A false equivalency | Syracusefan.com

A false equivalency

SWC75

Bored Historian
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
34,011
Like
65,638
This video put together on Syracuse.com shows the Gbinije play and the Fair play over and over in sequence:
http://www.syracuse.com/axeman/inde...basketball_vs_duke_brent_axe_rapid_recap.html

I've heard over and over again that these are the same plays. They clearly aren't. Mike is clearly established position and is directly in the path Parker takes to the basket. Hood is clearly to the side and moves over to close the gap he has left for CJ to drive to the basket.

It's not the same play that should have been called the same way. The first was clearly a charge and the second clearly a block.

"It could have gone either way". No, they both should have gone our way.
 
Here is what people are not looking at as well. We were the beneficiary of a gift intentional foul in the first half that they called on Duke.

I agree that it was a bad call but we had our chances and had some calls go our way.
 
Obviously a lot of people on the board were talking about the block call on Michael, and in my opinion, it was almost bigger than the call at the end of the game. That was CLEARLY a charge. Instead, they gave Parker the and-1. I literally couldn't believe it and I talked about up until CJ's charge.
 
Here is what people are not looking at as well. We were the beneficiary of a gift intentional foul in the first half that they called on Duke.

I agree that it was a bad call but we had our chances and had some calls go our way.
It was a gift that we paid for over and over agian throughout the game.
Look at you,..Mr. Reasonable!
 
Theres a picture somewhere, and if I wasn't at work I would find it, but the picture clearly shows hood falling down before CJ even makes contact with him.
 
It was a gift that we paid for over and over agian throughout the game.
Look at you,..Mr. Reasonable!

Hey I was pissed too at the call dont get me wrong. I just think that we had our chances to put us in a better position at the end. Make some shots and we dont have to score at the end.
 
Hey I was pissed too at the call dont get me wrong. I just think that we had our chances to put us in a better position at the end. Make some shots and we dont have to score at the end.
You can say that about every single loss. The entire game is full of chances to put you in a better position, which, by the way, there is another team out there with the same mindset. It doesn't justify bad calls. The and-1 against G was one such moment, but that was taken away. The no-foul on Rak's dunk was another moment.
 
Marsh01 said:
Here is what people are not looking at as well. We were the beneficiary of a gift intentional foul in the first half that they called on Duke. I agree that it was a bad call but we had our chances and had some calls go our way.

That call didn't cost Duke a single point. The other 2 calls cost us plenty.
 
Also, Gbinije was the primary defender, ie, entitled to space. Hood was the secondary defender, ie, is only entitled to space if making a play on the ball.
 
Also, Gbinije was the primary defender, ie, entitled to space. Hood was the secondary defender, ie, is only entitled to space if making a play on the ball.

Yes and they specifically changed the rule to stop this BS attempt at picking up charges by running in as the help defender.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
170,464
Messages
4,892,252
Members
5,998
Latest member
powdersmack

Online statistics

Members online
247
Guests online
2,477
Total visitors
2,724


...
Top Bottom