THE flagrant non-call (you know what I mean)

[MChambers]

Doesn't not calling it determine the outcome of the game?

Yes, of course. But that’s not what the refs and some misguided fans think.

[JetpackJesus]

Is there a site on internet/YouTube that reviews NCAA Mens BB calls, either on the team, league or National Level?
As an example, on the MLS site, pundits, ostensibly employees of MLS, review every Yellow/Red card of the weekend, so this is not unheard of. Video series Instant Replay, even sponsored by Cheez-It
I have been watching BB since 1976, and each season I am more upset with the quality of officiating in a sport that depends so much on their calls. I could imagine a site that reviews changes each season in NCAA rules- as the cylinder call three years ago seems now to just be good defense. (One year its "space to play offense", the next year the emphasis changes to allow a defender in the jock strap of the offense.) Then such a site could review every foul, or just critical ones during each game of interest. There are so many angles with video operators that there must be different views of every play. We review the amateur players in highlight packages-why not the performance of the professional referees?
My example is the "fake" flop call on Jeremy against VT, (only one view shown) or the block calls on Jeremy at the end of so many important games. If alternate angles were available later to confirm a foul, I would take each call more evenly, convinced that the referees did see something that I didn't. But I exploded when the flop was called, knowing then that we would not survive the referee crew, which, in the end, we didn't. Asking in order to lower by BP, Stroke risk and to advance understanding from my Clemson wife.

BTW, the MLS site doesn't seem to castigate the refs, but there must be an implicit understanding that the league is sponsoring an objective review even if there is no direct accountability. FWIW, Here is the web address in the most recent of the series https://www.mlssoccer.com/video/no-p...d-to-austin-fc

And can Teddy TV stop grabbing every players backside?!?

Another comparison is the NBA's two minute report. The NBA releases a statement about missed calls in the final two minutes of all games that were at or within three points at any time during the last two minutes. This play would've been subject to that report.

[sagegrouse]

As we have been told many times by Jay Bilas : INTENT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE CALL- It's a Flagrant One.

Duke was hosed and Scheyer could have made a big stink about it embarrassing the league and its officials.
We all know some other ACC coaches would have.

But Scheyer was a gentleman about it.

Let's see if it gains us any calls down the stretch.

Why do I want a "gentleman" as our coach?

[knicknut]

Chiefs-Bengals last night had me thinking -- why does the "rules depend on game circumstances" seem to be a topic more in basketball than in other sports, or at least not extend as much to football? Perhaps cornerbacks can get away with more pass interference on game-deciding plays, but no one questioned the late hit call on Mahomes that had a massive impact on the game. It would be indefensible to have let that go "because it would have impacted the game." Why is the same argument even entertained for flagrant fouls (Flip), techincal fouls (how often do you hear, "good restraint shown by the official for not T-ing up the coach in a way that could have decided the game"), or even common fouls (Lebron no-call over the weekend perhaps due to a desire to not determine the outcome).

[Indoor66]

Chiefs-Bengals last night had me thinking -- why does the "rules depend on game circumstances" seem to be a topic more in basketball than in other sports, or at least not extend as much to football? Perhaps cornerbacks can get away with more pass interference on game-deciding plays, but no one questioned the late hit call on Mahomes that had a massive impact on the game. It would be indefensible to have let that go "because it would have impacted the game." Why is the same argument even entertained for flagrant fouls (Flip), techincal fouls (how often do you hear, "good restraint shown by the official for not T-ing up the coach in a way that could have decided the game"), or even common fouls (Lebron no-call over the weekend perhaps due to a desire to not determine the outcome).

Maybe they don't like LeCryBaby?

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Chiefs-Bengals last night had me thinking -- why does the "rules depend on game circumstances" seem to be a topic more in basketball than in other sports, or at least not extend as much to football? Perhaps cornerbacks can get away with more pass interference on game-deciding plays, but no one questioned the late hit call on Mahomes that had a massive impact on the game. It would be indefensible to have let that go "because it would have impacted the game." Why is the same argument even entertained for flagrant fouls (Flip), techincal fouls (how often do you hear, "good restraint shown by the official for not T-ing up the coach in a way that could have decided the game"), or even common fouls (Lebron no-call over the weekend perhaps due to a desire to not determine the outcome).

I mean, the refs swallow the whistle on defensive pass interference regularly at the end of games. Even if it's a playoff matchup between the Seahawks and 49ers.

[FUBARDoorBuster]

Maybe they don't like LeCryBaby?

If if foul is not a foul, then sport is not a sport, at least the way that we consider it on a balanced playing field. Then it becomes a hyped entertainment package for the benefit of .. ?
TV Production? Gamblers? Booster clubs?
Might as well be WWE with pre-determined outcomes. 1999 and 2004 certainly felt that way for Duke BB. Kind of felt the story was agreed to before the game even started.
It's happened in NCAA BB before, - 1950's and MLB in 1910-20.
Or in the ACC since its inception, first with NC State, then UNC as the benefactors.
Someone on the board mentioned only watching the highlight packages as a path to better mental health. I am almost there.

Addition: This is laughable. I did find a video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDJIoMNGDKE
NCAA referee review, or apologist. If this is the cause, Jeremy in the V Tech game should have received a warning, prior to the call of a Class B Technical.

BTW, What happened to the cylinder. For instance in the GTech game, Kyle gets a flagrant for shooting the basketball. If the defender hits him with an arm, foul on the defender. If the defender gets his head in the cylinder, foul on the shooter? So that encourages the player to give up his head to get the foul? Where is the player safety in that, and why does the foul call completely change 3-4 years later (thinking the Syracuse call)

[Phredd3]

Addition: This is laughable. I did find a video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDJIoMNGDKE
NCAA referee review, or apologist. If this is the cause, Jeremy in the V Tech game should have received a warning, prior to the call of a Class B Technical.

You may not be aware, but for this year, the official rules removed the warning requirement for technical fouls awarded for flopping. A flop call is correctly rewarded with a free throw immediately following the end of the play. What constitutes flopping, and consistent enforcement of the rule, were the issues in Jeremy's case. Once the flop was called, however, it was correctly enforced according to the rules.

[Bluedog]

Chiefs-Bengals last night had me thinking -- why does the "rules depend on game circumstances" seem to be a topic more in basketball than in other sports, or at least not extend as much to football? Perhaps cornerbacks can get away with more pass interference on game-deciding plays, but no one questioned the late hit call on Mahomes that had a massive impact on the game. It would be indefensible to have let that go "because it would have impacted the game." Why is the same argument even entertained for flagrant fouls (Flip), techincal fouls (how often do you hear, "good restraint shown by the official for not T-ing up the coach in a way that could have decided the game"), or even common fouls (Lebron no-call over the weekend perhaps due to a desire to not determine the outcome).

I think basketball has more "judgment calls" and thus is subject to this more than football. As noted by another poster, Football refs may swallow their whistle for defensive pass interference near end of game, which is also a bit more subjective. But something like pushing someone when they're out of bounds already is a clear late hit and not controversial.

[Duke04Dad]

I'm very late to the party with this observation, but I think Kyle is being abused a bit by the lack of officiating. In the VT game with about 5:20 left, VT #15 moves past Kyle trying to keep Flip from the shooter. As #15 slides by, Kyle buckles to the floor in response to what I perceived to be an elbow to the midsection. The ref was right in front of this albeit perhaps watching the shooter and no call. The chat felt like Kyle was gassed and cramping, but I think there was certainly more to it. I do hope that Coach continues/begins using his voice with the refs. I have a lot of respect for Kyle's "play-on" attitude.

[knicknut]

But something like pushing someone when they're out of bounds already is a clear late hit and not controversial.

You mean, like punching someone after the play? It just goes back to my original point of where society seems to have chosen where to draw the line of what is subjective and what isn't depending on the sport.

[Bluedog]

You mean, like punching someone after the play? It just goes back to my original point of where society seems to have chosen where to draw the line of what is subjective and what isn't depending on the sport.

Hahahaha, I agree there's a major gray area, but if the "punch" was intentional (as the "push" was), it would have obviously been called a flagrant. And I recognize intent is NOT supposed to matter, but it's obviously the refs took that into consideration (as well as the time on the clock). So, yeah, I agree that refs are human and are subject to bias/inconsistency and likely influenced by what they think the outside world would think. And they aren't getting lambasted at all for calling the late hit, but probably would have if they called a flagrant when someone did a celebratory thing and accidentally clocked someone -- ironically, though, they ARE getting lambasted by us. (For the record, I believe it should have been a flagrant too, just also describing that I can understand the human factor in these situations were different.)

[semper phi 78]

If you don’t like the manipulative effect of flopping, wait till you see the how celebratory throat punches play out!…just make ‘em look accidental. What if it had been Grayson Allen doing the celebrating? Would media indignation have settled down after just one week?

But really, that strike to the best Duke player on the floor that night changed the outcome just as much as a F1 foul would have.

[kako]

If you don’t like the manipulative effect of flopping, wait till you see the how celebratory throat punches play out!…just make ‘em look accidental. What if it had been Grayson Allen doing the celebrating? Would media indignation have settled down after just one week?

This is exactly why I expected the ACC to admit they missed the call. If not, then anyone can celebrate a made basket by punching their fist without reservation... because if they hit someone accidentally, it's incidental - no foul. I am waiting for the next such instance, and we should all be indignant if they call it a F1.

9F

[JetpackJesus]

Chiefs-Bengals last night had me thinking -- why does the "rules depend on game circumstances" seem to be a topic more in basketball than in other sports, or at least not extend as much to football? Perhaps cornerbacks can get away with more pass interference on game-deciding plays, but no one questioned the late hit call on Mahomes that had a massive impact on the game. It would be indefensible to have let that go "because it would have impacted the game." Why is the same argument even entertained for flagrant fouls (Flip), techincal fouls (how often do you hear, "good restraint shown by the official for not T-ing up the coach in a way that could have decided the game"), or even common fouls (Lebron no-call over the weekend perhaps due to a desire to not determine the outcome).

There are a couple of practical explanations for the first sentence, I think. First, basketball is unique among major US sports in the frequency of scoring--no other sport is scoring even a point per minute on average (per team). Second basketball is fairly unique among major US sports in the frequency of fouls/penalties/violations. I just think the potential for game-altering calls in the final few minutes of a close basketball game is so, so much higher than it is for other sports that it inevitably becomes a topic of debate way more often.

None of this is to disagree with your concluding points about the Flip non-call, etc.. Though a lot of Bengals fans seem to be suggesting (vociferously) that the refs should've swallowed the whistle on that late-hit penalty.

[FUBARDoorBuster]

I'm very late to the party with this observation, but I think Kyle is being abused a bit by the lack of officiating. In the VT game with about 5:20 left, VT #15 moves past Kyle trying to keep Flip from the shooter. As #15 slides by, Kyle buckles to the floor in response to what I perceived to be an elbow to the midsection. The ref was right in front of this albeit perhaps watching the shooter and no call. The chat felt like Kyle was gassed and cramping, but I think there was certainly more to it. I do hope that Coach continues/begins using his voice with the refs. I have a lot of respect for Kyle's "play-on" attitude.

I agree with all above ( and below) this comment. In addition, I feel there is a correlation to size of the "afflicted" vs the "fouler" - the Shaq effect. Bigger players do not get the call, in general- hit the big guy with a gut punch, neck blow, or even bang your head against the elbows of a bigger player, taking a normal shot, and, BOOM, if you are smaller, then you get your call.. .So much for "creating a space for basketball plays" or "protecting the safety of the players"
Thanks to others on the board for correcting my previous posts, but where is the factor for safety for the defender's health. Apparently a headbut to the shooter's elbow gets you the advantage.
Additive factor of how much the player reminds a referee of Laetner, and doubles the effect. Time for a regression analysis of height of the player plus laetner effect/Darker blue.
Can anyone find a 7' player getting fouled for rotating to take his shot, and called for a F1 in 2023? Alternatively, if Blakes switches on to Bacot, should he be coached to dive into his elbows to take a head shot "for the team"? This is really refereeing in 2023?

[Papa John]

And I recognize intent is NOT supposed to matter, but it's obviously the refs took that into consideration (as well as the time on the clock).

And if they did so, then according to the writing of the rule they were incorrect in doing so. The league should have made a statement about the error, given how egregious it was. But 'Duke gets all the calls,' so here we are.

[Namtilal]

My theory is that as games get near the end, refs and umps get hungry and thirsty and will do what's necessary to end the proceedings...

Let's compare this play to the penalty against the Bengals that gave KC the game last weekend.

I think calling a foul or penalty on each play was the technically correct call, but I believe that refs should consider whether an incident that would decide the game should be called in a certain circumstance.

I don't think that a silly mistake by a VT player should decide the game, despite the fact that earlier in the game this same play would have absolutely been a flagrant.

Similarly, I would have supported the refs not throwing a flag against the Bengals for an honest, non-malicious mistake in the game on Sunday. It would have disappointed me for Duke to win due to flagrant foul without malice, just like it disappointed me for a great football game to be decided on a penalty for a late hit without malice.

There is an element of equity here -- does a mistake by a player that doesn't really effect the game play merit deciding which team wins the game? In my opinion, sports are better when refs overlook innocent mistakes like these two.

We were simply outplayed and didn't deserve to win the game. We will get better and close out games more capably in the future.

(As an aside, I just want to mention how valuable Mark Mitchell is to this team. His defense is so fundamentally sound and he mostly isn't forcing shots. Far and away my favorite player on this team. Such a great work ethic and consistent effort. He fits in with my favorite type of Duke player -- Chris Carawell, early Shane Battier, Nate James, Dave McClure, Tyler Thornton, Amile Jefferson, and many others.)