Duke board full of whining babies:

[memcorsu]

That is a ridiculously obvious foul.

To claim otherwise is silly/insane.

What are you calling a foul? Look at the Vine. Hood dunks the ball into Grants hand. There is no body. The only thing left is Hood's arm hitting Grants arm. Hood was swinging down and Grant across so it is Hood's arm coming down on Grants.

Edit: That is Duke's very own Jay Wright calling it a clean block. He is not usually one who is proSU. Many threads about that over here.

 

[TheCusian]

I'm just going to assume you've had a lot to drink. How many times in the history of your team, have they made 15 3's??? And of course JB is so dumb of a coach, we'll do the exact same things defensively in 3 weeks...wow

Hey now - the are used to INC and Roy Williams.

 

[LongShanks44]

What are you calling a foul? Look at the Vine. Hood dunks the ball into Grants hand. There is no body. The only thing left is Hood's arm hitting Grants arm. Hood was swinging down and Grant across so it is Hood's arm coming down on Grants.

Don't waste your time trying to reason with him even though it's blatant that it was a clean play. He's going to see it his way and it's useless to explain why he's wrong.

 

[Orangezoo]

NOD- see the other duke fan posts regarding difficulties on defense for both teams. The officials did not make you lose this game. They called it the way they should in that as the aggressor SU was attacking more and Duke was shooting the 3 ball all game staying out of the paint. The missed calls on duke ranged from bumping cutters to hacking on rebounds to a few missed calls on drives. They missed some calls on SU as well that were of a similar nature. In terms of the opportunity for calls to be made there were many more chances for parker and jefferson to get called and percentage wise it hurt duke since they are the only two post defenders for the devils. If it was called as tightly as you wish they would have been in foul trouble much sooner.

 

[ssbriefcase]

NOD- see the other duke fan posts regarding difficulties on defense for both teams. The officials did not make you lose this game. They called it the way they should in that as the aggressor SU was attacking more and Duke was shooting the 3 ball all game staying out of the paint. The missed calls on duke ranged from bumping cutters to hacking on rebounds to a few missed calls on drives. They missed some calls on SU as well that were of a similar nature. In terms of the opportunity for calls to be made there were many more chances for parker and jefferson to get called and percentage wise it hurt duke since they are the only two post defenders for the devils. If it was called as tightly as you wish they would have been in foul trouble much sooner.

Couldn't have said it any better..

 

[l'orange]

you guys shot 50% of your shots from the 3 point line, we only shot 4 total 3 pointers because we were pounding it inside. Of course, we're going to get more calls.

This is exactly why the foul discrepency was so big. Syracuse pounded it into the paint where you draw fouls. Duke spent half their time beyond the arc, you don't get too many fouls out there.

 

[jekelish]

This is exactly why the foul discrepency was so big. Syracuse pounded it into the paint where you draw fouls. Duke spent half their time beyond the arc, you don't get too many fouls out there.

Stop being logical. It must have been that we paid off the refs.

 

[anomander]

If Karl Hess didn't call a foul then it is NOT a foul

 

[Mistakebythelake90]

Look, the dunk no-call was questionable. But I don't see it as a "clear, obvious foul", especially when you watch it in real time. If you have to watch it in super slow-mo and use a one-frame screen shot to try and justify it, you're trying too hard.

 

[BludOrange]

Should be happy they got the imaginary foul on Suilaman's 3 ball and leave it at that.

 

[brandokc]

What about Jefferson's moving pick on the 3+1 the trip before he fouled out? Guess the Dukie's selectively missed that one.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

I thought Hood made a stupid play going for the dunk that aggressively. :noidea:

 

[OrangeDW]

I thought Hood made a stupid play going for the dunk that aggressively. :noidea:

Agreed. If he laid it in, I don't think Christmas would've been able to get a piece of it. I thought it was dumb to try to dunk it too.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Agreed. If he laid it in, I don't think Christmas would've been able to get a piece of it. I thought it was dumb to try to dunk it too.

At first I actually thought K was yelling at him for the play and not the refs, to be honest.

 

[NOD1]

The key to finishing in the lane against Cuse's bigs is to go extremely strong. That's the only way Parker was able to score on the interior.

It takes some dubious retrospectoscope to fault him for going strong there (not just because that would be called a foul most of the time, but also because that's the way to actually finish against long bigs).

 

[OrangeDW]

The key to finishing in the lane against Cuse's bigs is to go extremely strong. That's the only way Parker was able to score on the interior.

It takes some dubious retrospectoscope to fault him for going strong there (not just because that would be called a foul most of the time, but also because that's the way to actually finish against long bigs).

Or you could use your body control and touch and maybe even use the rim as a bit of a shield to finish with the right.

I don't recall seeing Christmas get dunked on too many times, if at all.

 

[NOD1]

Or you could use your body control and touch and maybe even use the rim as a bit of a shield to finish with the right.

I don't recall seeing Christmas get dunked on too many times, if at all.

Ever play basketball? The key point made whenever playing against shot-blockers is to go up strong and not get 'cute.'

Again, ridiculous MMQB'ing to find any fault whatsoever with Hood there.

 

[Orangezoo]

NOD... passive aggressive doesn't make you a good sport. It is a tough loss. Quit arguing it in some way should have been different from a one sided perspective. There are adequate arguments from the cuse side on how it could have been different as well. Typically that means it was a close hard fought basketball game between two very good teams with passionate fans. Excuses are ugly.

 

[NOD1]

NOD... passive aggressive doesn't make you a good sport. It is a tough loss. Quit arguing it in some way should have been different from a one sided perspective. There is adequate arguments from the cuse side on how it could have been different as well. Typically that means it was a close hard fought basketball game between two very good teams with passionate fans. Excuses are ugly.

I'm not here seeking your approval.

This is a board for discussion. This is a thread about Duke fans whining.

To not expect retorts is foolish.

And, as for the recently-raised topic -- no idea how my responses in a discussion about Hood's choice to go for the dunk there could be considered 'passive aggressive' in any way.

 

[OrangeDW]

Ever play basketball? The key point made whenever playing against shot-blockers is to go up strong and not get 'cute.'

Again, ridiculous MMQB'ing to find any fault whatsoever with Hood there.

Yes. I'll play you for your shoes. Meet me at Gate B of the Carrier Dome.

 

[Orangezoo]

Ever play basketball? The key point made whenever playing against shot-blockers is to go up strong and not get 'cute.'

Again, ridiculous MMQB'ing to find any fault whatsoever with Hood there.

Shot fake to be sure you get a clean look. It was a gamble to go that hard. Going hard is not the only way against long defenders. Being smart is the best approach.

 

[NOD1]

Shot fake to be sure you get a clean look. It was a gamble to go that hard. Going hard is not the only way against long defenders. Being smart is the best approach.

shot fake there would be idiotic. He had 3 guys nearby, and at most 2 would go for a fake, and they would clog up the lane so much by their reaction that he would have nowhere to go except for a fadeaway.

With those 2 choices, you go strong for the dunk every single time.

 

[Orangezoo]

I'm not here seeking your approval.

This is a board for discussion. This is a thread about Duke fans whining.

To not expect retorts is foolish.

And its a syracuse board at which we welcome the banter but you need to realize that you are not going to move the needle towards your side of the argument screaming bad officiating and spewing what ifs behind the front of saying great game.

 

[orangeinohio]

I'm not here seeking your approval.

This is a board for discussion. This is a thread about Duke fans whining.

To not expect retorts is foolish.

And, as for the recently-raised topic -- no idea how my responses in a discussion about Hood's choice to go for the dunk there could be considered 'passive aggressive' in any way.

What are you expecting out of this whole experience on this board?
Syracuse fans are going to agree with your perspective that the game was lost by Duke because of the refs?
Duke lost this game.
There are going to be a lot more games in the future.
Maybe it's time to move on.

 

[Orangezoo]

shot fake there would be idiotic. He had 3 guys nearby, and at most 2 would go for a fake, and they would clog up the lane so much by their reaction that he would have nowhere to go except for a fadeaway.

With those 2 choices, you go strong for the dunk every single time.

Well clearly the result makes your point. You have a shot blocker closing in who has 3 inches on you and is an elite athlete. Yet a race to the rim is better than getting him to bite? It is a gamble at that juncture not an absolute.