the pick on Singler

[moonpie23]

does anyone have a good clear hd clip of it? man....i looks pretty flagrant .....he clipped kyle like a running back...

maybe i should just let it alone, but.,..man...

[hc5duke]

matt howard should really consider going pro -- rasslin', not nba. hard & moving screen with some elbows, should have been called but since 1) the shot didn't go in and 2) singler hasn't mentioned it, i decided to let it go.

[DevilHorns]

does anyone have a good clear hd clip of it? man....i looks pretty flagrant .....he clipped kyle like a running back...

maybe i should just let it alone, but.,..man...

I don't have a picture of it, but I remember seeing Matt Howard looking at his own bloody lip. Ya thats right buddy, this is Duke basketball. Think about that for the next few days as your lip heals.

[mr. synellinden]

I don't have a picture of it, but I remember seeing Matt Howard looking at his own bloody lip. Ya thats right buddy, this is Duke basketball. Think about that for the next few days as your lip heals.

He should have known better than to set a pick on someone made of iron. He's lucky he got out with just a bloody lip.

[4decadedukie]

Words cannot express how deeply I hope Kyle returns for his senior year! He is truly something very special!

[Edouble]

does anyone have a good clear hd clip of it? man....i looks pretty flagrant .....he clipped kyle like a running back...

maybe i should just let it alone, but.,..man...

Why let it alone? I am gonna be running every nuance of this game through my head for months, I'm so damn happy.

It looked dirty to me. It looked like a foul. I noticed on Sportscenter this AM that they kept slowing it and then freezing the replay in the middle of Howard setting himself so that you couldn't actually get a feel for whether or not Howard was moving into Singler, or more likely, they did it in this manner so that you couldn't see what an obvious foul had occurred.

Howard had his arms up too, which is always a no-no in organized (men's) hoops.

[SCMatt33]

does anyone have a good clear hd clip of it? man....i looks pretty flagrant .....he clipped kyle like a running back...

maybe i should just let it alone, but.,..man...

From what I saw, it looked like he leaned into it a little, and in the middle of a regular season game, that is probably called a foul, and rightfully so, but any ref who values his reputation would NEVER call that in that situation. I would feel so terrible if the championship had been decided on a call like that, if for no other reason than we would never hear the end of it from every Duke hater for all-time. It worked out just fine and we have a championship!

[oldnavy]

I don't have a picture of it, but I remember seeing Matt Howard looking at his own bloody lip. Ya thats right buddy, this is Duke basketball. Think about that for the next few days as your lip heals.

Didn't Mazzula have to go out with a cut on his head after he jumped into Kyle's chin on a put back in the WVU game? When I saw the replay I was expecting to see an elbow or something hitting Mazzula's head, but he clearly head butted Kyle's chin. Kyle didn't even flinch...

Kyle is kind of scary isn't he?

[GODUKEGO]

I wish that we could slow this down. Regular speed, it looks vicious!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRk_bqNpHRg&feature=related

[Welcome2DaSlopes]

Not to be a homer, but shouldn't it be pick?

[Mr Blue Devil]

Sure looks like he put his shoulder in to Kyle.

But again, it doesn't matter. I would rather have the no call and win than to get that and have everyone I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this. and moan that Duke gets all the calls even more.

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a320/thecorbar/SinglerPick.jpg

[BleedsP287]

My view is it was a hard pic, more shoulder there than should be allowed, a little movement. But overall I think it was a good no call. We need to communicate on defense to prevent that kind of thing. Had it been called we'd be hearing the complaints for decades, so I'm glad it worked out exactly the way it did.

[JohnGalt]

It was about as clean as Brett Favre's block on Eugene Wilson

[DukeGirl4ever]

My view is it was a hard pic, more shoulder there than should be allowed, a little movement. But overall I think it was a good no call. We need to communicate on defense to prevent that kind of thing.


I'm not sure they were able to communicate about the pick on that play. They were all scrambling trying to prevent a game-winning shot and I don't think anyone saw it coming (can't remember who was back). That was one of those REACT moments where you don't really have time to think let alone speak.

I get what you're saying, but I think we'd be hard pressed to find anyone who could communicate the pick was coming in that situation.

[greybeard]

From what I saw, it looked like he leaned into it a little, and in the middle of a regular season game, that is probably called a foul, and rightfully so, but any ref who values his reputation would NEVER call that in that situation. I would feel so terrible if the championship had been decided on a call like that, if for no other reason than we would never hear the end of it from every Duke hater for all-time. It worked out just fine and we have a championship!

Howard walked into the screen and lifted his folded forearms up and forward. Flagrant foul, not just in the middle of the game. What does that mean, foul in the middle of the game but not on the play that decides it? Nonsense.

Same deal on the Lance steal. A minute or so to go, Lance steals it, has control, calls time out, only before he does, the ref whistles "jump ball" only the only thing that got jumped was Lance; the guy just lept on him and didn't have a hand within a yard of the ball. Ronnie Nunn, chief of NBA referees, just reviewed that "play" on his TV program and explained that that is a foul, that you need to get ball first before you hit. This guy never got ball, never.

Another call that you make in the middle of the game but not with the game on the line?

These two calls were chokes by the referees. Chokes! They saw things clearly, let fouls go that clearly created advantage and could have influenced the outcome of the national championship. When they say. "Let the players decide it" they do not mean that you excuse obvious fouls made in the course of over-the-top aggression and physical contact. If you don, then, you, the ref, decide it, not the players. Thakfully, the refs inexcusible calls at the end did not alter the outcome.

[diablesseblu]

Never had high hopes for the quality of the officiating in the championship .....once I saw that Ted Valentine had "earned" the honor of officiating.

[Channing]

Howard walked into the screen and lifted his folded forearms up and forward. Flagrant foul, not just in the middle of the game. What does that mean, foul in the middle of the game but not on the play that decides it? Nonsense.

Same deal on the Lance steal. A minute or so to go, Lance steals it, has control, calls time out, only before he does, the ref whistles "jump ball" only the only thing that got jumped was Lance; the guy just lept on him and didn't have a hand within a yard of the ball. Ronnie Nunn, chief of NBA referees, just reviewed that "play" on his TV program and explained that that is a foul, that you need to get ball first before you hit. This guy never got ball, never.

Another call that you make in the middle of the game but not with the game on the line?

These two calls were chokes by the referees. Chokes! They saw things clearly, let fouls go that clearly created advantage and could have influenced the outcome of the national championship. When they say. "Let the players decide it" they do not mean that you excuse obvious fouls made in the course of over-the-top aggression and physical contact. If you don, then, you, the ref, decide it, not the players. Thakfully, the refs inexcusible calls at the end did not alter the outcome.

I was actually curious about the call on Lance. On the one hand it was a jump ball and a tie up. On the other hand, they said that at some pt Duke had posession (as the shot clock restarted). Since Duke was calling timeout from the moment Lance hit the deck, how can you say Duke had posession at any point, but not grant a timeout?

[roywhite]

These two calls were chokes by the referees. Chokes! They saw things clearly, let fouls go that clearly created advantage and could have influenced the outcome of the national championship. When they say. "Let the players decide it" they do not mean that you excuse obvious fouls made in the course of over-the-top aggression and physical contact. If you don, then, you, the ref, decide it, not the players. Thakfully, the refs inexcusible calls at the end did not alter the outcome.

Gotta agree with you on this one.

The almost automatic alternate possession call on those loose ball scrambles is one of my pet peeves.

[BD80]

In interviews on Mike & Mike and Sportscenter this morning, Coach K referred to Kyle as getting "Blown Up." It sounded a little whiny, but I liked hearing him defending his player.

I would like to see the talking heads make more of a deal of this, if only to highlight how friggin tough Kyle is.

[Mr Blue Devil]

As long as we are talking bad calls, how about the phantom travel called on Singler when there should have been a blocking foul on Howard (and would have been his fifth)? Yet Hayward traveled two times going to the rim as though he were playing in the NBA!

I don't care about how the game was called, only because we won. Sounds bad I know.

But what I do care about is people constantly (and still after this game) claiming that Duke gets all the calls.

[UrinalCake]

I would feel so terrible if the championship had been decided on a call like that, if for no other reason than we would never hear the end of it from every Duke hater for all-time.

Don't worry, the Duke haters are still complaining - stating that the refs gave us this game, and that the only reason we won was because of an easy draw.

Lance's foul on that breakaway was another big call - it was totally the correct one; he was reaching for the ball and there was no intentional harm done at all. HOWEVER, that is the kind of play that is often called a technical just because of how it "looks." Not saying this is correct, but it happens. So in my mind we caught a break there.

[Mr Blue Devil]

Don't worry, the Duke haters are still complaining - stating that the refs gave us this game, and that the only reason we won was because of an easy draw.

Lance's foul on that breakaway was another big call - it was totally the correct one; he was reaching for the ball and there was no intentional harm done at all. HOWEVER, that is the kind of play that is often called a technical just because of how it "looks." Not saying this is correct, but it happens. So in my mind we caught a break there.

I could see that being called flagrant at the moment it happened.

But they made no call, then reviewed and they decided it was not. Was the right call to be made.

[MChambers]

Gotta agree with you on this one.

The almost automatic alternate possession call on those loose ball scrambles is one of my pet peeves.

My kids were yelling, and I had to tell them that whenever there is a loose ball scramble, one team gets it, the other team jumps on top, and the refs call an alternate possession. It's really stupid.

[alteran]

I was actually curious about the call on Lance. On the one hand it was a jump ball and a tie up. On the other hand, they said that at some pt Duke had posession (as the shot clock restarted). Since Duke was calling timeout from the moment Lance hit the deck, how can you say Duke had posession at any point, but not grant a timeout?

Yeah, I said the same thing when it happened-- either we had possession and get a timeout, or you don't reset the shot clock. Instead, Butler had their cake and ate it, too.

[hurley1]

it was obvious that singler's assignment on the play was to stick to his man like glue.......singler had him just where he wanted him and was coming at him on the angle to pick him up just before he got to half court and all of a sudden howard drifts into singler's lane and BOOM, blindsided singler........without a doubt a foul and a planned play by butler to shake the shooter free........definately should have neem called regardless of the time left on the clock........had the shot went in, it would have been a huge problem........bad job by refs........lance was going for the ball, the call was correct.......

[left_hook_lacey]

We should let it go. On a last second play that could decide the game, no ref wants to end it by calling an illegal screen on a half-court shot with 2 seconds left.

I promise you, that was not the only illegal/hard pick set in this game by either team, continuing to complain about it 2 days after WE WON the championship makes us look whiny. Don't give anyone fodder.

[hurley1]

We should let it go. On a last second play that could decide the game, no ref wants to end it by calling an illegal screen on a half-court shot with 2 seconds left.

I promise you, that was not the only illegal/hard pick set in this game by either team, continuing to complain about it 2 days after WE WON the championship makes us look whiny. Don't give anyone fodder.

i am certainly not whining, just calling it like it is........in the game of basketball a foul should be called ANYTIME one player takes unfair advantage of another player.......singler had as much right to guard against the shot as the shooter had to take the shot........by blowing singler up, it denied him his right to guard against the shot.......it's called a foul........and, the refs no call would have decided the national championship had that shot gone in......not what the game of basketball needs.....sometimes refs will let contact go in the last seconds of a game, however, this was a planned knock off of singler by butler to give the shooter an open shot....definately should have been called regardless of the time on the clock......

[DrChainsaw]

it was obvious that singler's assignment on the play was to stick to his man like glue.......singler had him just where he wanted him and was coming at him on the angle to pick him up just before he got to half court and all of a sudden howard drifts into singler's lane and BOOM, blindsided singler........without a doubt a foul and a planned play by butler to shake the shooter free........definately should have neem called regardless of the time left on the clock........had the shot went in, it would have been a huge problem........bad job by refs........lance was going for the ball, the call was correct.......

I wouldn't call it a planned play by Butler - that was the point of missing the 2nd free throw. Howard was doing the right & natural thing by setting the pick. To me it looked like a foul, I think Howard knew he had to set the screen to win the game and just didn't do it right. The foul should have been called, no matter what the time on the clock said. If that shot had gone in and the foul had not been called, I would have smashed my TV.

[diablesseblu]

I was discussing this with a Heel fan yesterday. He was appalled by the level of "letting them playness" in the title game. We agreed that we worry there will eventually be a life threatening injury in college bball...given how many "non calls" there are.

It wouldn't take much for a game to escalate to a Rudy T. type incident. Or I can imagine a grievous injury during play from some of the forearm shivers and basket undercutting that I've seen.

The NBA seems to be getting less violent (witness the outcry after the Bogut injury). The NCAA needs to proactively address level of physicality before, rather after, a tragic injury.

[DukeSean]

In interviews on Mike & Mike and Sportscenter this morning, Coach K referred to Kyle as getting "Blown Up." It sounded a little whiny, but I liked hearing him defending his player.

I would like to see the talking heads make more of a deal of this, if only to highlight how friggin tough Kyle is.

And here is the comment from Chad Ford's draft blog:
"I spoke with a number of GMs on Monday; most of them still have questions about Singler. They wonder who he'll guard in the NBA. They question his toughness. They doubt he's athletic enough." (emphasis added).

Seriously? I doubt there's a tougher guy out there than Singler. Guy practices hard, plays harder.

[ncexnyc]

Here's another prime example of people viewing a game with their Duke tinted glasses on.
It was just a little over a week ago some members on this board were so stoked about the "great screen" Brian laid on Kramer. Yet, now some members want to cry about this play. It's been give and take all year, with both Brian and Lance laying some really hard and sometimes moving screens. This time it was our player on the receiving end, live with it.

The same thing with our defense. We play some very intense in your face defense, with a lot of grabbing and hand checking, which we love to call tenacious defense, yet on Monday night we came-up against a team, which played very similar to us. Again, several people suddenly find this type of play unacceptable since we are on the receiving end and gripping about a lack of foul calls.

[DukieBoy]

I might be in the minority here, but I thought it was a perfectly legal pick. Didn't look like he leaned into it and definitely didn't put any elbows into it. I think Singler was just blindsided by it and it looked much worse than it, in fact, was.

[DukieBoy]

Here's another prime example of people viewing a game with their Duke tinted glasses on.
It was just a little over a week ago some members on this board were so stoked about the "great screen" Brian laid on Kramer. Yet, now some members want to cry about this play. It's been give and take all year, with both Brian and Lance laying some really hard and sometimes moving screens. This time it was our player on the receiving end, live with it.

The same thing with our defense. We play some very intense in your face defense, with a lot of grabbing and hand checking, which we love to call tenacious defense, yet on Monday night we came-up against a team, which played very similar to us. Again, several people suddenly find this type of play unacceptable since we are on the receiving end and gripping about a lack of foul calls.

Absolutely perfect example. This happens with every team though, but I think the Zoubek screen was 10x worse than the Howard screen

[grossbus]

i want to know what lance is doing back by the foul circle standing with his hands in the air. ???

[Mike Corey]

By rule, you can't raise your arms while setting the screen, and that's precisely what Howard did. Further, it was a completely useless screen. Singler was out of the play. To me, it looked like a getting-out-your-aggression screen that should have been whistled.

The more egregious non-call from the referees occurred in the scrum prior to Howard's missed fadeaway with 6 seconds left. Zoubek's leg was lifted on the ground (by Mack?) and he was essentially tackled. The ball went off his foot and it went to Butler in a play that could have cost Duke the game.

[alteran]

I might be in the minority here, but I thought it was a perfectly legal pick. Didn't look like he leaned into it and definitely didn't put any elbows into it. I think Singler was just blindsided by it and it looked much worse than it, in fact, was.

I was pretty outraged when I saw it, but I now think it looked a bit worse than it was. I guess that puts me between the two groups here.

Last night working out on my treadmill I watched it over and over a handful of times, and in slow-motion. I still think it was an ILLEGAL pick, but I no longer think it was a VICIOUS pick, or at least a viciously intended pick.

Howard was quickly moving (in Kyle's direction) to set the pick, and when he planted his feet he still had some significant forward momentum in his upper body. His arm/hand placement was bad for avoiding an illegal screen call. He noticeably leaned his shoulder into the contact (but not as much as I originally thought). And finally, he slightly pushes Kyle off him at the end-- that's an automatic whistle normally.

Even though I now think the pick was within striking distance of being technically legal, that would simply be called an illegal pick in normal circumstances. It might even be called a flagrant, although I don't think reviewing the tape would support that.

But these were not normal circumstances. I grudging think that the officials made the right call.

Particularly since the ball did not go in. :D

[BlueTeuf]

OK - some strong opinions here about the Howard pick. I was as curious as any how that pick would look upon review, but haven't seen any video that I felt shed much illumination.

Are you folks looking at something other than the CBS highlight or Youtube link that was posted earlier in this thread? Not enough there for me to draw any definitive conclusions. Yes, it seems Howard was raising his arms - but conclusive? Until I see something more, Howard and the refs get a pass on this from me.

I am intrigued why there isn't more. The answer is available on film. CBS must have had multiple camera angles recording that sequence. I've seen nothing but the one angle the producer chose at the moment. If the shot had gone in, would we have seen replays from other angles? Don't know; not a conspiracy theory - but I find it curious.

[juise]

Seriously? I doubt there's a tougher guy out there than Singler. Guy practices hard, plays harder.

I completely agree. Stength. Maybe. Toughness. That's an absolute joke. I can not think of any Duke who has taken more of a beating (except that there are a few who drew more charging fouls)... and he's always performed at a high level. Has he ever missed time due to injury?

[DukeDevil]

The more egregious non-call from the referees occurred in the scrum prior to Howard's missed fadeaway with 6 seconds left. Zoubek's leg was lifted on the ground (by Mack?) and he was essentially tackled. The ball went off his foot and it went to Butler in a play that could have cost Duke the game.

I agree with this. While I think it was an illegal pick, it was hard to say if it was flagrant, I think my duke emotions and seeing singler turn like he did made it look really bad, but it's hard to say that it was straight up flagrant. I think in an end game situation like that a flagrant is all you can call, and I don't blame the refs for not calling what seemed to be an illegal pick but not a vicious foul in that situation.

Additionally, there have been plenty of picks and screen we set that I know in my heart of hearts would piss off opposing fans, and in an attempt to not be a hypocrite I don't want to hard on that particular play.

That being said, that turnover they called off zoubs foot was just BS. I remember seeing zoubs fall and (wow...if you told me a year ago I'd be saying something like this about the Z-Man...) thinking "what? he just fell of his own accord??? He's a Rock! That's BS!" and that was from the nosebleed seats in the stadium. Seeing it in the replays confirms what I thought, they straight up took his leg out from under him. That call was completely off.

[oldnavy]

I completely agree. Stength. Maybe. Toughness. That's an absolute joke. I can not think of any Duke who has taken more of a beating (except that there are a few who drew more charging fouls)... and he's always performed at a high level. Has he ever missed time due to injury?

NBA GM's make mistakes every year in the draft... lots of mistakes... so I would not worry too much about their assessment of Kyle's toughness or lack thereof. He is plenty tough.

[Channing]

By rule, you can't raise your arms while setting the screen, and that's precisely what Howard did. Further, it was a completely useless screen. Singler was out of the play. To me, it looked like a getting-out-your-aggression screen that should have been whistled.

The more egregious non-call from the referees occurred in the scrum prior to Howard's missed fadeaway with 6 seconds left. Zoubek's leg was lifted on the ground (by Mack?) and he was essentially tackled. The ball went off his foot and it went to Butler in a play that could have cost Duke the game.

didnt Zoubek throw Howard to the ground on that play as well?

[DukieBoy]

The more egregious non-call from the referees occurred in the scrum prior to Howard's missed fadeaway with 6 seconds left. Zoubek's leg was lifted on the ground (by Mack?) and he was essentially tackled. The ball went off his foot and it went to Butler in a play that could have cost Duke the game.

Again, I have to disagree. Maybe he was lifted off the ground, but if you watch the play, Z swings and hits Howard in the face with his arm while flailing for the ball. If you don't call that a foul, you can't call Z getting hit a foul

[JasonEvans]

Some folks in the mainstream media have talked about the Howard pick...

Joe Posnanski, who wrote a truly brilliant column (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/joe_posnanski/04/06/duke.title/1.html) about the game, says --


Butler had one more bit of sorcery left. Instead of panicking, Hayward grabbed the rebound and dribbled quickly to his right. And instead of panicking, Butler's Howard set a crushing pick on Singler, a certain foul except no referee is calling a foul there. That pick cleared Hayward, left him alone to shoot the final shot.

--Jason "no way that foul gets called... ever" Evans

[DevilHorns]

Some folks in the mainstream media have talked about the Howard pick...

Joe Posnanski, who wrote a truly brilliant column (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/joe_posnanski/04/06/duke.title/1.html) about the game, says --



--Jason "no way that foul gets called... ever" Evans

Coach K on Mike and Mike radio this morning said that it was an obvious foul, but there would be no way any ref would make that call.

[DukieBoy]

Some folks in the mainstream media have talked about the Howard pick...

Joe Posnanski, who wrote a truly brilliant column (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/joe_posnanski/04/06/duke.title/1.html) about the game, says --



--Jason "no way that foul gets called... ever" Evans

In the same regards, you can't say that the foul would have been called in another time because Hayward wouldn't have been running full speed to half court and players would be calling out to Singler that a pick was coming

[nyesq83]

I might be in the minority here, but I thought it was a perfectly legal pick. Didn't look like he leaned into it and definitely didn't put any elbows into it. I think Singler was just blindsided by it and it looked much worse than it, in fact, was.

The way I heard it, I thought K said Singler was "Blown Out"

[greybeard]

The way I heard it, I thought K said Singler was "Blown Out"

That was this morning. Immdeiately after the game, it was put better, "Kyle got killed."

K said no way he was letting the game go to overtime. One of the reasons was a euphomism for what I saw happening throughout the game and especially down the stretch. He said that one of the reasons he didn't want to go into overtime was "the David and Golliath factor," which translates into, Butler was going to get away with murder. Lance stole it with a minute to go, had control and was screaming for a time out, a Buttler guy dove on him without a hand coming within a yard of the ball and the ref calls a "jump ball." Say what?

K in his rye way then proceeded to flesh out the "D & G comment. He says with a twinge of the glee of a guy who has been a fight and comes out the winner something like, my poetic license, "You did see that my star Kyle got blown out on that last play, adding rhetorically but "I suppose you don't call it in that situation." Anybody think that he meant that? How could he. If not in that situation, then when? It lead to an open look for the National Championship; 2 shots and the ball. That's the rule and it is a crucially important one. They didn't call it.

K said everybody on his team had their man. Howard walked straight into Kyle's path and then blasted him with a double forearm. It was a stupid play made in the heat of the frenzy that followed because, prepared as they might have been for a Zoubek miss, they were not prepared for the daring that K put on them. A stupid, stupid play by a kid who was letting his aggression get the better of him the entire game, even Kellog commented on it on one or two occasions, which I think is against the rules for announcers since they so rarely say anything of controversy except if it is against Duke.

The "D & G" factor that K didn't trust.

You want another one. The fourth on Zoubek, which would have been the fifth on Howard. Howard drove from deep in the corner, Zoubek got there, was stopped, and most importantly did not lean his torso. He was nailed dead in his sterum. Okay, the toughest call in basketball. Dead in the sternum without leaning, his body was straight up. Unless Z has no skelleton he was there first and set and that was a charge. Tough still has right answers sometimes and this one was wrong. Dead in the sterum with his torso straight up. Only one call permitted when such contact is made and it was not the one the ref chose.

The other two weren't tough, they were just plain WRONG. K had seen enough before Kyle was "blown out" to let the refs have a hand in an overtime outcome.

I think also that the Smith and Singler misses in the last minute showed they were spent. duke makes those shots; that is the way they have been closing people out. No, K wanted no part of OT. Also, with 4 fouls, Z and L were playing on borrowed time.

The play was a foul that had to be called; that's not me talking; that's K talking putting it ever so graciously after having explained that OT was not an option because he didn't trust the refs.

[magjayran]

The more egregious non-call from the referees occurred in the scrum prior to Howard's missed fadeaway with 6 seconds left. Zoubek's leg was lifted on the ground (by Mack?) and he was essentially tackled. The ball went off his foot and it went to Butler in a play that could have cost Duke the game.

Yeah but before that Zoubs clearly used his arm and elbow to clear out for the rebound. Very blatant. I think we actually caught a break there.

Anyway, y'all can complain about that screen not being called all you want but it's pointless. That call will NEVER be made in that situation. We need to celebrate the fact that the refs were "letting them play" and Duke won. A year ago Duke loses games that were played that physical. This year we won pretty much all of them.

[ACCBBallFan]

Good point about Duke team being pretty exhausted. Zoubs had already played 31 minutes, his career high never more than 20 in prior seasons, and both he and Lance had been playing with 4 fouls.

http://goduke.statsgeek.com/basketball-m/players/career-highs.php?playerid=520

Minutes
Rk Date Opponent Minutes
1. 4/5/2010 vs. Butler 31
2. 2/17/2010 at Miami 29
2/21/2010 VIRGINIA TECH 29
3/3/2010 at Maryland 29
5. 3/13/2010 vs. Miami 28
3/14/2010 vs. Georgia Tech 28
7. 4/3/2010 vs. West Virginia 27
8. 12/29/2009 LONG BEACH STATE 25
9. 2/6/2010 at Boston College 24
3/26/2010 vs. Purdue 24


But same can be said for Howard and Jukes each having four fouls and Coach Stevens doing a masterful job alternating them on Offense/Defense.

Plumlees were well rested and much taller had it gone OT and a few more big guys fouled out on each team.

[Jason W]

I think the still shot someone posted said it all. His left shoulder is up and leaned in. Also look where Kyle falls. Doesn't look like he ran into a wall, looks like he got clotheslined.

[hurley1]

I think the still shot someone posted said it all. His left shoulder is up and leaned in. Also look where Kyle falls. Doesn't look like he ran into a wall, looks like he got clotheslined.


without a doubt a foul.....i screamed at the t.v. as soon as it happened.....saw it clearly........and, i am certain, seeing that singler had allowed howard no room to operate all night, one of the coaches said to him......" get singler off of him before he shoots the ball "........i will always believe it was planned and flagrant............AND, let me ask you this.......had singler not been blown up, and had he run up behind howard just as howard was releasing the ball and took his head off, causing the ball to go straight up in the air with less than a second on the clock, would that foul have been called ??????.......you bet ya it would....3 foul shots, needing to make 2 to win a ring........it has to work both ways....refs will let you band underneath with the clock running down, everybody agrees with that, but, this was entirely different.......don't confuse the two......the foul should have definately been called........2 shots for duke and the ball........;)..anything other than that is not good for basketball......

[hurley1]

Here's another prime example of people viewing a game with their Duke tinted glasses on.
It was just a little over a week ago some members on this board were so stoked about the "great screen" Brian laid on Kramer. Yet, now some members want to cry about this play. It's been give and take all year, with both Brian and Lance laying some really hard and sometimes moving screens. This time it was our player on the receiving end, live with it.

The same thing with our defense. We play some very intense in your face defense, with a lot of grabbing and hand checking, which we love to call tenacious defense, yet on Monday night we came-up against a team, which played very similar to us. Again, several people suddenly find this type of play unacceptable since we are on the receiving end and gripping about a lack of foul calls.

kramer got fouled........no question about it.......you can't show me anywhere i have said that kramer didn't get fouled........i have only mentioned one foul call, and it was a no call.......one that definately should have been called.......overall, i thought the refs were excellent,but, they almost caused that blue ribbion performance to be ruined by that last play.......you will never convince me that fould should have not been called.......i would say the same thing had it been us setting the pick.......it is what it is.......

[hurley1]

if you know what to look for, it's extremely easy to see in this video.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nDmW988_5Jg

[greybeard]

Coach K on Mike and Mike radio this morning said that it was an obvious foul, but there would be no way any ref would make that call.

Just before that K said that there was no way he was going to overtime and gave as one of his reasons the David and Gollaith factor. As I understand it, K was saying that the refs were calling crucial plays Butler's way. I have explained other reasons that make K's choice compelling. But, No. 54, was playing way rough and clearly charged into Zoubek's sternum but the ref called the foul on Z, given Z his fourth rather than Howard his fifth.

The steal Lance made at midcourt with less than a minute to play lead to an incomprhensible call. Lance disrupted the dribble, scootched the ball up as he fell and simultaneously yelled for "Time." The Butler just dove on Lance, no reach for the ball, his hand literally not within a yard of the ball, the ref standing right in front of the play. No time out, no foul against Butler, a jump ball. There was no jump ball. Is this a play that you never call either?

I don't think that K meant it when he said that foul is never called. I think he was underscoring one reason that he chose to make his stand on the last play, and had no intention to going to overtime. I believe he was being witty, ironical, making his point to a mindless media that assumed that he did not consider the implications of the choice he had made. The failure of the ref to make a blatent foul call when one occurred unscored K's point; no way he was playing overtime. It would end on that play one way or the other.

Howard was using his hands and arms and body on defense and the boards that were over-the-top and was called for only a few of them. I think that he lost his poise early and often and throughout. But then again, isn't the story that Stevens let the kid play against Mich St even after he had been taken off with a concussion, and then played him in this game because "the doctors had cleared him." I do not think that the kid was himself; I thought he played recklessly; I think that he is damn lucky that that collision with Singler did not leave him with permanent brain damage.

In my view, the foul needs to be called. You don't get a pass for a flagrant, violent play because it came at a stupid time.

If you say that Singler was out of the play, that is not what I heard K say. He said that his guys were on their men; Hayward did nothing to shake Singler; Howard did, preventing any opportunity Kyle might have had to make Hayward alter his shot.

This was not a judgment call. It was a flagrant foul, by a guy who should have been fouled out at the 10 minute mark and probably should not have been on the court at all.

[greybeard]

As an aside, did anyone else notice that K said not one word to the refs during the entire game. I think he is fed up with the Duke hate as much as you guys are. I think that that is, as I said earlier, a big part of why he would not permit it to go to overtime. If his team looses, the heads, including Mr. Feinstein, self-verify that oft repeated trashing of the Duke program, this team in particular and say that they were right all of time, depriving K's team of the credit they deserve. This is exactly what would have happened.

I do not think that you can take what K said about that illegal play never getting called in that circumstance--after the game, when asked about the free throw decision, K ignored the question and pointed out how Kyle "got killed on the ensuing play." Ditto for the Mike and Mike interview, when asked after he offered his initial terse explanation, he made the comment about david and golliath and with an ironic almost whimsical tone said, "Kyle got blown up" on that play. These terms were put out with a bit of whimsey but they speak volumes. He clearly thought that the refs were not doing their job and it was going to cost his guys, it already had, and thus he chose to end the game on his terms, forcing a guarded heave. The refs blew the call, but K is giving the press nothing at all to Duke-bash on. Don't worry, they found something but it was by his choice directed at him, to which with a figurative wink, he shot back each time with a terse, "It worked!" Indeed it did.

Duke won with not a thing negatively that anyone can say about it. It took out the team that took out Syracuse, blew them out, that took out KU, and took out Mich St, in a game that Izzo said Butler had gotten away with murder. They almost did with Duke, only K's daring decision making and his team's ability to make plays, they made them all going down the stretch, prevented the injustice.

[DevilHorns]

What if Singler stayed down after the play? What if he was injured?

A "normal" player would have been out for at least 10 seconds. Kyle is the terminator, I am convinced.

If he did stay down, I'm sure Nance or Kellogg would have commented on the screen and said it was illegal right then and there... that would change some perception around the universe that Duke always has the refs in their pocket

[burnspbesq]

The screen Howard laid on Singler was blatantly illegal. He leaned in and brought both forearms up into Kyle.

That said, didn't we all wish Alison Bales would light up Ivory Latta that way, just once.

[greybeard]

kramer got fouled........no question about it.......you can't show me anywhere i have said that kramer didn't get fouled........i have only mentioned one foul call, and it was a no call.......one that definately should have been called.......overall, i thought the refs were excellent,but, they almost caused that blue ribbion performance to be ruined by that last play.......you will never convince me that fould should have not been called.......i would say the same thing had it been us setting the pick.......it is what it is.......

Kramer was slamming into screeners all night, especially Zoubek, hard and low and then feigning hurt. He was playing football and looking to create enough collisions with the hope that some of his creation would result in fouls being called on Duke. It was a poor show, beneath most coaches but not that Dude from Purdue who makes my skin crawl.

Very tough game to play and to ref. Duke had to resort to sixth-grade player dominance strategy to put Purdue away. As mentioned at the time, Scheyer would dribble around the exterior from one side to the other. Purdue's tactic all game was to push the dribbler away from the basket. But to do that the dribbler has to try to move toward the basket. Scheyer just ran around with a defender or two trying to find what to hit. When Scheyer finally saw an alley, he changed speeds, accelerated from the slow pace he was maintaining, got past the defender and took 6th grade dipsy doodle shots to finish.

Purdue made the game ugly and almost had a chance until K told his guys they were standing up too straight, that they had to adopt a defensive solid stance to withstand the pushing and then attack. Thankfully it worked.

I don't know enough about how the rule book reads to say whether that body up defense, get under the guy and push his legs and his hips with your hips and thighs is legal or not, but would have to think not.

Kramer took it to a different level, he used his thighs and hips to hit the screener low, his shoulder to hit him in the ribs, and then especially against Z screens flailed his arms that Z was impeding illegally his progress, which was not true. He got none of those calls, appropriately. That he didn't get called for more fouls still has me confused. But, Duke was favored, Purdue had a sympathy factor, and Duke is Duke.

In sum, with all due respect, you are talking nonsense here.

[the_grad_student]

If you start at about 25 seconds, you can see it from a baseline angle. Obviously, he doesn't just run into Howard's body (as in a legal screen). It looks like Howard shoving/elbowing Singler pretty high on his body to send him spinning to the ground. Dirty but I wouldn't expect it called.

http://www.youtube.com/user/DukeBluePlanet?feature=mhw5#p/u/0/cchAZ3MEjEk

[mgtr]

I do think that Howard fouled in the last seconds, but Howard fouled far more often than he was called in many games. He is terrific on offense, but not so good on defense, so he fouls. Zoubek, however, also fouled on defense, and in part that is his game.
If Hayward's shot had gone in (and he is a great player, much like Singler) then the refs would have been under some real criticism for not calling the Howard pick.
I sure hope we don't play Butler next year until the NCAAs. They will be good, and will be on a mission. In that regard, I wish their coach would move on, but I do not expect that he will. He needs to finish the job he started. The Butler hierarachy needs to decide whether they want to try to build a great BB program, or just sink back into the morass. I second Coach K's view that Stevens should stay at Butler to build the program, but that he ought to get a big raise. Sometimes, however, that is hard to do because the faculty thinks it is more important to add another Humanities program. Sad.

[hurley1]

if you simply watch howard's feet in this video, it will be a no brainer that it was a foul and a foul that should have been called........simply advance each frame of the video one by one and you will see that howard immediately runs to half court and then slams on the brakes.......his right foot is directly over the letter D in the half court logo.......THEN, he moves back towards the duke basket and contacts singler at a point where his right foot is a long way from the logo.......just watch his feet, they tell everything.......he purposely moved into singler's path and took his head off.........it's right here......

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nDmW988_5Jg

[tele]

Perhaps part of the reason K is pointing out the foul on Singler on that illegal Howard pick, is because of all the questions and second guessing he is getting on the decision to miss the second free throw. So, if Singler isn't fouled on the pick, Hayward doesn't even get a clean look and maybe the last shot isn't even close, and the decision to miss the free throw isn't second guessed so much. But Singler gets clobbered and the guy he was assigned to guard gets off an uncontested last second missed shot.

So Coach K is saying if you want to question the decision, then question the uncalled foul on the pick too. Not to mention, the uncalled tackle and traveling call on Singler earlier, that cost duke 3 points. If you have those kind of calls going against you at critical times downs the stretch of a game, if 2 of your veteran players are in serious foul trouble, do you really want to play 5 more minutes of overtime in a hostile road game? No, you miss the free throw and try and win the game with your defense right there.

The uncalled foul on the Singler Pick just helps prove K made the right decision to miss the second free throw. Few coaches would make this decision, few coaches have 4 NCs.

[_Gary]

I really appreciate all of greybeard's comments on the third page of this thread. Initially I really hated the call for Z to intentionally miss the 2nd free throw. But after reading the comments Coach made I not only completely understand his reasoning for telling Z to miss but I also agree with the call for Z to miss. Now that the game is a few days old I feel I can say that there's no doubt in my mind we were getting shafted on calls - throughout the game, but especially toward the end. Coach K saw this and realized it was now or never. I love it and just wish the idiotic media would take off the blinders as it pertains to stuff like this.

Greybeard also hits it on the head with his belief that Coach is also sick of the "Duke hate/gets all the calls" bull and I'm hoping he can find some way to help reverse this trend. I'm not sure what the answer is, but something really does need to be done because I do think we are seeing this mentality begin to affect even the officiating in the games. It could have cost us a national championship. Thankfully it did not. But we might not be so fortunate next time around.

Gary

[Inonehand]

I do believe the screen was illegal...without a doubt. But I do appreciate that the kid tried to set one. Without a timeout, we decided to miss the ft, Butler big men allowed the right guy to rebound, Zoubek provided initial containment, Kyle got into GREAT (unlike those who said he was in poor position...what? did you want a foul called?) position to run him up the sideline and contest the shot from a safe distance, AND Howard came back to try and free their shooter. These two teams are well-coached.

Lots of fouls in this game could have been called, some that were could have gone another way. The one thing that irked me the most...Kellogg going on and on about Scheyer taking a charge (pretty sure he said at least once that was a bad call ;)) and then somehow thinking the travel on Singler was the right call. There is no way in the world you can have that take and be considered impartial. No way.

[Udaman]

Obviously there are missed and bad calls in a game. My frustration with this game is that the refs seemed to allow some serious contact inside, and then would call touch fouls on the perimeter (but not consistently). I know one Butler player got called for one of those near the end of the game, and it wasn't fair given what had happened throughout (nor were the ones that seemed to go against Duke when Hayward kept getting to the free throw line).

But there were 6 calls that really, really stood out to me, and 4 of them definitely went in Butler's favor, one went in Duke's, and the other really could have gone either way, but the call made was terrible. They are

1) First half, Singler slashes to the basket for a layup that went in. He got bumped making the move, and then on the replay got absolutely raked across his arms by Butler. 100% a foul. The ref under the basket missed it completely. Terrible no call. No excuse not to call it. Butler's favor

2) First half, Butler shoots the ball and misses and the rebound goes high up. Lance Thomas jumps up for it, and has it, and the Butler player comes crashing in, banging bodies with Lance, which causes him to lose control of the ball and it slips out of bounds. Butler's ball, and they then score. Again, just a blatant foul and no call. This is the one where I slapped the table in the bar and yelled, "That's a foul! Call it!" Butler's favor.

3) Scheyer's charge that he drew. On replay it certainly looked like he was not fully set. I think it should have been a block. Took away a Butler basket. Duke's favor.

4) Singler's travel. This is the one that could have gone either way...but what it was not was a travel. There was contact, and either it was Hayward causing him to slip, or Singler crashing into Hayward. But a travel is a weak call there. Personally, I thought Hayward cut into Singler...but Singler was a bit out of control there as well. Could have gone either way.

5) Jump ball with Thomas. As others have said, the Butler guy jumped on Thomas (foul), Duke clearly had possession, enough to make the shot clock restart for Butler, and every Duke player was calling time out, but they didn't give it to us, instead jump ball when their guy never really had his hands on it. Bad calls, all around. Advantage Butler

6) The pick at the end. This one gets me the most. It was a vicious moving pick with his arms up, and should have 100% been called a foul. Go to the rule book (linked here)

http://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/BR09.pdf

Section 4, 59 states "A player shall not....take a position so close to a moving opponent that this opponent cannot avoid contact by stopping or changing direction."

In other words, you can't set a pick on a person who is running at full speed by sliding up to him in a manner that there is no way he could have avoided hitting you. That is EXACTLY what Howard did.

Also, it says that a screener should

"stay within his or her vertical plane" Howard was still moving forward, and edged forward.

Then in the rules, Appendix III, Section 2, Point 6 (and this is the key one)

A foul shall be called when....the screener sets a blind screen (outside the visual field) on a moving defender and doesn't allow him/her ample time to stop or change directions, usually one to two strides.

First the screen was moving. Howard had not completely set, and his momentum was carrying him forward, and he leaned into it. That's a foul. But people could argue with that one. Maybe he was there. Maybe he was set. The angle is hard to see. I don't agree with them, but they could at least argue ie.

What they cannot argue is that Kyle had no chance to avoid the screen. None. It was a blind pick that gave Kyle no opportunity to avoid it, and no chance to go around it. Even is someone had yelled out at the top of their lungs - "Screen!", Kyle still could have done nothing to avoid it because Howard slid up to him with Kyle and full speed and planted right in front of him.

Absolute foul. Worst miss of the entire game, in my opinion.

As others have said - thankfully, it didn't matter.

[Danke Shane]

While we're talking about Howard, did anyone else notice his pathetic attempt at talking trash to LT before Butler tried to inbound the ball with ~15 seconds left? Granted, I'm making the assumption it was trash talk, but you can tell by the look on his face that he was trying to get under LT's skin. LT completely ignored him and just turned around and said something to Z at the corner.

Howard is a waste of space who tries to make up for his lack of skills by hacking and taking cheap shots. Seeing his pube-stached face sprawled out no the floor in agony as Duke celebrates the championship forever immortalized on the SI cover will help me to get over that clothesline on Singler.

[DukeGirl4ever]

While we're talking about Howard, did anyone else notice his pathetic attempt at talking trash to LT before Butler tried to inbound the ball with ~15 seconds left? Granted, I'm making the assumption it was trash talk, but you can tell by the look on his face that he was trying to get under LT's skin. LT completely ignored him and just turned around and said something to Z at the corner.

Howard is a waste of space who tries to make up for his lack of skills by hacking and taking cheap shots. Seeing his pube-stached face sprawled out no the floor in agony as Duke celebrates the championship forever immortalized on the SI cover will help me to get over that clothesline on Singler.

Yes, I noticed that too, and I've been trying to figure out what he was saying. I think he said, "Switch it," either referring to LT and Zoubs switching places so Zoubs wasn't on the ball out of bounds, or telling him to switch screens trying to get LT to do that knowing they were looking for the roll to the bucket.

[fogey]

In addition to what looked like a malicious cheap shot on Kyle, it seems Howard gets away with a Hansblough type travel on his post spin move. I was going to suggest WOJO work with Miles/Mason on replicating the move, as it is impressive to see Howard spin and explode to the hoop, until I replayed his move against us in the Championship game (around the 14 minute mark of the second half).

If anyone has the tape, please tell me how 3 steps post dribble is not a travel. THAT in my opinion is why the move is effective and he is able to extend so far toward the basket post dribble.

If he was graduating, or leaving early, it would be fine for the NBA, but if he stays it is unfair to allow him to train the refs to allow him an unfair advantage, much as Hansbrough did for four years.

[hurley1]

Kramer was slamming into screeners all night, especially Zoubek, hard and low and then feigning hurt. He was playing football and looking to create enough collisions with the hope that some of his creation would result in fouls being called on Duke. It was a poor show, beneath most coaches but not that Dude from Purdue who makes my skin crawl.

Very tough game to play and to ref. Duke had to resort to sixth-grade player dominance strategy to put Purdue away. As mentioned at the time, Scheyer would dribble around the exterior from one side to the other. Purdue's tactic all game was to push the dribbler away from the basket. But to do that the dribbler has to try to move toward the basket. Scheyer just ran around with a defender or two trying to find what to hit. When Scheyer finally saw an alley, he changed speeds, accelerated from the slow pace he was maintaining, got past the defender and took 6th grade dipsy doodle shots to finish.

Purdue made the game ugly and almost had a chance until K told his guys they were standing up too straight, that they had to adopt a defensive solid stance to withstand the pushing and then attack. Thankfully it worked.

I don't know enough about how the rule book reads to say whether that body up defense, get under the guy and push his legs and his hips with your hips and thighs is legal or not, but would have to think not.

Kramer took it to a different level, he used his thighs and hips to hit the screener low, his shoulder to hit him in the ribs, and then especially against Z screens flailed his arms that Z was impeding illegally his progress, which was not true. He got none of those calls, appropriately. That he didn't get called for more fouls still has me confused. But, Duke was favored, Purdue had a sympathy factor, and Duke is Duke.

In sum, with all due respect, you are talking nonsense here.

i believe you are overlooking that i am talking about 2 different situations with this post.......the pick on kramer ( it was a foul ) and the pick on singler ( also a foul )......trust me, i know my stuff, i should after 30 plus years being involved in this game.......;)

[ncexnyc]

If I didn't know better I'd say I was at IC. This thread has gotten really lame with all the whining about the refs.

[DukeCrow]

No joke. What happened to winning with class and "Next Play?"

Can't imagine what this thread would be like if we had lost....

[DukieBoy]

Not sure if you guys realize this, but we won the national title. I think everyone needs to agree to disagree and go celebrate.

[DukeAppWV]

Howard executed a great peel-back block on the punt return - Oh, wrong sport
----

[fogey]

Sorry, should have anticipated the thought police descending on this thread. However, celebrating our team's magnificent accomplishment should not foreclose thoughtful analysis/comment regarding oncourt violations in a thread entitled "the pick on Singler". Perhaps those who are offended by it should resist dispensing lectures, and go focus on other threads.:D

[hurley1]

howard executed a great peel-back block on the punt return - oh, wrong sport
----

bingo !!!!!!!!!

[Adrian]

Given the obvious fouls not called by the referees late in the game enumerated on this thread by others, I find the foul call that Zoubek was fouled by by #1 on the Butler team after rebounding Hayward's fadeaway at the end inexplicable. Butler player #1 was behind Zoubek and merely put his left hand on Zoubek's left arm/shoulder and his right hand on Zoubek's right hip. That was all. He didn't apply any force, didn't actually grab Zoubek or attempt to turn him. Given all of the aggressive hand checking the refs allowed not to mention to blatant fouls that went uncalled, including one earlier in the second half in which Howard appeared to be literally climbing Zoubek's back as Zoubek fell to the floor, how could Butler #1 merely touching Zoubek from behind be called a foul? Zoubek and other Duke players were grabbed, pushed, shoved, and climbed upon aggressively all game without fouls being called, and yet the referees were willing to call a foul on Butler #1 merely for touching Zoubek from behind? It's absurd. Calling that foul, which entailed stopping the clock, advantaged Butler; yet any one of a serious of fouls at game's end that should have been called against Butler, which would obviously have been to Duke's advantage, were not called by the officials. Butler #1's laying of hands on Zoubek from behind was the weakest infraction by a Butler player that could have been called during the games final minutes an possibly the entire second half if not the whole game; yet it was called while a long series of obvious fouls on plays that were consequential to the game and posed some physical risk to the player fouled were ignored. This is inexplicable. That foul on Butler #1 for laying his hands on Zoubek never should have been called, play never should have been stopped, Zoubek never should have gone to the free throw line, and the game should have ended right then with the clock expiring as Zoubek held the ball after the rebound. The one foul against Butler that disadvantaged Duke was called while none of the fouls against Butler that could have been called to Duke's benefit were not. I understand the concept of not calling fouls at the end of the game--of letting the players play and not getting in their way (although I disagree with it)--but strict adherence to that approach would include not calling such a weak if not phantom ticky-tack hand touch foul. If such a foul can be called, it's absurd that none of the other blatant ones were. The officiating logic was capricious and appeared to be biased in favor of Butler.

[DukeAppWV]

Given the obvious fouls not called by the referees late in the game enumerated on this thread by others, I find the foul call that Zoubek was fouled by by #1 on the Butler team after rebounding Hayward's fadeaway at the end inexplicable. Butler player #1 was behind Zoubek and merely put his left hand on Zoubek's left arm/shoulder and his right hand on Zoubek's right hip. That was all. He didn't apply any force, didn't actually grab Zoubek or attempt to turn him. Given all of the aggressive hand checking the refs allowed not to mention to blatant fouls that went uncalled, including one earlier in the second half in which Howard appeared to be literally climbing Zoubek's back as Zoubek fell to the floor, how could Butler #1 merely touching Zoubek from behind be called a foul? Zoubek and other Duke players were grabbed, pushed, shoved, and climbed upon aggressively all game without fouls being called, and yet the referees were willing to call a foul on Butler #1 merely for touching Zoubek from behind? It's absurd. Calling that foul, which entailed stopping the clock, advantaged Butler; yet any one of a serious of fouls at game's end that should have been called against Butler, which would obviously have been to Duke's advantage, were not called by the officials. Butler #1's laying of hands on Zoubek from behind was the weakest infraction by a Butler player that could have been called during the games final minutes an possibly the entire second half if not the whole game; yet it was called while a long series of obvious fouls on plays that were consequential to the game and posed some physical risk to the player fouled were ignored. This is inexplicable. That foul on Butler #1 for laying his hands on Zoubek never should have been called, play never should have been stopped, Zoubek never should have gone to the free throw line, and the game should have ended right then with the clock expiring as Zoubek held the ball after the rebound. The one foul against Butler that disadvantaged Duke was called while none of the fouls against Butler that could have been called to Duke's benefit were not. I understand the concept of not calling fouls at the end of the game--of letting the players play and not getting in their way (although I disagree with it)--but strict adherence to that approach would include not calling such a weak if not phantom ticky-tack hand touch foul. If such a foul can be called, it's absurd that none of the other blatant ones were. The officiating logic was capricious and appeared to be biased in favor of Butler.

Per the last call - Refs know the game of basketball and they know in that situation team B (Butler) will have to foul - anticipation, I guess - anyway if I'm not mistaken if a defender puts 2 hands on the player it is a foul ----

[Inonehand]

Per the last call - Refs know the game of basketball and they know in that situation team B (Butler) will have to foul - anticipation, I guess - anyway if I'm not mistaken if a defender puts 2 hands on the player it is a foul ----

I believe Adrian was making a joke.

[Indoor66]

I believe Adrian was making a joke.

I hope it was a joke after having read through that tortured post!

[gus]

3) Scheyer's charge that he drew. On replay it certainly looked like he was not fully set. I think it should have been a block. Took away a Butler basket. Duke's favor.

I don't have a copy of the game, but what do you mean by "he was not fully set"? Drawing a charge does not require being motionless, nor does it require both feet being planted. Once defensive position is established, the guard is allowed to shift laterally and is not required to have two feet on the playing surface.

[Udaman]

Huh? What are you talking about.

This is about setting a screen. You have to be set. IF you are moving, then the rules clearly state that you both must be moving in the same direction, and that there is only a foul if the trailing player moves into you.

[gus]

Huh? What are you talking about.

This is about setting a screen. You have to be set. IF you are moving, then the rules clearly state that you both must be moving in the same direction, and that there is only a foul if the trailing player moves into you.

I was responding to this: "Scheyer's charge that he drew", which I took to mean Scheyer drawing a foul as a defender on a player with the ball. That's what people normally call a charge.

[DukieBoy]

I still think a lot of you guys are looking at this through a biased opinion. I consider myself a neutral fan in this scenario as I've been both a Butler fan and Duke fan for a long time.

Howard did slightly lean into the screen. But you guys have blown this up to make it look like the most blatant illegal screen ever executed.

Does anyone remember that 2 weeks ago, Z was getting praised for setting a more illegal screen on Kramer that knocked him out?

I'm not trying to sound like a douche or something right now, but this is why people tend to hate Duke fans. We praise our players for doing wrong, then go crazy when an opponent does it to us.

How did you feel when Nolan got screened so hard he missed the following game last year?

Now, did you feel the same way when Z screen Kramer so hard he was knocked out? Didn't think so.

[Duvall]

I
I'm not trying to sound like a douche or something right now, but this is why people tend to hate Duke fans. We praise our players for doing wrong, then go crazy when an opponent does it to us.


Given that all fans do this, I'm inclined to think that it's really not.

[-bdbd]

I still think a lot of you guys are looking at this through a biased opinion. I consider myself a neutral fan in this scenario as I've been both a Butler fan and Duke fan for a long time.

I'm not trying to sound like a douche or something right now, but this is why people tend to hate Duke fans. We praise our players for doing wrong, then go crazy when an opponent does it to us.
How did you feel when Nolan got screened so hard he missed the following game last year?

Now, did you feel the same way when Z screen Kramer so hard he was knocked out? Didn't think so.

See bolded comment above. So, you mean to say that we are EXACTLY like all other fan groups??? Actually spend a little time on IC or the KY fan sites and you will see quickly that the level of whining about such things on this board is nowhere near the level of most other fan sites. The decorum here is important to most posters - not so elsewhere.

Honestly, that phrase "this is why other fans hate Duke fans..." is one of the most overused phrases on these boards. (1) No it isn't why they hate Duke, as stated above, b/c EVERYONE does this. (2) The reasons for Duke hate are numerous and varied and mostly tied to either Duke having wronged them or their team (read "b-e-a-t") at some point, anti-winners (anti-Yankee?) sentiment, or some mis-informed perception of rich-kid school/entitlement attitude/unfair advantage (usually based on quite oft-repeated untrue stereotypes by those with ulterior motives).

The "severity"/impact of the screen contact is not relevant, generally, to whether a moving pic is called. In the case of the Smith facial run-in with the 6-9 250 lb MD Center's forearms, it was nasty (and their fans' reaction absolutely classless - "re-play! re-play! re-play!") but that very rarely gets called b/c his feet WERE planted even though he - this is the nasty part - clearly leaned into Nolan at contact.

Zoubek's charge-taken again "looked bad" b/c the offensive player got injured. But the announcers showed, several times in slow-mo that it was probably the right call - Z arriving first and being established. BTW, the injury wan't b/c of the contact with Z, but on the O-player's cut to avoid Z or on landing. Pretty much any other team - i.e. those w/o legions of "haters" - and that call hardly gets mentioned as at all controverial.

The moving pic against Kyle with 2 seconds to go in the NC game, could have been huge (but wasn't). The severity of the impact is not relevant, other than it made the moving pic all that more obvious - the direction of the Singer fall is a useful indicator though. It simply doesn't ever get called in that (last second) situation. In the first 39:30 of a game that would have been called for what it obviously was - a moving pic.

That said, we won. Game over. Call irrelevant.

:cool:

[MChambers]

I still think a lot of you guys are looking at this through a biased opinion. I consider myself a neutral fan in this scenario as I've been both a Butler fan and Duke fan for a long time.

Howard did slightly lean into the screen. But you guys have blown this up to make it look like the most blatant illegal screen ever executed.

Does anyone remember that 2 weeks ago, Z was getting praised for setting a more illegal screen on Kramer that knocked him out?

I'm not trying to sound like a douche or something right now, but this is why people tend to hate Duke fans. We praise our players for doing wrong, then go crazy when an opponent does it to us.

How did you feel when Nolan got screened so hard he missed the following game last year?

Now, did you feel the same way when Z screen Kramer so hard he was knocked out? Didn't think so.

For the record, I felt that Zoubek's screen on Kramer was a foul, and should have been called that way, but wondered how the refs had been calling those plays during the game. That was a pretty rough game.

[Summie444]

I still think a lot of you guys are looking at this through a biased opinion. I consider myself a neutral fan in this scenario as I've been both a Butler fan and Duke fan for a long time.

Howard did slightly lean into the screen. But you guys have blown this up to make it look like the most blatant illegal screen ever executed.

Does anyone remember that 2 weeks ago, Z was getting praised for setting a more illegal screen on Kramer that knocked him out?

I'm not trying to sound like a douche or something right now, but this is why people tend to hate Duke fans. We praise our players for doing wrong, then go crazy when an opponent does it to us.

How did you feel when Nolan got screened so hard he missed the following game last year?

Now, did you feel the same way when Z screen Kramer so hard he was knocked out? Didn't think so.
I think all fans behave in this fashion. It's probably part of the definition of being a fan. This is definitely not the reason why people hate Duke fans. People hate Duke fans because of the "Duke" part.

P.S. I think Howard's screen was a foul because he raised his arms.

[alteran]

Honestly, that phrase "this is why other fans hate Duke fans..." is one of the most overused phrases on these boards. (1) No it isn't why they hate Duke, as stated above, b/c EVERYONE does this. (2) The reasons for Duke hate are numerous and varied...

QFT. And all the similar posts above it.

I am tired of us making excuses for other people's bull hockey. Our fan base is not perfect in more or less the same way other fan bases are not perfect. We may think we're better than most, but so do all the other fan bases.

Seriously, what kind of a fan base goes around saying, "hey, we're not very good! Not good players, not a good institution, not even good fans! Our school doesn't care about the rules! And our opponents play fairer than we do! GO BIG GREEN!"

Of course we see things more our way than others would. That's the very definition of a fan.

That has nothing to do with the hate-mongering. All that stuff is just an excuse.

[greybeard]

The "severity"/impact of the screen contact is not relevant, generally, to whether a moving pic is called.:

With you.


The moving pic against Kyle with 2 seconds to go in the NC game, could have been huge (but wasn't). The severity of the impact is not relevant, other than it made the moving pic all that more obvious

Disagree, big time. The severity of the hit was caused by Butler's having walked into the hit, mass times velocity equals force, by then lifting both arms elbows spreed to deliver a wicked blow. These things are ugly and then impacted play.

If you have EVER seen a play like that NOT GET CALLED PLEASE IDENTIFY IT. IF NOT, I WISH PEOPLE WOULD STOP SAYING IT IS A NON CALL BECAUSE IT WAS A POTENTIALLY GAME CHANGING HIT AND THEREFORE BECAME A NONCALL. Every time I repeat this syllogism my head starts shaking back and forth like Larry Black's when he has pointed out something mind numbingly stupid like when he was directed as a kid to practice getting under his desk in case of a nuclear attack.

How can a hit like that become less significant when its import on the game becomes more significant. What am I missing here? It was a judgment call? Well, these referees were adults, they get paid to make judgments, and that was a judgment that they plain blew.

Who says that Kyle ever gets impeded by a lawfully set pick? The guy walked into him and then leveling him with a body-supported two armed shiver supported by force created directly by the second most powerful muscle group in the body, that would be the shoulder girdle, and also the pelvis, which would be numero uno in force creation, precluded our knowing whether your ordinary pick set in a timely fashion and not delivered by a moving hit would have worked.

Suppose Howard had been stationary? Would the guy defending him stepped into the lane between Howard and the baseline? We don't know because that play did not happen.

You never see that play not called, ever. If the guy was standing still, and delivered the blow that Howard imparted with his arms and shoulders, he is OUT OF THE GAME. DO NOT PASS GO, DO NOT COLLECT TWO HUNDRED BUCKS. GONE. Every time, but this time? The logic please, somebody supply the logic.



That said, we won. Game over. Call irrelevant.

:cool:

Irrelevant? You have every talking head this side of Paris saying that that play does not get called in a game-changing moment and that is irrelevant? I'm numb.

If Kyle got a severe concussion, then it would be relevant? A broken jaw? A broken clavicle?

He got hit by a 250 pund guy on the move who delivered a double forearm shiver. No place for that in the game. It never gets called? My pattuti. Show me once when it didn't get called!

Sorry, Cinderellas don't get to clean someone's clock to get the prince; they play by the rules or turn into a pumpkin, which is what the ref turned into.

[cptnflash]

He got hit by a 250 pund guy on the move who delivered a double forearm shiver. No place for that in the game. It never gets called? My pattuti. Show me once when it didn't get called!

Wow, you must be looking at a different set of replays than the ones I see. Howard's feet appear to be set, and I certainly wouldn't call it a forearm shiver. He definitely leaned into Kyle with his shoulder and his arms came up after the contact, certainly enough to be called a foul in other game situations but nowhere near ejection level material. Kyle fell awkwardly mostly because he was at a dead sprint and didn't see it coming.

I don't think anyone should be surprised it wasn't called. In the press conference immediately after the game Coach K himself said something like, "Kyle got taken out, but of course they're not going to call it in that situation." If he's ok with it not being called, I think we all should be too.

And for the record, I'm still not convinced that Hayward even got the shot off in time, illegal pick or no.

[dukestheheat]

That play on Kyle was assault and battery; it was flagrant. No way it gets called right then and there, but I was pretty upset about the play. I played football and I have seen that play many times on the turf; it has no place on the basketball court. A part of me wants to think that Howard was letting out some frustration on that play, and that he intentionally popped Kyle. Talk me out of that, will ya?

dukestheheat.

[greybeard]

Wow, you must be looking at a different set of replays than the ones I see. Howard's feet appear to be set, and I certainly wouldn't call it a forearm shiver. He definitely leaned into Kyle with his shoulder and his arms came up after the contact, certainly enough to be called a foul in other game situations but nowhere near ejection level material. Kyle fell awkwardly mostly because he was at a dead sprint and didn't see it coming.

I don't think anyone should be surprised it wasn't called. In the press conference immediately after the game Coach K himself said something like, "Kyle got taken out, but of course they're not going to call it in that situation." If he's ok with it not being called, I think we all should be too.

And for the record, I'm still not convinced that Hayward even got the shot off in time, illegal pick or no.

I see your point of view, but I thought that K was just being overly gracious as only a guy who just had won a championship can be.

To me, you don't say that your guy got "killed" and in the next sentence say, "but that's never called in that situation" and mean it. As I said, in his interview with Fratello the day after, K went into some detail as to why he thought that Butler was getting away with illegal physical contact most of the game and mentioned another play involving Singler near the end that he said went into his decision that OT was not an option. He was saying as politically as possible that he flat out did not trust the refs. That's a pretty strong condemnation of guys chosen to ref a national championship game.

Would have been interesting if Fratello was not so interested in hearing himself talk and had allowed K a chance to discuss that incident again. I doubt you would have heard anything like "they never make that call in that situation."

A 250 guy is moving into you in the opposite direction you are running in and then lifts his forearms into a hit, sorry, K variously described it as Kyle was "killed", Kyle was "brought down"; these are out of step with your take that this was an ordinary play.

Stepping sideways into a pick on a guy running up the court can still nail him. Walking into him and adding the lifting of arms with your shoulder girdle is another thing. No, he did not hit him like a linebacker. He hit him as hard as you can hit a guy on a basketball court. He "killed" him.

Maybe I'm overstating things. But I saw this is foul clear and simple and don't get the situational noncall argument. I hate the violence that is endemic in sport, which seeps down to all levels. I think that the games that young people play need to be made much safer than they are. Perhaps that that bias is reflected in my perspectives on this play.

For the record, I like Howard's offensive moves. I don't like his defense. I think he is a player that gets away with stuff, way too much stuff. In the few games I watched, it was the case every game that I couldn't wait for him to get into foul trouble, which usually happened way later than I expected. The Cinderella factor, imo. Hated Butler's coach for putting Howard back in against Michigan State; think he should have kept Howard out of the final game--I know that a doctor signed off on it, but, either Duke was playing some awesome defense that I did not see, or the kid's 0 for 10 start was indicative that he was not right.

Loved Heyward's game, loved their guard play, especially their defensive guard play with their hands going after the ball. Thought Izzo was dead on that his team got robbed by the refs and that the same thing nearly happened to Duke. Glad that it didn't.

[dukestheheat]

I still think a lot of you guys are looking at this through a biased opinion. I consider myself a neutral fan in this scenario as I've been both a Butler fan and Duke fan for a long time.

Howard did slightly lean into the screen. But you guys have blown this up to make it look like the most blatant illegal screen ever executed.

Does anyone remember that 2 weeks ago, Z was getting praised for setting a more illegal screen on Kramer that knocked him out?

I'm not trying to sound like a douche or something right now, but this is why people tend to hate Duke fans. We praise our players for doing wrong, then go crazy when an opponent does it to us.

How did you feel when Nolan got screened so hard he missed the following game last year?

Now, did you feel the same way when Z screen Kramer so hard he was knocked out? Didn't think so.

Please, man, desist and Stop! What is this about 'people hating Duke fans'? That play was aggressive! We have had aggressive plays by Duke guys ON other players before, and I've called it like it was at that time: aggressive, at times...flagrant (I was upset about Henderson's pop on Hansbrough, for example). But to say that play wasn't and then tie it to hatred of Duke fans sends me over the proverbial edge.

The Zoubek screen on Kramer you cite was NOT flagrant; the play on Singler was flagrant and excessive and it was cheap!

Butler is a fine team and well-coached, there is no doubt about it; I am certain that a Mr. Howard got a dressing-down by his coach in the locker room for that play after the game. Count it.

dth.

[greybeard]

Please, man, desist and Stop! What is this about 'people hating Duke fans'? That play was aggressive! We have had aggressive plays by Duke guys ON other players before, and I've called it like it was at that time: aggressive, at times...flagrant (I was upset about Henderson's pop on Hansbrough, for example). But to say that play wasn't and then tie it to hatred of Duke fans sends me over the proverbial edge.

The Zoubek screen on Kramer you cite was NOT flagrant; the play on Singler was flagrant and excessive and it was cheap!

Butler is a fine team and well-coached, there is no doubt about it; I am certain that a Mr. Howard got a dressing-down by his coach in the locker room for that play after the game. Count it.

dth.

The entire game, as in entire, evey time Singler ran off a Zoubek screen, Kramer rammed into Zoubek and then flailed his arms trying to draw a call. Every time. Watch your DVR if you have it. Purdue's coach plays dirty defense. Dirty Defense and Kramer's job was to get fouls called on Zoubek by running into him. The refs had no part of it the entire game.

Nobody all year tried to get over a screen like that set by any big in any game I've watched. Yeah, maybe on occasion, a defender would have inside position (position closer to the screen) than the offensive player and get to the top of the screen first, but other than those rare circumstances, everybody in the country plays that screen by going behind, the defender of the screener shows to slow the cutter, the guy who goes behind catches up, and the big defender returns to his man or to another man if there is a planned rotation.

Kramer was bashing into Zoubek's legs, hips and ribs all game, and then acting like he was the victim to boot. I hate the Purdue coach; I think the baby faced coach of Butler is cut of nearly the same cloth. His team gets away with more because of his baby face and because Butler is such a small school.

Kramer was a wild man on the court against Duke, could easily have hurt someone, and he did. It was himself. The refs let Purdue get away with way too much physical play, way, way too much. The way K described his half time talk and the position he urged his players to take to withstand "the pressure" Purdue was applying, it sounded to me like he had harkened back to his days at the Point and was leading basic training in hand-to-hand combat. I know that the stance he described could be called the classic "athletic stance," but it sounded to me that it was being presented differently, like K was talking to soldiers in the field.

In other words, I think that blaming anyone but Purdue's coach for Kramer's concussion is a misstake, unless you want to blame Kramer himself for listening to the guy.

Nothing I have seen about the way Butler plays makes me believe that is remotely possible that Howard got a dressing down by his coach. Sorry, when two of the game's giants, neither of whom is averse to physical play, both call another team's play overly physical and say that refs were not doing their job I listen. I also watch. Anyone who put Howard back into the Michigan State game after he banged his head of the floor, continued to scrunch up his forehead and squeeze between his eyes, is not fit to coach.

I think Howard was not right in the Duke game and that his inability to score the ball proved it. I was surprised that Stevens said Howard had been cleared to play by the doctors. I was not surprised that Stevens chose to play him and think it was wrong. I think that that last play which we have beat to death proves the point.

Look, let's look at this entire thing from the other side. What possibly could have lead a seasoned player to make a play like that which nearly everyone including you says was clearly a foul. How do you do something that dumb? Only if playing over the line is habbitual. That is exactly how that coach has key players for Butler playing, Howard at the forefront.