniforms. Although I'm glad Duke's players like each other, and I do think it helps a little, I've got to point out that lots of teams have done just fine without that closeness, like the 1991-1992 Duke team and the Oakland As of the 1970s.

I agree to a point. The 91-92 team, though, had such advantages in talent (maybe the best in the country at two positions with Laettner and Hurley, and Grant who got better every game) and experience that they could offset most internal issues. This team isn't as talented or experienced, and I think the advantages of being unified will help in the long run.

dukemsu

[MChambers]

I agree to a point. The 91-92 team, though, had such advantages in talent (maybe the best in the country at two positions with Laettner and Hurley, and Grant who got better every game) and experience that they could offset most internal issues. This team isn't as talented or experienced, and I think the advantages of being unified will help in the long run.

dukemsu

Thanks for the response. I agree that the 91-92 team was a great, great team, and had wonderfully matched talent, and get your point. And I take pleasure in the reports that our rivals nearby don't get along, hoping that it means they won't play well together, especially on the defensive end.

[LetItBD08]

If the ref who T-ed up Monroe had been an ACC ref, I think there would be smoke rising over Georgetown this morning.

John Cahill was a familiar face in Cameron over my four years. I usually (in my rather biased perspective) thought a lot of his tough calls went the non-Duke way. Clemson fans would probably point to one noticeable exception, however... http://www.goduke.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=4200&ATCLID=753349

Looking at his stats for this season, he's called quite a few games involving both ACC and Big East teams (More Big East, but that can happen when you have 53 teams in your conference)... http://www.bbstate.com/officials/1237

[calltheobvious]

No doubt about JTIII. I guess that in the ref's mind, he felt he was sure of who made the comment. Maybe the ref was wrong, but I bet he felt that he was right and making the right call. I guess ultimately all we know is that something was said. If nothing got said, regardless of who said it, it would not have been an issue I suppose. Whoever the guilty party happens to be, maybe they will learn to watch what they say.

Look, if Monroe didn’t say anything, then it was a big-time mistake by the official. There’s no getting around it. He should have been more than sure it was Monroe before pointing the finger at him.

But there’s another issue here that Georgetown fans are going to be loathe to bring up in public. Those seats behind the visiting bench are premium, tightly held tickets. The people who occupy those seats are given their tickets by players, coaches, and VVIPs. In other words, it’s a great privilege to sit in those seats, and that privilege should carry with it expectations of a certain level of decorum. And it is ultimately the responsibility of the head coach to make it clear to everyone distributing those tickets that during the game, the fans in those seats should comport themselves as if they were actually on the team.

Georgetown supporters can complain about the injustice of the whole thing; and again, if Monroe didn’t say anything, then it’s worse than a raw deal. But let’s not let the Georgetown coaching staff off the hook completely.

If I understand JTIII at all, he's taking the bullet for this one. Because either justice was served, or he didn't do his job with those fans (all of whom would prefer watching and sitting quietly to being dressed down by the head Hoya).

[BlueintheFace]

Well - I'm very upset about the outcome of the game. but congrats on a good win to you guys.

I'm curious if anyone on the board was at the game and has any idea about the T on Monroe. What is being speculated on the g town boards is that a fan behind the bench said something - and the ref's incorrectly attributed it to monroe. of course here it is being speculated that monroe did say something to get him the tech.

not sure the real story will ever come out - just wondering if anyone here has any insight.

i think that was the biggest play in the game. we were clearly a MUCH better team today with monroe on the floor than when he was not. and it appeared as though we would close the gap in the second half. too bad - would have been a much better game (at least for me) if it had been close the entire second half.

its certainly a good win for you all - but I wouldn't be too worried at all if we met again in march. I think on a neutral court this is a much closer game.

I was at the game. Monroe definitely said something. Whether or not what HE said was what the ref called the tech for could be disputable I suppose. It is worth noting that Monroe was the only one on the bench standing with the coaches when the tech was given.

Though less likely, it could have been a fan's words that provoked the tech, but if I were a Hoya fan I would rather believe that it was Monroe. If the tech was for Monroe's words... okay, that stinks, but he was being passionate during a hard-fought game. That's understandable.

If it was a Georgetown fan, that means that georgetown fans are hurting their team rather than helping. It would reflect poorly on all georgetown fans whether such a generalization is deserved or not.

[FireOgilvie]

Not, it really isn't. They can both jump really high. Kobe is one of the two best players in the world. No one in college has a similar "playing style."

I watch almost every Lakers game. I watch every Duke game. Gerald Henderson, particularly in the Georgetown game, did his best Kobe Bryant imitation. He took his defender one on one in isolation, used a combination of 3s and pull-up (sometimes fading) jumpshots, and used slashing and finesse moves to get to the rim. Gerald Henderson does those things and so does Kobe (and many other pro players). That's all I am saying. I am not saying Gerald is Kobe. I'm not saying Gerald will be Kobe in the NBA. There's no point in arguing.

[Virginian]

John Cahill was a familiar face in Cameron over my four years. I usually (in my rather biased perspective) thought a lot of his tough calls went the non-Duke way. Clemson fans would probably point to one noticeable exception, however... http://www.goduke.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=4200&ATCLID=753349

Looking at his stats for this season, he's called quite a few games involving both ACC and Big East teams (More Big East, but that can happen when you have 53 teams in your conference)... http://www.bbstate.com/officials/1237

Hmm. Thanks for doing the research on this point. I was responding to several news reports that identified Cahill as a Big East ref. Maybe it's not so clear cut.

[Indoor66]

I watch almost every Lakers game. I watch every Duke game. Gerald Henderson, particularly in the Georgetown game, did his best Kobe Bryant imitation. He took his defender one on one in isolation, used a combination of 3s and pull-up (sometimes fading) jumpshots, and used slashing and finesse moves to get to the rim. Gerald Henderson does those things and so does Kobe (and many other pro players). That's all I am saying. I am not saying Gerald is Kobe. I'm not saying Gerald will be Kobe in the NBA. There's no point in arguing.

You are beating a very dead horse.

[Virginian]

Look, if Monroe didn’t say anything, then it was a big-time mistake by the official. There’s no getting around it. He should have been more than sure it was Monroe before pointing the finger at him.

But there’s another issue here that Georgetown fans are going to be loathe to bring up in public. Those seats behind the visiting bench are premium, tightly held tickets. The people who occupy those seats are given their tickets by players, coaches, and VVIPs. In other words, it’s a great privilege to sit in those seats, and that privilege should carry with it expectations of a certain level of decorum. And it is ultimately the responsibility of the head coach to make it clear to everyone distributing those tickets that during the game, the fans in those seats should comport themselves as if they were actually on the team.

Georgetown supporters can complain about the injustice of the whole thing; and again, if Monroe didn’t say anything, then it’s worse than a raw deal. But let’s not let the Georgetown coaching staff off the hook completely.

If I understand JTIII at all, he's taking the bullet for this one. Because either justice was served, or he didn't do his job with those fans (all of whom would prefer watching and sitting quietly to being dressed down by the head Hoya).

This is right on, IMO. I've been to many Georgetown games in D.C. over the years and sat behind the bench on several occasions. I can tell you that some of their fans are really "dirty-mouthed" and ride the opposing players and refs mercilessly non-stop throughout the game. To the point that fellow GT fans will ask those boorish types to please pipe down.

I have to guess whatever was said was pretty strong for an experienced ref to react so strongly. Now that it's done, it really doesn't matter if what was said came from the fans rather than a player. All those Georgetown partisans who are so upset about this call and for some reason are blaming Duke for this supposed travesty, ought to be pouring out their pain and anger towards their own bench and fans.

[SupaDave]

I think it's safe to say that we would have kept attacking Monroe regardless. When Dave McClure is attacking the rim - I suspect the coaches are monitoring Monroe's fouls.

It was quite obvious that Monroe knew his foul situation and the announcers made constant mention of his shying away on defense.

Regardless of the tech - we were getting ready to mash the gas anyway with Monroe on the bench. We would have NOT stopped attacking the basket and eventually a freshmen like Monroe is gonna want to stand his ground. He would've gotten his fouls soon enough.

Same result on neutral floor. Notice that we also got a charging foul on Monroe. In any future meeting we will attempt to foul him out as well. He knew it then and he will know it if we meet again.

It's also obvious that guard play killed the Hoyas as well with some terrible stretches of ball-handling. We don't mind Saunders going off - as long as no one else does.

[dukelifer]

I am ecstatic.
- Monroe is the real deal. If he had come to Duke we'd be an overwhelming team right now. Once he gets his bearings and cuts down of frosh mistakes (whatever you think about the T he really struggled with handling the intensity and pressure of the game) he will be a serious NPOY candidate and lottery pick. Georgetown got a good one and I hope they are enjoying him.



Do you mean that Duke might be the number 1 or 2 team in the country right now if they had Monroe ;)

[SupaDave]

Do you mean that Duke might be the number 1 or 2 team in the country right now if they had Monroe ;)

If we had Monroe and we lost a game we'd have National Championship meltdown on the boards like the IC...

[dukelifer]

If we had Monroe and we lost a game we'd have National Championship meltdown on the boards like the IC...
If Monroe has trouble dealing with the pressure of playing in Cameron, I wonder how he would handle the pressure of playing AT Duke. Monroe has talent but not yet enough talent to dominate a Duke team in which the tallest player on the court for most of the game was 6' 7".

[Stray Gator]

... All those Georgetown partisans who are so upset about this call and for some reason are blaming Duke for this supposed travesty, ought to be pouring out their pain and anger towards their own bench and fans.

Georgetown fans certainly have no rational basis for whining that Duke was favored by the officials. Not only was Georgetown awarded more trips to the free throw line in total (18 to 13)--which is remarkable given the Hoyas distinctively "physical" style of play--but the record reveals that during the second half, prior to the last 1:26 mark when Georgetown started fouling intentionally, the Hoyas were generously gifted with 15 free throw attempts while Duke took only two. (In fact, until that last 1:26 of the game, the free throw disparity in favor of Georgetown was 18 to 6.) I haven't done the research to confirm this, but I can't recall any visiting team receiving such "hospitality" from the officials in Cameron.

[Jaymf7]

Like anyone else who watched the game on TV, I have no idea whether Monroe said anything to warrant the T. That said, there were at least 2 instances earlier in the game when Monroe was whistled and he made an over-the-top gesture or reaction to a call (I think they were both charge calls). On one I wondered whether it warranted a T (it certainly would if we had one of those D Ewing refs). I chalked it up to emotion in a big game and had no problem with the refs letting it go. Nevertheless, Monroe may have been on the refs radar and on a short leash in light of some of his antics earlier in the game.

[slower]

The thing about the kid that I find remarkable is that he does not play dirty, push into guys legs, try to overbody them. He is just 100 percent focused, sponateous in going after what he sees on the floor, and build like a brick S#$* house.

Yes, and he's got quite a strong grip, as evidenced when he reconfigured Kyle's jersey. There are plenty of other descriptors that could be used about him, but I guess everybody will see what they want to see. If you're a Georgetown fan, your blinders will obscure quite a bit.

[77devil]

Georgetown fans certainly have no rational basis for whining that Duke was favored by the officials. Not only was Georgetown awarded more trips to the free throw line in total (18 to 13)--which is remarkable given the Hoyas distinctively "physical" style of play--but the record reveals that during the second half, prior to the last 1:26 mark when Georgetown started fouling intentionally, the Hoyas were generously gifted with 15 free throw attempts while Duke took only two. (In fact, until that last 1:26 of the game, the free throw disparity in favor of Georgetown was 18 to 6.) I haven't done the research to confirm this, but I can't recall any visiting team receiving such "hospitality" from the officials in Cameron.

It was a Big East officiating crew. The Hoya partisans should look somewhere other than Duke to carp at.

[gadzooks]

I was at the game. Monroe definitely said something. Whether or not what HE said was what the ref called the tech for could be disputable I suppose. It is worth noting that Monroe was the only one on the bench standing with the coaches when the tech was given.

Though less likely, it could have been a fan's words that provoked the tech, but if I were a Hoya fan I would rather believe that it was Monroe. If the tech was for Monroe's words... okay, that stinks, but he was being passionate during a hard-fought game. That's understandable.

If it was a Georgetown fan, that means that georgetown fans are hurting their team rather than helping. It would reflect poorly on all georgetown fans whether such a generalization is deserved or not.I've been hoping that someone who was at the game would chime in. On TV, you could hear the Crazies react to something just before the whistle blew, and a photographer who was right in front of Scheyer turned his camera toward the G-town bench, so we could tell *something* big was going on. It seems to me that the Crazies would be less likely to notice and react to a fan mouthing off than Monroe.

[77devil]

I said a 1, 2, or 3. Not just a 1. Don't know what I did to make you mad, but I'd appreciate you cooling down a bit.

Not mad just think including a one seed in your post is absurd. Frankly a 2 seed is a stretch IMO.

[jimsumner]

"but the record reveals that during the second half, prior to the last 1:26 mark when Georgetown started fouling intentionally, the Hoyas were generously gifted with 15 free throw attempts while Duke took only two"

Let me add a bit to this. The two foul shots were those taken by Scheyer following the technical. Georgetown then fouled four times down the stretch, resulting in seven free throws; GP missed the first end of a bonus.

In other words, not one single time in the second half did the officials whistle Georgetown for a foul on a Duke shot. This was with Duke attacking the glass, attacking the basket off the dribble. And it's not like there wasn't contact. The play before Singer was called for the intentional foul, he was absolutely mauled on a follow shot. And this wasn't an isolated example, although perhaps the most egregious.

I generally give scant credence to the Duke-gets-all-the-calls-crowd but this time, it really doesn't hold water.

Hopefully, this will come in handy sometime, somewhere in March, when a physical opponent is matched with officials disinclined to blow the whistle. This is why K schedules games like this.

[MulletMan]

I've been hoping that someone who was at the game would chime in. On TV, you could hear the Crazies react to something just before the whistle blew, and a photographer who was right in front of Scheyer turned his camera toward the G-town bench, so we could tell *something* big was going on. It seems to me that the Crazies would be less likely to notice and react to a fan mouthing off than Monroe.

Disclaimer: I've not read the whole thread, so I'm not sure if I'm repeating this...

The sequence was this: There was an out of bounds call that resulted in Duke having an in-bounds play at G'Town's end. JT3 had an extended conversation with the official who eventually called the T. It was a conversation, JT3 was not yelling and it looked like he was relatively satisifed with what he was told. The Crazies began shouting for JT3 to get off the court during this exchange. The official gave the ball to Duke (Scheyer?) under the hoop and it was about to be inbounded when the whistle came. JT3's back was to the official and he turned and looked in confusion. I thought he had recieved the T until he adamatlly pointed at Monroe who instantaneously jumped up from his seat on the bench and started pointing to the G'Town fans directly behind thier bench. Most of my friends thought JT3 had recieved the T while I thought it was Monroe. The announcer shortly confirmed that it was Monroe.

[loran16]

For the record, it looked like right before the T a Georgetown female fan (Player's mother?) yelled the words "F You" to the Ref as he went bye.....as I was on the other side i couldn't hear it but it certainly looked like she mouthed those words right before the T.

Now if monroe said anything I would not have any clue.

[DukieInBrasil]

Though Nolan played a decent game, he had no assists. Though he is not a natural PG, he handles the ball a lot and needs to be able to deliver the ball to people so that they can score. Granted, Jon does that pretty well and Kyle has done that very well this year too, but we need a PG who can do that.
Despite the physicality of the inside play and the banging that Kyle took (and dished out, he did grab 16 boards) he still took no foul shots. That is odd.
As Jumbo pointed out and as i have also noticed, LT has become less of a factor lately, essentially a zero factor in each of the last two games. However, this was Z´s first no-impact game of the year. After both of them far exceeded expectations in "Phase II", they have both virtually disappeared since ACC play started (except in the D´son game).

[greybeard]

I think it's safe to say that we would have kept attacking Monroe regardless. When Dave McClure is attacking the rim - I suspect the coaches are monitoring Monroe's fouls.

It was quite obvious that Monroe knew his foul situation and the announcers made constant mention of his shying away on defense.

Regardless of the tech - we were getting ready to mash the gas anyway with Monroe on the bench. We would have NOT stopped attacking the basket and eventually a freshmen like Monroe is gonna want to stand his ground. He would've gotten his fouls soon enough.

Same result on neutral floor. Notice that we also got a charging foul on Monroe. In any future meeting we will attempt to foul him out as well. He knew it then and he will know it if we meet again.

It's also obvious that guard play killed the Hoyas as well with some terrible stretches of ball-handling. We don't mind Saunders going off - as long as no one else does.

Monroe had three fouls. He didn't get one of those fouls, not one, defending the rim, which he was doing throughout until he drew his fourth.

Speaking only for myself obviously, I wish that the ref had not called the T. That is what my position was in the original post, and I'm sticking to it. I think that the ref was too concerned with himself and less with the game in making that call. It was a reflex response to being disrespected behind his back in a game between two great college teams. It involved nothing whatever between players on opposite teams; I just wish he hadn't made the call. I would have enjoyed watching much more if he had not.

I suppose in retrospect I'd have to say the same about the double foul called on Singler and Omar. The ref could have taken each aside individually and told him in no uncertain terms that whatever was going on between them had already stopped "OR ELSE." Had he done that, I have no doubt that the last play that resulted in Singler's fourth never happens.

Again, my point, the refs made calls that took the game away from the players, which in my view is unfortunate. JTIII did not go that far, but perhaps he did so implicitly. What he said in answer to a question about the T, was that it did not cost Georgetown the game. I agree that Duke earned the win. Whether they would have won without the T, whether they could have closed out on a charging Georgetown, was what we all wanted to see. At least I did. I'm disappointed that I didn't get to.

By the way, while I thought it was over after Duke made its ensuing run, Georgetown came back on them. Kyle, who hadn't come close from outside the entire game, steps into a pass and lets it go. Duke played great, but I can't call the game a great one, and therfore can't call the victory a great one, albeit well earned. Not my fault, perhaps not even the refs, but had they done their jobs differently, . . . .

That view, btw, more or less represents the views of the mature Georgetwon fans I know. They ain't crying over this, they expected Duke to hold its home court, and they feel the refs kept this game from being a great one and that that was a shame.

[RaineyDevil]

Just goes to show you that Duke can slug it out with the best in the country. We looked tough when we needed to be!

[devildeac]

Georgetown fans certainly have no rational basis for whining that Duke was favored by the officials. Not only was Georgetown awarded more trips to the free throw line in total (18 to 13)--which is remarkable given the Hoyas distinctively "physical" style of play--but the record reveals that during the second half, prior to the last 1:26 mark when Georgetown started fouling intentionally, the Hoyas were generously gifted with 15 free throw attempts while Duke took only two. (In fact, until that last 1:26 of the game, the free throw disparity in favor of Georgetown was 18 to 6.) I haven't done the research to confirm this, but I can't recall any visiting team receiving such "hospitality" from the officials in Cameron.

Ah yes, the old "rational basis" argument with cold, hard statistics included. How far do you think that pony will run with opposing fans and sportswriters, Mr. Gator:rolleyes:.

I might bet a small sum of loose coins that our lighter shade of blue foes down the road have had a FT disparity or two in the last few decades at CIS...(sadly)

[77devil]

Monroe had three fouls. He didn't get one of those fouls, not one, defending the rim, which he was doing throughout until he drew his fourth.

Speaking only for myself obviously, I wish that the ref had not called the T. That is what my position was in the original post, and I'm sticking to it. I think that the ref was too concerned with himself and less with the game in making that call. It was a reflex response to being disrespected behind his back in a game between two great college teams. It involved nothing whatever between players on opposite teams; I just wish he hadn't made the call. I would have enjoyed watching much more if he had not.

Your point about fouls defending the rim is superfluous and nonsense. As Jim Sumner already pointed out, the the refs did not call a single foul against Georgetown defending the rim in the second half and there was plenty of hard contact. Monroe's second foul was a blatant moving screen right in front of an official, made more obvious because he did not even move in a straight line. The third foul was a clear charge, no dispute, after some nice lateral defense by Plumlee I might add. But apparently you believe that unless a foul occurs defending the rim, it should not be called.

As for the T, you have no idea what was said and by whom, and like everyone else, are in no position to judge whether it was appropriate or not. You should not forget that the officiating crew works primarily in the Big East.

[Stray Gator]

Ah yes, the old "rational basis" argument with cold, hard statistics included. How far do you think that pony will run with opposing fans and sportswriters, Mr. Gator:rolleyes:. ...

I have no expectation whatsoever that these facts will alter any opinions of fans and observers who are already convinced, to the point of having closed minds on the issue, that Duke always receives the benefit of the officiating. I posted those statistics simply to provide what I believe is relevant information for any readers of this thread who might be inclined to agree with the view that the officials spoiled the game by depriving Georgetown of a fair opportunity to compete and win the game. I was at the game, and it appears to me that the statistical disparity in free throws is a pretty accurate reflection of the distinct slant in the officiating.

While I generally refrain from complaining about uneven officiating, especially when my team managed to win in spite of it, I refuse to sit by quietly while others insinuate that Duke's victory is tainted or was to any extent attributable to officiating that was somehow unfavorable to Georgetown. In my opinion, the only sense in which one can fairly say that the refs "took this game away from the players" is to recognize that, if the officiating yesterday had been evenhanded and proper for a basketball game, the score would not have been nearly as close. It was only because the Big East officials allowed the Hoyas to get away with an absurd amount of hard physical contact when playing defense, and then put them on the free throw line whenever a Georgetown player was the recipient of similar contact on their offensive possessions throughout the second period, that the game was any contest at all after halftime.

[greybeard]

Your point about fouls defending the rim is superfluous and nonsense. As Jim Sumner already pointed out, the the refs did not call a single foul against Georgetown defending the rim in the second half and there was plenty of hard contact. Monroe's second foul was a blatant moving screen right in front of an official, made more obvious because he did not even move in a straight line. The third foul was a clear charge, no dispute, after some nice lateral defense by Plumlee I might add. But apparently you believe that unless a foul occurs defending the rim, it should not be called.

As for the T, you have no idea what was said and by whom, and like everyone else, are in no position to judge whether it was appropriate or not. You should not forget that the officiating crew works primarily in the Big East.

My personal view is that charges away from the rim are ruining what was once a good game. Moving screen? Really, where was this egregious offense commited and was there advantage gained? So, if you read what I said carefully, what I said was that I would prefer that such calls, at least two of them, would not have been made. I think that it would have made for a better game. You disagree, fine.

I did not say that only fouls at the rim should be called. One dukie here said that Monroe surely would have picked up a fourth (in relation to the technical now) because Duke was attacking the rim. I pointed out in response that they had been attacking all game and Monroe had been defending them, effectively I might add, and had drawn no fouls in doing so.

Look, if you think that the calls did not detract from the game you watched simply because your team won I respect that. Admit it though. As a person who declared before the fact that I could easily be happy with either team winning, and I am by the way, I was disappointed that the game that seemed to be afoot was taken away by discretionary calls that were made against Monroe away from the rim when no advantage was gained and about matters that as often as not can result in no calls or bad ones, in the case of deciding whether a collision is a charge or a block.

Now, the charge block distinction makes the game interesting when someone is attacking the rim and tries to bull over an object, that would be a defender, clever enough to get there first. Mistakes are made and are maddening but I think that the play has become almost as interesting as trying to block layups. The bad calls in this context are worth it.

Charges away from the basket I'd completely do away with.

As for the T, I really don't care what was said. The guy should have made believe that he didn't hear it, apparently no one else did, certainly no one on the Duke bench did, and let them play on. This is not a game about the refs and whether if a tree falls in the forest and only the ref is around it has to be called because it made a sound discernible to no one that mattered. It screwed up the game unnecessarily is my point and made the ref more important than the game itself. As someone who wanted to see a real contest between two top teams I was ticked.

Good win for Duke; could have been great but for discretionary calls made by the refs which prevented it. If you saw differently, I'd have to think it was through those blue glasses. Not hatin you for it, this is a Duke blog. But, you know and have seen too much basketball to seriously contend that the game was not diminished by these calls. You really would not have liked to see Duke take on Georgetown down the stretch with an unincumbered Monroe competing against an unincumbered Singler?

Whatever issues you have with me in your post presuppose what I repeatedly have said since before the game is not so. I was and am happy with whomever won. I didn't see the game that was there for the taking only because the refs took it needlessly, unless you believe that your boys couldn't have won if Monroe had not gotten in foul trouble. I doubt that you want to go there, and I didn't. I don't know what would have happened, but I do know that it would have been a gas watching. The kind of thing that you slide off the coach when guys are making plays. As it is, the only big play down the stretch of moment for Duke was when Singler hit the three, and that was pretty far from the end of the contest; there were so many more such play that I believe were left on the table, plays by both teams.

Nice chatting with you although it seems more like ships passing in the night. So what else is new.

Stray, a tad chippy I would say and not your best. Really think that Duke got the worse of th calls in the second half? Not possible. Your joking, right? The technical and the call that preceeded it, game, set, match--Georgetown had closed to within 4 and clearly has the momentum; Duke loses it out of bounds, only wait, a foul is called on Georgetown that could and one might argue should have been a no-call); a technical is called about a tree falling in the forest; and Duke goes on a 15 to 2 or something run. Game over. No other calls in the second half mattered, right!

[Jumbo]

I have no expectation whatsoever that these facts will alter any opinions of fans and observers who are already convinced, to the point of having closed minds on the issue, that Duke always receives the benefit of the officiating. I posted those statistics simply to provide what I believe is relevant information for any readers of this thread who might be inclined to agree with the view that the officials spoiled the game by depriving Georgetown of a fair opportunity to compete and win the game. I was at the game, and it appears to me that the statistical disparity in free throws is a pretty accurate reflection of the distinct slant in the officiating.

While I generally refrain from complaining about uneven officiating, especially when my team managed to win in spite of it, I refuse to sit by quietly while others insinuate that Duke's victory is tainted or was to any extent attributable to officiating that was somehow unfavorable to Georgetown. In my opinion, the only sense in which one can fairly say that the refs "took this game away from the players" is to recognize that, if the officiating yesterday had been evenhanded and proper for a basketball game, the score would not have been nearly as close. It was only because the Big East officials allowed the Hoyas to get away with an absurd amount of hard physical contact when playing defense, and then put them on the free throw line whenever a Georgetown player was the recipient of similar contact on their offensive possessions throughout the second period, that the game was any contest at all after halftime.

I don't think Georgetown has a right to complain about the officiating yesterday. Nor do we, for that matter. We really shouldn't be concerned about physical play, because we give as good as we get this year. And that's a good thing.

[diveonthefloor]

Hmm. Thanks for doing the research on this point. I was responding to several news reports that identified Cahill as a Big East ref. Maybe it's not so clear cut.

Actually, Cahill does Big East games far more frequently than ACC....
http://statsheet.com/mcb/referees/john-cahill/conferences

[JStuart]

In my opinion, the fact that we are debating whether or not Monroe's "star" status illuminates a big part of the problem with officiating in college basketball.

Monroe has been playing college basketball for about three months. What exactly has he done to warrant "star" status? He's had some good games. So? His offensive fouls could be considered borderline but they were still fouls. I don't think his demonstrative moaining after the calls helped him in the officials' eyes, either. Remember Hurley's freshman year when K put together the tape of his expressive behavior? In Monroe's case, he needs to learn to control his body as he's markedly bigger and stronger than almost everyone. Greg Oden had to learn the same painful lesson in his only season, in which he spent large portions of sitting on the pine in foul trouble.

I have never understood why some players (Duke included) are believed to be worthy of levity from the rules. To me, if you're an excellent player, you shouldn't need additional advantages from the guys in stripes.


dukemsu

Which is why I still don't understand why Hansbrough has only fouled out of one (1) game in his career. Freshmen foul out. Often. Officials call fouls on freshmen. Why not Hansbrough?

[beltwayBD]

I don't know if anyone has seen this, I laughed so hard:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/dcsportsbog/2009/01/1_georgetown_i_am_just.html

The Post is getting seriously worked up:


And other observations from a game I probably should have attended.

* I meant to post a poll last week asking Maryland fans whom they'd root for in Georgetown-Duke. Well, I never asked, but as far as I'm concerned the answer was provided yesterday. Because Duke cheats*. And because the Duke Basketball Report hinted that the Hoyas were thugs, describing Kyle Singler's intentional foul like this:

In the second half, after getting hacked and mugged, he pushed back. Again, it's not something you see from him on a regular basis. We can't ever remember seeing it. He's a tough kid, though, and apparently reached his limit.

And because someone on a Duke message board posted this:

Loved seeing Greg get worked up. I don't know if the camera caught it, but did anyone see Greg slap the floor? You can't beat that!

That's my line about Greg. Greg's tough and emotional performance was inspiring. And they Hoyas can't top that.

[devildeac]

I have no expectation whatsoever that these facts will alter any opinions of fans and observers who are already convinced, to the point of having closed minds on the issue, that Duke always receives the benefit of the officiating. I posted those statistics simply to provide what I believe is relevant information for any readers of this thread who might be inclined to agree with the view that the officials spoiled the game by depriving Georgetown of a fair opportunity to compete and win the game. I was at the game, and it appears to me that the statistical disparity in free throws is a pretty accurate reflection of the distinct slant in the officiating.

While I generally refrain from complaining about uneven officiating, especially when my team managed to win in spite of it, I refuse to sit by quietly while others insinuate that Duke's victory is tainted or was to any extent attributable to officiating that was somehow unfavorable to Georgetown. In my opinion, the only sense in which one can fairly say that the refs "took this game away from the players" is to recognize that, if the officiating yesterday had been evenhanded and proper for a basketball game, the score would not have been nearly as close. It was only because the Big East officials allowed the Hoyas to get away with an absurd amount of hard physical contact when playing defense, and then put them on the free throw line whenever a Georgetown player was the recipient of similar contact on their offensive possessions throughout the second period, that the game was any contest at all after halftime.

Stray, I was actually kidding with my comment about convincing folks about the officiating In a way, it reminded me about the f$u game you attended several years ago after the acc office suspended a crew for an improper T (or flagrant foul?) called against one of the f$u players in CIS several weeks earlier. Almost every touch on one end of the court was a PF against us, but we were mugged repeatedly by the f$u players with few whistles. I think the final FT stats, IIRC, were about 39 for the 'noles and about 19 for us.

I was somewhat amazed when I looked at the final stats and saw us with only 13 FT, most of them coming in the last 90 seconds or so as others have already mentioned. Yet, a lot of the focus is on the T on Monroe and how it affected the outcome of the game, with the insinuation, of course, that Duke get all the calls.

[Stray Gator]

... Stray, a tad chippy I would say and not your best. Really think that Duke got the worse of th calls in the second half? Not possible. Your joking, right? The technical and the call that preceeded it, game, set, match--Georgetown had closed to within 4 and clearly has the momentum; Duke loses it out of bounds, only wait, a foul is called on Georgetown that could and one might argue should have been a no-call); a technical is called about a tree falling in the forest; and Duke goes on a 15 to 2 or something run. Game over. No other calls in the second half mattered, right!

As far as I am concerned, you just blew into dust whatever semblance of credibility you may have possessed on this issue. Here's an indisputable fact: Not a single foul (other than the technical on Monroe) was whistled against Georgetown in the second half until the last 1:26, when the Hoyas deliberately started fouling. During that same stretch, Georgetown was sent to the charity stripe 15 times. Yet you seriously suggest it was Georgetown that was shafted by the officials? How can even the most ardent Georgetown fan honestly maintain with a straight face that the Georgetown players, who pride themselves on playing very physical defense--and certainly did plenty of that for forty minutes yesterday--committed no personal fouls for more than 18.5 minutes of the second half in a game where they were trailing but still within reach, and Duke was frequently attacking the basket on offense? You're joking, right?

And on the play immediately preceding the technical, I can only assume you're being intentionally facetious when you say Duke "lost the ball out of bounds" and that the foul "should have been a no-call." On that sequence, which happened under the basket directly in front of my seats, a pushing foul against Singler was initially committed by the Georgetown defender after the rebound and before the ball was "lost" out of bounds, but the official let it go because Singler was able to regain his balance--in effect, because no advantage was gained by the contact. It was the second contact by the Georgetown player that forced the ball loose out of bounds and drew a whistle--in effect, refusing to reward the defender for using physical contact to gain an advantage.

How much of an advantage would the officials need to give Georgetown before you would consider it a fair game? Keep in mind that, prior to the last 1:26, when the outcome was decided and the deliberate fouling commenced, Georgetown had attempted 18 free throws to Duke's 6. That's a 3-to-1 advantage. Would the Hoyas and their fans have been more satisfied with the "fairness" of a 4-to-1 advantage in free throw attempts?

If you want to believe that whatever "advantage" Duke received by virtue of the technical called on Monroe by the Big East official--which cannot under any theory be blamed on Duke--more than offset the indisputable disadvantage that Duke suffered by reason of the demonstrably biased whistling of personal fouls by the Big East officials during the second half, then at least recognize and acknowledge that your opinion on this issue is anything but objective, because the empirical evidence flatly refutes your position.

[greybeard]

As far as I am concerned, you just blew into dust whatever semblance of credibility you may have possessed on this issue. Here's an indisputable fact: Not a single foul (other than the technical on Monroe) was whistled against Georgetown in the second half until the last 1:26, when the Hoyas deliberately started fouling. During that same stretch, Georgetown was sent to the charity stripe 15 times. Yet you seriously suggest it was Georgetown that was shafted by the officials?

NO! NOT ONLY AM I NOT SUGGESTING THAT GEORGETOWN GOT SHAFTED BY THE OFFICIALS, I SPECIFICALLY SAID THAT I WAS NOT SUGGESTING THAT, NOT ONCE BUT MAYBE FIVE TIMES, BEGINNING WITH MY VERY FIRST POST.

What I said was that the refs ruined a great game. I believe that they did.

That "T" lead to a 15 to 2 run, put Duke up 16, and the game was effectively over. I know that my buddy and I, and he is a big Georgetown fan, started talking football. We were barely watching after that run. If I was sitting courtside, I would have watched. If my cable company had not screwed up and I had been at home, I probably would have switched the channel to watch a rerun movie. I do it all the time, I don't care who is playing.

Calls like that, and calls of no consequence that seem to me arbitrary, make me want to do something other than watch sports. I do not think I am alone. When, as here, the calls in question effect such a key player on a team that I expect will have an uphill battle to stay with the other team, much less beat it, it really is disturbing to me.

To me the kid, Monroe, the other team's key player, got taken out of the game by refs who lost the forest for the trees.

As for the play under the basket, I do not believe that they showed it on replay; the way I saw it, it had none of the details you describe. My friend went nuts, as did his son. They were Georgetown fans. I trust you that it was a righteous call. I know that the Georgetown bench didn't like it, and that the "T" by the ref then completely changed the momentum, which in the ensuing minutes, effectively ended the game.

The calls made at the beginning against Monroe, like I said, are the kind that drive me up the wall. That's me. The more important the game, the more important the player, the more I find them maddening.

As I said, I thought the double foul call was the lesser choice by far open to the ref. I think it was not effective in delivering a message and that a "chat" with each guy telling each what was what would have likely been much more effective. Again, bad judgment that, had Monroe not been saddled and the game all but over, could have ruined the game too. But I said that already.

The disparity in calls, I don't know. Like I said, I was barely watching. Maybe the refs knew that they had blown it and were trying to make it up. Come on, I didn't mean that and I don't think that they jobbed Georgetown. I think that they jobbed me. The rest of you each will have to decide for yourselves whether you saw the game that you would have liked, assuming that Duke would have won in the end regardless. Really, I didn't think that that was such a hard question. Slippery slope, I suppose, to be avoided at all costs, especially by very, very high quality lawyers like some on the board. Later, counselor. ;)

[Bob Green]

Here's an indisputable fact: Not a single foul (other than the technical on Monroe) was whistled against Georgetown in the second half until the last 1:26, when the Hoyas deliberately started fouling.

There is some confusion in this thread. Just because Duke didn't go to the free throw line doesn't mean fouls were not called on Georgetown. The refs called five fouls against GT (not counting the technical) in the second half prior to the 1:26 mark:

15:09 Foul on Henry Sims
15:08 Foul on Greg Monroe (Technical)
14:55 Foul on Omar Wattad
13:24 Foul on Jessie Sapp
10:07 Foul on Jason Clark
8:13 Foul on Austin Freeman

The empirical evidence (http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/playbyplay?gameId=290170150) proves that no shooting fouls were called on Georgetown, but the refs definitely blew their whistles against the Hoyas.

[juise]

There is some confusion in this thread. Just because Duke didn't go to the free throw line doesn't mean fouls were not called on Georgetown. The refs called five fouls against GT (not counting the technical) in the second half prior to the 1:26 mark:

15:09 Foul on Henry Sims
15:08 Foul on Greg Monroe (Technical)
14:55 Foul on Omar Wattad
13:24 Foul on Jessie Sapp
10:07 Foul on Jason Clark
8:13 Foul on Austin Freeman

The empirical evidence (http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/playbyplay?gameId=290170150) proves that no shooting fouls were called on Georgetown, but the refs definitely blew their whistles against the Hoyas.

Thanks for clearing that up, Bob. I was thinking that I remembered us being in the bonus toward the end of the half (Greg missed the front end of a one-and-one). Getting into the bonus doesn't seem possible if the first foul came that late in the half.

[Bob Green]

Thanks for clearing that up, Bob.

You're welcome. I have nothing better to do on a Holiday Monday afternoon than sit around drinking beer and researching facts on the internet while I wait for Sumo to come on TV.

[Stray Gator]

There is some confusion in this thread. Just because Duke didn't go to the free throw line doesn't mean fouls were not called on Georgetown. The refs called five fouls against GT (not counting the technical) in the second half prior to the 1:26 mark:

15:09 Foul on Henry Sims
15:08 Foul on Greg Monroe (Technical)
14:55 Foul on Omar Wattad
13:24 Foul on Jessie Sapp
10:07 Foul on Jason Clark
8:13 Foul on Austin Freeman

The empirical evidence (http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/playbyplay?gameId=290170150) proves that no shooting fouls were called on Georgetown, but the refs definitely blew their whistles against the Hoyas.

You are correct, Bob, and I obviously misstated in attempting to make my point, which is simply that the disparity in free throw attempts during the second half seriously undermines, IMO, the credibility of anyone who saw the game yet still suggests that Duke did not get the short end of the calls. My apologies for the error. I'll shut up now.

[greybeard]

You are correct, Bob, and I obviously misstated in attempting to make my point, which is simply that the disparity in free throw attempts during the second half seriously undermines, IMO, the credibility of anyone who saw the game yet still suggests that Duke did not get the short end of the calls. My apologies for the error. I'll shut up now.

Since you agree that many improvident decisions were made by the refs, and since logic dictates that some improvident decisions are more consequential than others, the numbers you site cannot possibly support assertions regarding anyone's "credibility." I agree with those who say that any attempt to argue that Duke got jobbed in its own house in this game is pointless.

As for numbers, maybe Duke, having Georgetown down, got overly aggressive in trying to really, really "put them away" and as a consequence played a tad out of control on defense. With the other team on its, heals, and the crowd yelling for blood and you're up 16, you go for it, right and maybe commit a bunch of silly fouls in the process? Possible counselor?

On the other hand, it is possible that a young and inexperienced Georgetown team that had two freshman (including Monroe with 4) and two sophomores on the floor, one of whom plays on the average of 7 minutes a game played more carefully on defense after having been stung by the technical, particularly if perchance that Monroe is telling the truth. Again counselor, possible, right.

So, aside from the faulty assumption that all bad calls are equal, your argument based upon statistics falls of its own weight. And, if we are assuming that the refs made bad calls, and I know I am, it is possible that the refs might even have tried to make up for the tech, which I have to believe even the guy who called it knew was wrong within moments after his temper cooled.

I wonder, anybody have foul stats for the key limited period during the 15 to 2 run. Just kidding. Credibility is not an issue. Even money says that when Stray played, stray elbows flew. That is a complement big guy. ;)

[cf-62]

My personal view is that charges away from the rim are ruining what was once a good game. Moving screen? Really, where was this egregious offense commited and was there advantage gained? So, if you read what I said carefully, what I said was that I would prefer that such calls, at least two of them, would not have been made. I think that it would have made for a better game. You disagree, fine.

I did not say that only fouls at the rim should be called. One dukie here said that Monroe surely would have picked up a fourth (in relation to the technical now) because Duke was attacking the rim. I pointed out in response that they had been attacking all game and Monroe had been defending them, effectively I might add, and had drawn no fouls in doing so.

Look, if you think that the calls did not detract from the game you watched simply because your team won I respect that. Admit it though. As a person who declared before the fact that I could easily be happy with either team winning, and I am by the way, I was disappointed that the game that seemed to be afoot was taken away by discretionary calls that were made against Monroe away from the rim when no advantage was gained and about matters that as often as not can result in no calls or bad ones, in the case of deciding whether a collision is a charge or a block.

Now, the charge block distinction makes the game interesting when someone is attacking the rim and tries to bull over an object, that would be a defender, clever enough to get there first. Mistakes are made and are maddening but I think that the play has become almost as interesting as trying to block layups. The bad calls in this context are worth it.

Charges away from the basket I'd completely do away with.

As for the T, I really don't care what was said. The guy should have made believe that he didn't hear it, apparently no one else did, certainly no one on the Duke bench did, and let them play on. This is not a game about the refs and whether if a tree falls in the forest and only the ref is around it has to be called because it made a sound discernible to no one that mattered. It screwed up the game unnecessarily is my point and made the ref more important than the game itself. As someone who wanted to see a real contest between two top teams I was ticked.

Good win for Duke; could have been great but for discretionary calls made by the refs which prevented it. If you saw differently, I'd have to think it was through those blue glasses. Not hatin you for it, this is a Duke blog. But, you know and have seen too much basketball to seriously contend that the game was not diminished by these calls. You really would not have liked to see Duke take on Georgetown down the stretch with an unincumbered Monroe competing against an unincumbered Singler?

Whatever issues you have with me in your post presuppose what I repeatedly have said since before the game is not so. I was and am happy with whomever won. I didn't see the game that was there for the taking only because the refs took it needlessly, unless you believe that your boys couldn't have won if Monroe had not gotten in foul trouble. I doubt that you want to go there, and I didn't. I don't know what would have happened, but I do know that it would have been a gas watching. The kind of thing that you slide off the coach when guys are making plays. As it is, the only big play down the stretch of moment for Duke was when Singler hit the three, and that was pretty far from the end of the contest; there were so many more such play that I believe were left on the table, plays by both teams.

Nice chatting with you although it seems more like ships passing in the night. So what else is new.

Stray, a tad chippy I would say and not your best. Really think that Duke got the worse of th calls in the second half? Not possible. Your joking, right? The technical and the call that preceeded it, game, set, match--Georgetown had closed to within 4 and clearly has the momentum; Duke loses it out of bounds, only wait, a foul is called on Georgetown that could and one might argue should have been a no-call); a technical is called about a tree falling in the forest; and Duke goes on a 15 to 2 or something run. Game over. No other calls in the second half mattered, right!


So let me get this straight:

If a game is properly called (offensive fouls when a player simply runs over his defender, an illegal screen that is not only moving, but includes an intentional shove, a technical foul for somebody saying "F YOU" to the ref), then it cannot be a good game?

That certainly sounds like the Big Least refereeing philosophy.

Dude, you have to take a step back and re-read your ridiculous statements. Offensive fouls shouldn't be called away from the basket? Next, you'll be saying that a hard hand-check shouldn't be called if it doesn't immediately cause the ballhandler to lose control of the ball, or that a two-handed shove in the back of a post player shouldn't be called if he doesn't have the ball. Oh wait, that IS how the Big Least calls their games.

All of these are -- and should continue to be fouls -- because basketball is NOT football. It's not about who's the "stronger" or "bigger" player -- it's about who can use their strength, size, agility, and brains to gain an advantage.

15 years ago, Chris Weber made a ridiculous statement that one reason he was going to the NBA the year he did was because in the NBA, you could go straight at the basket and the defender couldn't stop you by just standing between you and the basket and taking a charge. There is a sport where you don't have to worry about somebody out-thinking you and getting in your way as you prove you can jump higher than anybody else. It's called the High Jump.

And if Monroe wants to be able to just run people over, then he should play football. But this is basketball...

[77devil]

I If my cable company had not screwed up and I had been at home, I probably would have switched the channel to watch a rerun movie. I do it all the time, I don't care who is playing.

I guess you don't see many games to completion



The disparity in calls, I don't know. Like I said, I was barely watching.

You certainly have a lot to write about for barley watching.

I do find these periodic diatribes of yours amusing. I can't tell if you really believe much of what you write or do it to be provocative and stir things up which is fine by me. Keeps the board interesting.

To take license from the classic closing line from the movie Chinatown: "Forget it Jake, it's only Greybeard."

[DukeVol]

This thread has been entertaining and informative.

One thing I have learned is that Greybeard has a tremendous man-crush on Omar Wattad (maybe greater than Jumbo's Scheyer crush:p). I guess it's evidence that you see things that you already believe because after reading Greybeard's post on Wattad, I watched him specifically throughout the game. Besides annoying chippyness and the tie-up with Singler, I really didn't think he had much of an impact on the game; certainly not like Greybeard's post would have led us to believe. That's just me though....

At least Greybeard hasn't made a soccer analogy in this thread. That has been somewhat surprising ;)....

[DukeUsul]

greybeard, you suggested you aren't alone, but I think you are much more alone than you think you are. Moving screens away from the ball? Foul. Pushing a ballhandler and gaining an advantage when he goes out of bounds? Foul. Mouthing off to a ref? Technical foul. Swinging your arm at a guy away from the ball? Intentional foul. If the refs don't call fouls according to the rules, how in heck are the players supposed to know what goes and what doesn't?

I'm not sure what sport you like to watch, but it doesn't sound like basketball.

[moonpie23]

[QUOTE=greybeard;243714]

What I said was that the refs ruined a great game. I believe that they did.

actually, Georgetown stunk it up at the foul line and the freshman tried too hard to make a statement at the school he rejected.





That "T" lead to a 15 to 2 run, put Duke up 16, and the game was effectively over.

actually, that T lead to 2 points.....the rest of run didn't happen BECAUSE of the T......G'town didn't go on a 15-2 tear after singler got his INTENTIONAL..





Calls like that, and calls of no consequence that seem to me arbitrary, make me want to do something other than watch sports.


maybe the rules should be changed more to your liking...



To me the kid, Monroe, the other team's key player, got taken out of the game by refs who lost the forest for the trees.


no, the kid took himSELF out by trying too hard to use aggression and overplay and not understanding the GAME.




The disparity in calls, I don't know.

well......ignore what you will...

[Fish80]

I've enjoyed reading all of these posts. This is good fun!

Just to throw my two cents in on the officiating: I don't think it's appropriate to single out one call in isolation. Certainly we want and need the game to be played by and officiated according to the rules. And from time to time, we collectively agree to change the rules. But for any given game, there is a set of rules that apply and that is the standard that should be used.

A lot of action happened prior to the T on Monroe. We probably will never know with certainty who said what. We do know that refs are human (most of them :D ), and everything that happened prior to the call influences how the ref reacts. All the things that the players said and did, including Monroe, up to that point influenced the call.

Viewed in isolation, the call should be made strictly according to the rules. But in the heat of the battle, split second judgment calls are made in the context of game.

The T on Monroe was called in the context of the game, influenced by all the things said and done prior to the call.

[Virginian]

Every game has calls and non-calls that could go either way. I thought this game was called reasonably well.

At the very least there were not nearly as many fouls called as you might expect in a game this rough. A lot of games of this nature end up with one side or both shooting 30 or more free throws.

But in this game, the refs really didn't stop the flow of the game that often, the technical call notwithstanding.

I like to see a good game too, one that doesn't end up in a free-throw shooting contest, but at the end of the game I want to see Duke emerge the winner. And I'd rather see Duke win a sloppy game than see Duke lose a game for the ages. Sorry, that's just me.

Good stuff on this thread so far. Thanks!

[BD80]

Even in Hi Def, I couldn't tell what the Crazies did to greet Monroe or what if anything they did for/to him during the game. Anything good, or clever, or crass, or worthy of mention?

[gep]

I've enjoyed reading all of these posts. This is good fun!

Just to throw my two cents in on the officiating: I don't think it's appropriate to single out one call in isolation. Certainly we want and need the game to be played by and officiated according to the rules. And from time to time, we collectively agree to change the rules. But for any given game, there is a set of rules that apply and that is the standard that should be used.

A lot of action happened prior to the T on Monroe. We probably will never know with certainty who said what. We do know that refs are human (most of them :D ), and everything that happened prior to the call influences how the ref reacts. All the things that the players said and did, including Monroe, up to that point influenced the call.

Viewed in isolation, the call should be made strictly according to the rules. But in the heat of the battle, split second judgment calls are made in the context of game.

The T on Monroe was called in the context of the game, influenced by all the things said and done prior to the call.

I was also thinking along the same lines... and also that since the officials, especially the one that called the T on Monroe, did a few Georgetown games this year... maybe Monroe does have somewhat of a "reputation" that the refs watch for... So, not only in the "context of the game", but maybe also in the "context of the season"...:rolleyes: (Of course, I haven't watched Georgetown games, so I don't know at all, but was just a thought...)

[ncexnyc]

Here's the article, which ran in my local paper on Sunday, concerning the game and the foul.
http://www.fayobserver.com/article?id=316167

Not sure where the writer was seated, so I can't speak for his vantage point on this matter.

[greybeard]

So let me get this straight:

If a game is properly called (offensive fouls when a player simply runs over his defender, an illegal screen that is not only moving, but includes an intentional shove, a technical foul for somebody saying "F YOU" to the ref), then it cannot be a good game?

That certainly sounds like the Big Least refereeing philosophy.

Dude, you have to take a step back and re-read your ridiculous statements. Offensive fouls shouldn't be called away from the basket? Next, you'll be saying that a hard hand-check shouldn't be called if it doesn't immediately cause the ballhandler to lose control of the ball, or that a two-handed shove in the back of a post player shouldn't be called if he doesn't have the ball. Oh wait, that IS how the Big Least calls their games.

All of these are -- and should continue to be fouls -- because basketball is NOT football. It's not about who's the "stronger" or "bigger" player -- it's about who can use their strength, size, agility, and brains to gain an advantage.

15 years ago, Chris Weber made a ridiculous statement that one reason he was going to the NBA the year he did was because in the NBA, you could go straight at the basket and the defender couldn't stop you by just standing between you and the basket and taking a charge. There is a sport where you don't have to worry about somebody out-thinking you and getting in your way as you prove you can jump higher than anybody else. It's called the High Jump.

And if Monroe wants to be able to just run people over, then he should play football. But this is basketball...

Dude, I am a Duke fan. I will repeat, I am a Duke fan. My credentials as a Duke fan are impeccable. I also am a Hoya fan, I live in DC. I am a huge fan of JTIII as a coach; up there with K, in my view, although he has a lot more to accomplish before he is put on the same footing. I am not a fan of Big East basketball, nor am I a fan of ACC basketball. As I mentioned the game for me is difficult to watch. I try when one of my teams, and you have the list, plays. Otherwise, I'd read a book, which is saying something.

Dude, I didn't see any of the things you speak about. Monroe bulled his way over nobody in this game, nobody.

If a dude jumps in front of someone far from the basket, my understanding of the game is that it is a fair/good play to dribble up to the defender, make contact (not bowl over him, touch, seal) and then change direction; one of the classic moves in basketball as I have always understood the game. Huge part of my own personal arsenal. Nowadays, if you touch too hard in the ref's judgment, a charge is called. Especially on plays that are otherwise meaningless, I think that blowing the whistle is a WRONG call. I think that that places the game outcome in meaningless judgments made by falable people who are not players. The spin counter to a defender taking a solid position to impede progress is a terrific move that has risks and rewards. One of the risks should not be a charge except where the contact is the result of a bull-in-the china-shop disregard of the defender's position and constitutes an attempt to overpower the defender. That is my view.

As for the T, you bet, if the ref is walking away from the bench and he hear's himself being cursed his job is to keep on walking. You stop and call a T, you did so reactively out of anger, personal interest, not the good of the game. That is a wrong move, completely. Displays against referees that everyone sees, or words said on the court that opponents hear and that are in your face, might leave you with no discretion. This was not that situation and there was plenty of discretion. The ref acted reflexively out of anger, ego, "I am the sheriff in these here parts", that made "his position" more important that the kid's.

I have put aside in all of this that I happen to believe Monroe. I see no reason put forth by anyone to suggest a grounds for doing otherwise, unless one is claiming that the ref has eyes in the back of his head. For the guy to fail to keep walking was unprofessional and wrong, IMO. It also ruined the game.

Footnote: I have rooted for Big East teams other than Georgetown exactly twice: both times when Syracuse teams made it to the finals. The first time the opponent with Knight, whom I think ruined the game of basketball by inventing and legitimatizing thug defense. The other time was when Syracuse won and I really liked that team, thought that they played a wonderful style, nothing thuggish about them.

I was a Maryland fan when Lefty was there except until the final few years. I rooted for Bob whatever his name was. I liked the guards that he got and notwithstanding that he got slammed I thought that he was a good man. I rooted for the Blake teams because he is one of my favorite guards of all time. I hate "thug" basketball, and, while I thought JTII made tremendous contributions to the game, the overphysical character of the play of his teams turned me off.

There it is Dude, deal with it or not: a Duke fan and a huge fan of K's and this team especially, says that the refs ruined the game, although I clearly see Duke as deserving and having earned a "good" win.

[hq2]

The technical clearly helped Duke, but I don't think it decided the game. Georgetown is a big east team used to playing rough; I think they dished out a lot of stuff that wasn't called. The Singler foul in particular was a case in point; the G-town player grabbed him blatantly and wasn't called for it. I think Duke was the better team to the point that no one can state that the officiating decided the outcome of the game.

[greybeard]

As to the free throw numbers, you do recall that in the later stages of the game, when Duke spread the floor there were at least 3 and perhaps several more instances in which Monroe switched on a high screen, someone like Scheyer took it to the rim, Monroe following in perfect position to come from the outside (ball hand side) and elevate to swat it away from above, a relative low risk play, but he stopped and let the guy finish unimpeded.

At least six points given away, and no real defense being played by Monroe in those instances. I am sure that there were other less obvious instances in which he chose to play soft rather than contesting a play, a pass, maneuvering for position, making moves on offense, etc. Did he set the tone for others? He is the team leader, no? Numbers do not tell stories; in this instance, the game was over afte the 15 to 2 run.

[moonpie23]

My credentials as a Duke fan are impeccable.


ok...i'll buy that



JTIII as a coach; up there with K,


ok, you just shot your cred...

[greybeard]

ok, you just shot your cred...

That would make two of us, me and Mr. Monroes. :rolleyes:

Look, the guy beat Duke with JJ and Shelden with JTIII doing exactly what K did here--sitting his center, who was an integral part of their offense, btw, unlike Z and L, and playing Duke small and beating their pants off until Duke made a heroic and almost successful comback. Terrific game.

Going into the quarterfinal game against UNC, all the heads were talking about how Georgetown's only chance was to slow it down and run the Princeton in truly Princetonian style. JTIII responded before the game that he did not think that it was possible to try to do that and have any chance of winning against Carolina. For the first time all year, he let the dogs hunt and came out blazing and running and beat Carolina at its own game.

Like K, his teams are terrifically entertaining to watch.

Lke K, the players on his team become smarter and more mature about the game and other things during the course of the season. JTIII is extremely smart and well educated and was mentored in the game by one of the true genuses of the elegant game and that would be Mr. Carrill. JTIII is easily the great coach's most accomplished and brilliant disciple.

Any notion that his teams, including this one, play thug defense is slanderous and nonsense. I guarentee you that Omar grabbed his shirt because Singler did something to get Omar out of his way that Omar felt was over the top. As I said going into this game, the kid is immovable and has quick feet, a very, very astute sense of where the play is going, and presents unique obstacles to the offense. He is not a player who tries to push people around. That is not his style, nor is it GTIII's.

I acknowledged that before JTIII can be said to stand on the same platform as K he must develop a comparable body of work. However, standing man to man right now in a game, I think that he holds his own in everything that counts, which includes how his teams and players play and grow, and not just that they win. I don't think me and Monroe are alone in that view.

[feldspar]

As for the T, you bet, if the ref is walking away from the bench and he hear's himself being cursed his job is to keep on walking. You stop and call a T, you did so reactively out of anger, personal interest, not the good of the game. That is a wrong move, completely. Displays against referees that everyone sees, or words said on the court that opponents hear and that are in your face, might leave you with no discretion. This was not that situation and there was plenty of discretion. The ref acted reflexively out of anger, ego, "I am the sheriff in these here parts", that made "his position" more important that the kid's.


Wow. I can't express how vehemently I disagree with this.

Take a step back and remember that we're talking about college kids here. Kids who are in school (supposedly) to get an education. What you are teaching a player like Monroe by allowing him to disrespect an official and get away with it? That is the exact opposite of good sportsmanship.

How is it sportsmanlike to disrespect an official just because you disagree with his calls? If you agree with me that it's not, then why do you criticize an official for penalizing unsportsmanlike conduct, when it is clearly laid out in the rules book?

What you are describing (allowing players to disrespect officials whether one person or 10,000 people witness it) is putting the PLAYERS above the GAME.

I don't know what was said. But I do know that you have no idea what went on in the head of the official when he called the T, as much as you would like to think that you did.

ETA: As for your "sheriff" comment, the officials are the sheriff on the court. That's their job. Do you have a problem with authority or something? Their job is to enforce the rules to the best of their ability. One of those rules is sportsmanlike conduct. That's not going to change.

[Dr. Rosenrosen]

My personal view is that charges away from the rim are ruining what was once a good game. Moving screen? Really, where was this egregious offense commited and was there advantage gained? So, if you read what I said carefully, what I said was that I would prefer that such calls, at least two of them, would not have been made. I think that it would have made for a better game.


Charges away from the basket I'd completely do away with.

It's a strange position you've taken with respect to what you label as "discretionary" fouls, e.g., moving screens and off-ball or away-from-the-basket charges. These most certainly should be called as fouls.

I think I saw somewhere that you said you play basketball. If that is correct, you must certainly agree that unfair advantages can be gained in both instances.

If I set a pick for a teammate who does not have the ball by establishing myself in a set position on the court, I am essentially giving him a legally placed obstacle that he can use to create separation from his defender. Simplest example... a back pick. If my teammate uses that pick correctly he can get himself open for a cut to the basket or flare out to receive a pass for a jumpshot. Why should his defender be allowed to bowl me over in order to maintain his defensive assignment? That doesn't make any sense. You have to call that a foul. It is his job to get around the pick.

Now if that same defender is playing good defense and sees the pick (or if his teammates let him know it is coming), it is his job to find a way around the pick (over or under) to maintain his defensive assignment. If I saw that he was about to get around my pick too easily and therefore decided to move into him, I have now created a moving obstacle and an unfair advantage for my own teammate, who would not otherwise have been able to get separation from the defender. That has to be called a moving screen. In fact, in my opinion, this particular foul is not called nearly as often as it should be. Refs let players who are setting high-post picks get away with shuffle steps all the time. And they hardly ever call a moving screen when the player setting the pick cleverly disguises it as a cut to the basket. But when a guy deliberately steps out of his set position and moves into the defender, it has to be a foul.

In the case of either, I would find it a miserable experience to play or watch a game in which off-ball/away from basket charges and moving screens were not called as fouls. It clearly creates an unintended advantage when these fouls are not called and perhaps more importantly it rewards less skillful play.

[calltheobvious]

That would make two of us, me and Mr. Monroes. :rolleyes:

Look, the guy beat Duke with JJ and Shelden with JTIII doing exactly what K did here--sitting his center, who was an integral part of their offense, btw, unlike Z and L, and playing Duke small and beating their pants off until Duke made a heroic and almost successful comback. Terrific game.

Going into the quarterfinal game against UNC, all the heads were talking about how Georgetown's only chance was to slow it down and run the Princeton in truly Princetonian style. JTIII responded before the game that he did not think that it was possible to try to do that and have any chance of winning against Carolina. For the first time all year, he let the dogs hunt and came out blazing and running and beat Carolina at its own game.

Like K, his teams are terrifically entertaining to watch.

Lke K, the players on his team become smarter and more mature about the game and other things during the course of the season. JTIII is extremely smart and well educated and was mentored in the game by one of the true genuses of the elegant game and that would be Mr. Carrill. JTIII is easily the great coach's most accomplished and brilliant disciple.

Any notion that his teams, including this one, play thug defense is slanderous and nonsense. I guarentee you that Omar grabbed his shirt because Singler did something to get Omar out of his way that Omar felt was over the top. As I said going into this game, the kid is immovable and has quick feet, a very, very astute sense of where the play is going, and presents unique obstacles to the offense. He is not a player who tries to push people around. That is not his style, nor is it GTIII's.

I acknowledged that before JTIII can be said to stand on the same platform as K he must develop a comparable body of work. However, standing man to man right now in a game, I think that he holds his own in everything that counts, which includes how his teams and players play and grow, and not just that they win. I don't think me and Monroe are alone in that view.

Just curious as to what you thought of Omar's tongue-wagging to the grad section after Singler was whistled for the intentional. Seemed an awful lot to me like someone who was thinking, "I just got over on Duke AND the officials at the same time!"

Also, I haven't figured out how to post photos, but check out the sixth photo from the top on the right row of thumbnails here. I'm guessing this knee to the groin was also just a response to some ungentlemanly play by Singler.
http://www.goduke.com/PhotoAlbum.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=4200&PALBID=56916

[feldspar]

check out the sixth photo from the top on the right row of thumbnails here. I'm guessing this knee to the groin was also just a response to some ungentlemanly play by Singler.

Sheesh. Lotta contact going on in this photo.




http://www.nmnathletics.com.edgesuite.net/pics22/800/DD/DDLVUFGTZRAHSGT.20090117220448.jpg

[calltheobvious]

Sheesh. Lotta contact going on in this photo.




http://www.nmnathletics.com.edgesuite.net/pics22/800/DD/DDLVUFGTZRAHSGT.20090117220448.jpg

First, thanks for posting the photo (I'm copying the tag template for the future).

Second, I'll cross-check the official play-by-play with the DVR and see whether Henderson was (rightly) charged with a foul here. My memory is fairly clear on the idea that Wattad was not charged with an intentional foul for grabbing Singler's jersey.

[DevilCastDownfromDurham]

First, thanks for posting the photo (I'm copying the tag template for the future).

Second, I'll cross-check the official play-by-play with the DVR and see whether Henderson was (rightly) charged with a foul here. My memory is fairly clear on the idea that Wattad was not charged with an intentional foul for grabbing Singler's jersey.

IIRC, Wattad was not charged with ANY foul. Kyle pushed him away and HE was charged with an intentional foul. Gosh the refs really had it out for G-Town. This game was totally not legit. :rolleyes:

[calltheobvious]

Didn't need the DVR. Thanks to my powers of deducement, I've ciphered that Henderson got away with one on the play in the photo. G's only foul was with 5:20 left in the game, and this was a first-half play (press row behind players means this shot was taken in front of the Duke bench).

[jv001]

Is it just me, or are all of our games a streetfight? I used to think teams would try to punk us down thinking Duke is soft. This year it seems like we provoke and get under teams' skin...have you seen Kyle talking after every made basket or Paulus not backing down to ANYONE? I like the fact we can be physical with the best of them, great season so far.

Kyle Singler...Can you say Christian Laettner!! Go Kyle & Go Duke!

[greybeard]

IIRC, Wattad was not charged with ANY foul. Kyle pushed him away and HE was charged with an intentional foul. Gosh the refs really had it out for G-Town. This game was totally not legit. :rolleyes:

This is what I see in this picture:

1. Gerald grabbing Monroe or Summer's arm, while whichever it was had the ball.

2. Wattad, an immovable force being positioned in between Singler and the play.

3. Wattad, an immovable force, falling backward, his foot coming up, and grabbing Singler's shirt and lifting his foot between Singler's legs and Singler is leaning forward and his extended arm is coming down onto Omar's arm that seems to be bent in a defensive posture, as in blocking the arm from coming down in his face.

A real mess. As I said, the refs should have pulled them aside earlier. I would not say it is fair to draw any conclusions about who was the aggressor here. Like I said, it ain't easy to knock Wattad off his balance; he clearly was falling and Singler was going for the ball hard and Wattad was between him and his objective. Wattan's face seems like a guy distressed by being thrown off balance to me. Clearly, Singler had no chance for the ball, especially with Wattad in his way.

[jv001]

It seems to me that many GT fans are sounding like unc fans by making excuses for the loss by the Hoyas to Duke. The refs did it. Go Duke!

[greybeard]

It seems to me that many GT fans are sounding like unc fans by making excuses for the loss by the Hoyas to Duke. The refs did it. Go Duke!

Seems to me that you are trying to make of a picture something that is not. I do not think that it was a biased game from a calls perspective and do think that Duke won fair and square. I don't know that you have included me among the group of GT fans you refer to, but I've always said that nuance is something that is lost on the young. And, to me, you are all young.

Which of my enumerated observations, if any, do you disagree with regarding the photo and why?

[DevilCastDownfromDurham]

A real mess. As I said, the refs should have pulled them aside earlier. I would not say it is fair to draw any conclusions about who was the aggressor here. Like I said, it ain't easy to knock Wattad off his balance; he clearly was falling and Singler was going for the ball hard and Wattad was between him and his objective. Wattan's face seems like a guy distressed by being thrown off balance to me. Clearly, Singler had no chance for the ball, especially with Wattad in his way.

The tongue wag after the play made it look a lot more like Vlade Divac/Dennis Rodman "gamesmanship" than Battier/Wojo tough defense to me. But otherwise I basically agree; at this point the game had gotten out of hand and either no foul or, better yet, a double foul would have been more equitable. So a close call went strongly against Duke's best player (4th foul on our best player AND an intentional). Monroe also got his fourth foul (+ technical FT's) on a close call that arguably shouldn't have been called on him.

So, at best, it's a wash. We both got a 4th on our best players (even though neither was our best scorer that day) on close/controversial calls. Neither player fouled out, and neither call was even close to deciding the game. Duke responded well to adversity, as you would hope an experienced team should. Georgetown responded badly to similar adversity, as you might expect from a young team. Experience and toughness can be said to have been a major factor in deciding the game.

I think we do have a philosophical difference regarding whether officials should call games closely or "let them play", and that's a fine thing to talk about. But no Georgetown fan (not assuming that you are, but we've heard it from quite a few folks) has any room to carp about officiating when Georgetown got their style of calls all night from a Big East crew and shot many, many more FT's until the last minutes of intentional fouling closed the gap some. JTIII was mature and gracious after a great game, noting that no single play decided things. Unfortunately, a lot of Georgetown fans have not followed his example.

[Virginian]

Graybeard says:
As for the T, you bet, if the ref is walking away from the bench and he hear's himself being cursed his job is to keep on walking. You stop and call a T, you did so reactively out of anger, personal interest, not the good of the game. That is a wrong move, completely. Displays against referees that everyone sees, or words said on the court that opponents hear and that are in your face, might leave you with no discretion. This was not that situation and there was plenty of discretion. The ref acted reflexively out of anger, ego, "I am the sheriff in these here parts", that made "his position" more important that the kid's.

Guy, I hear much of what you're saying and don't disagree with it, but this seems to me --IMHO -- a stretch. It really really depends on what was said. If someone says "Oh, BS!" that's one thing, but if the bench has been warned -- as we've been hearing -- and the ref hears "what a bunch of f*******g b******t, you f******g a*****le!!!!" he's gonna call it every time.

The point is that you and I have NO IDEA what was said or by whom, so your whining about the ref acting like sherif is totally out of line.

You're just making it up to suit your argument, and no one here is buying it. You don't know what the ref's "job" is. That's just baloney. He might very well believe it's important to keep the game under control. And you sure don't know how loud it was or who might have heard it. And when you say no one heard it and there was plenty of room for the ref's discretion, you're just making that up. I'm not saying he was right or wrong, only that I don't know. And you sure as heck don't know either.

Why put yourself into the position to judge what was right or wrong in this instance when you have no information on which to base your conclusion?

[greybeard]

The tongue wag after the play made it look a lot more like Vlade Divac/Dennis Rodman "gamesmanship" than Battier/Wojo tough defense to me. But otherwise I basically agree; at this point the game had gotten out of hand and either no foul or, better yet, a double foul would have been more equitable. So a close call went strongly against Duke's best player (4th foul on our best player AND an intentional). Monroe also got his fourth foul (+ technical FT's) on a close call that arguably shouldn't have been called on him.

So, at best, it's a wash. We both got a 4th on our best players (even though neither was our best scorer that day) on close/controversial calls. Neither player fouled out, and neither call was even close to deciding the game. Duke responded well to adversity, as you would hope an experienced team should. Georgetown responded badly to similar adversity, as you might expect from a young team. Experience and toughness can be said to have been a major factor in deciding the game.

I think we do have a philosophical difference regarding whether officials should call games closely or "let them play", and that's a fine thing to talk about. But no Georgetown fan (not assuming that you are, but we've heard it from quite a few folks) has any room to carp about officiating when Georgetown got their style of calls all night from a Big East crew and shot many, many more FT's until the last minutes of intentional fouling closed the gap some. JTIII was mature and gracious after a great game, noting that no single play decided things. Unfortunately, a lot of Georgetown fans have not followed his example.

Well put. The two fouls, however, were not equivalent. The T ended a Georgetown run and as you point out, Georgetown was incapable of recovering. Duke had nothing to recover from: it was in the lead, Monroe was playing soft, perhaps too soft (experience and being at Cameron; I'd think he'd rather find himself standing naked on Penn. Ave tomorrow than foul out in Cameron that afternoon :)).

I also do not think that it is fair to assert Georgetown relies on a rough style of defense. I disagree with that strongly. They do, however, rely on good position and the strength of starters Freeman and Sapp, and sub Wattan, to present defensive stances that one can not blow through (see my earlier descriptions, including pregame on this point) them. They do not rely on bodying up or pushing, they do not force players around the court, they do not play "Big East" or JTII defense. They play in the style of their coach, who is a stylist of what is the best in the game's grand tradition.

Duke met every challenge and played great. Good win for them.

[juise]

I would be interested to hear opinions on these issues from our other resident Georgetown fan (sorry if I'm forgetting someone), Mapei.

[DevilCastDownfromDurham]

Well put. The two fouls, however, were not equivalent. The T ended a Georgetown run and as you point out, Georgetown was incapable of recovering. Duke had nothing to recover from: it was in the lead, Monroe was playing soft, perhaps too soft (experience and being at Cameron; I'd think he'd rather find himself standing naked on Penn. Ave tomorrow than foul out in Cameron that afternoon :)).

Maybe we're talking past each other, or I'm assuming that you're making an argument that you aren't making. The T ended Georgetown's run because they let it. They hit a speedbump and folded. It's not like Monroe was lighting guys up and then had to sit because he fouled out. He was a) already on the bench and b) still able to play for a long time after the disputed call.

Kyle got hit with a close call and he and Duke got stronger. Georgetown and Monroe got a T that, arguably, should have been assessed to the bench and they wilted. If you are saying that you think the game would have been more exciting if they had responded better, I suppose you are correct. If you're saying that the T shouldn't have been called, you can't know that unless you know what was said by whom. If you're arguing that Duke's win is somehow tainted or that Georgetown got a raw deal from the officials you are factually wrong. I don't think you are making that argument, but a lot of folks, especially local media, are making exactly that incorrect argument, so we're not excited to hear about a "phantom technical" (http://www.fayobserver.com/article?id=316167) being responsible for our win.

This game was decided by the players (of course) but in part it was influenced by the character and poise of one team and the lack thereof by the other. Georgetown played a very good game that was a bit physical because it was officiated loosely. Their youth betrayed them. Duke played a slightly better game based on G's exquisite play, Greg's toughness, Kyle's smart play (including staying in the game with 4 fouls), etc etc. I can't think of a better way to see a game decided.

[jv001]

Maybe we're talking past each other, or I'm assuming that you're making an argument that you aren't making. The T ended Georgetown's run because they let it. They hit a speedbump and folded. It's not like Monroe was lighting guys up and then had to sit because he fouled out. He was a) already on the bench and b) still able to play for a long time after the disputed call.

Kyle got hit with a close call and he and Duke got stronger. Georgetown and Monroe got a T that, arguably, should have been assessed to the bench and they wilted. If you are saying that you think the game would have been more exciting if they had responded better, I suppose you are correct. If you're saying that the T shouldn't have been called, you can't know that unless you know what was said by whom. If you're arguing that Duke's win is somehow tainted or that Georgetown got a raw deal from the officials you are factually wrong. I don't think you are making that argument, but a lot of folks, especially local media, are making exactly that incorrect argument, so we're not excited to hear about a "phantom technical" (http://www.fayobserver.com/article?id=316167) being responsible for our win.

This game was decided by the players (of course) but in part it was influenced by the character and poise of one team and the lack thereof by the other. Georgetown played a very good game that was a bit physical because it was officiated loosely. Their youth betrayed them. Duke played a slightly better game based on G's exquisite play, Greg's toughness, Kyle's smart play (including staying in the game with 4 fouls), etc etc. I can't think of a better way to see a game decided.

Wish I had said it like that. And I am a Duke fan and a, well just a Duke fan. Go Duke!

[Kedsy]

Charges away from the basket I'd completely do away with.

What about defensive fouls away from the basket? Would you nix them as well? Why isn't a foul a foul?

[Jumbo]

Well put. The two fouls, however, were not equivalent. The T ended a Georgetown run and as you point out, Georgetown was incapable of recovering. Duke had nothing to recover from: it was in the lead, Monroe was playing soft, perhaps too soft (experience and being at Cameron; I'd think he'd rather find himself standing naked on Penn. Ave tomorrow than foul out in Cameron that afternoon :)).

I also do not think that it is fair to assert Georgetown relies on a rough style of defense. I disagree with that strongly. They do, however, rely on good position and the strength of starters Freeman and Sapp, and sub Wattan, to present defensive stances that one can not blow through (see my earlier descriptions, including pregame on this point) them. They do not rely on bodying up or pushing, they do not force players around the court, they do not play "Big East" or JTII defense. They play in the style of their coach, who is a stylist of what is the best in the game's grand tradition.

Duke met every challenge and played great. Good win for them.

At this point in the thread, the same people have made the same points over and over and over. Maybe you all can drop this particular subject and move on?

[weezie]

Good point Moderator Jumbo, sir. I think Georgetown needs snazzier unis, maybe incorporating something other than navy and gray. Our bold white and Duke Blue was far more stunning! :)

[greybeard]

Maybe we're talking past each other, or I'm assuming that you're making an argument that you aren't making. The T ended Georgetown's run because they let it. They hit a speedbump and folded. It's not like Monroe was lighting guys up and then had to sit because he fouled out. He was a) already on the bench and b) still able to play for a long time after the disputed call.

Kyle got hit with a close call and he and Duke got stronger. Georgetown and Monroe got a T that, arguably, should have been assessed to the bench and they wilted. If you are saying that you think the game would have been more exciting if they had responded better, I suppose you are correct. If you're saying that the T shouldn't have been called, you can't know that unless you know what was said by whom. If you're arguing that Duke's win is somehow tainted or that Georgetown got a raw deal from the officials you are factually wrong. I don't think you are making that argument, but a lot of folks, especially local media, are making exactly that incorrect argument, so we're not excited to hear about a "phantom technical" (http://www.fayobserver.com/article?id=316167) being responsible for our win.

This game was decided by the players (of course) but in part it was influenced by the character and poise of one team and the lack thereof by the other. Georgetown played a very good game that was a bit physical because it was officiated loosely. Their youth betrayed them. Duke played a slightly better game based on G's exquisite play, Greg's toughness, Kyle's smart play (including staying in the game with 4 fouls), etc etc. I can't think of a better way to see a game decided.

I don't agree with a lot of this and have already said why. Monroe did not fold. Duke went on a 15 to 2 run; game over. Monroe was inhibited from trying to make plays because he had been tagged with the T and had several disputable calls made against him on inconsequential plays. Did not trust the refs and therefore played cautiously. He and his team did not fold.

The T turned the game around.

If Monroe had three and kyle picked up his fourth we would be able to see if your argument holds water. If you saw a vastly superior response by Duke to the same challenges you are looking through those blue glasses.

Duke shut down Georgetown's guards, G went nuts, Kyle did a great job on the board's. Monroe played extremely well, I'd say equal to Kyle but for the caution post T; Summers had a great game that was in the same ballpark but not quite the equal of G's, Austin played smart and effectively and competed extremely well. The difference was mostly in the guard play and the change in momentum. Without the T Duke probably would have won and especially if they continued through the stretch to make plays. On the other hand, Monroe felt he had to let three guys score on layups he would have blocked had no T been called, and who knows what would have happened going down the stretch. Good win for Duke. The other stuff you say about the two teams is fluffy to me.

By the way, just got back from a pre inaug. bash; the joint was rockin and old boomers like me were as good once as we always was. Tomorrow (today) is gonna be outta sight. Go "O."