great job by the refs to not assume what happened on christmas's block | Syracusefan.com

great job by the refs to not assume what happened on christmas's block

Millhouse

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 16, 2011
Messages
27,322
Like
30,482
in real time, you just assume that there had to be a foul because it's such a spectacular play by christmas - it just seemed so unlikely. maybe Christmas benefited from the dunk almost going down anyway. if he gets a full hand on it and really stuffs him , maybe they call the foul.

95% of the time the refs blow the whistle assuming there had to be a foul
 

orange79

Internet Sleuth
Joined
Aug 20, 2011
Messages
37,388
Like
106,182
Really good point, and nice restraint by the refs. Truthfully, I think they had to be pleasantly surprised by the overall level at which the game was played, and that may have played a role.
 

longislandcuse

Living Legend
Joined
Sep 1, 2011
Messages
36,046
Like
43,785
I can't believe Duke fans still crying that it was a foul.

It was a great block. End game situation, you need to make a play. Christmas did that.
 

PeteCalvin

Hall of Fame
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
8,356
Like
10,232
No ref is making that call in a game like this, even if there was contact, which there wasn't. He missed the dunk because Roc got his hand on the ball. There was some slight arm contact on the follow through because Hood was dunking it. The contact was as much his motion forward as it was Roc's. But the ball was dislodged prior to the contact. No foul. Good no call by the officials.
 

RF2044

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 15, 2011
Messages
27,905
Like
83,529
Three things impacted the play not being called--first, Rak got all ball with his hand, and the contact that came afterward was minimal / initiated by Hood's follow through, not by Rak hitting his arm and changing the trajectory of the field goal attempt.

Second, Hood tried to jump from too far out, so the refs were perhaps more inclined to not view it as a sure dunk and automatically blow the anticipatory whistle that Millhouse talks about above.

Third, Rak avoided hitting him with the lower body--which would surely have drawn a foul.

It was a great defensive play by our player. Bang-bang play, without a ton of contact or obvious impact on the shot attempt. Could it have been called a foul? Sure. But those pretending that it is was a no-brainer missed call or bitching that it was a clear foul that should have been called are just expressing sour grapes.
 

Marsh01

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
15,129
Like
21,334
Bang bang play like that how can you make that call? You have to super slow mo it to even see the minimal contact.

I will give them the Parker 5th foul. That was really a favorable call that went our way. I have orange colored glasses and even I saw it.
 

TheOrangeBuddha

Scout Team
Joined
Aug 20, 2011
Messages
332
Like
355
in real time, you just assume that there had to be a foul because it's such a spectacular play by christmas - it just seemed so unlikely. maybe Christmas benefited from the dunk almost going down anyway. if he gets a full hand on it and really stuffs him , maybe they call the foul.

95% of the time the refs blow the whistle assuming there had to be a foul

Agreed. With the slow motion video I am having a very hard time seeing any contact between Christmas and Hood's arm. Yet, several announcers and sportscasters keep going on and on about this non-call.
 

Millhouse

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 16, 2011
Messages
27,322
Like
30,482
Agreed. With the slow motion video I am having a very hard time seeing any contact between Christmas and Hood's arm. Yet, several announcers and sportscasters keep going on and on about this non-call.
my lone quibble with espn is that the overhead view showed it wasn't a foul but they kept showing other angles

but of course if espn didn't bring 10,000 cameras, we wouldn't have gotten that angle so i can't complain

in football especially, they don't show the best angles often
 

BJORN II

Go kick rocks you goober!!!
Joined
Sep 4, 2011
Messages
14,315
Like
23,540
I think some of the duke fans wee saying they were fine with the no call on tht but the "tickey tack" fouls on Parker and Jefferson is what they were really mad at.

IMO, the refs made a great no call, minimal contact, Rak got all ball. Yah there was very little contact on it though.

They Act like they got screwd by the refs, Grant was fouled twice, one in the first half on a missed putback, and when he got taken to the ground. The. Ennis being ridden all game. And the push in the back that sent CJ to the floor, Thor ton made no play on the ball.
 

Trueblue25

Cali Award Magistrate; 2022 Iggy Winner: OOC Rcd
Joined
Apr 16, 2013
Messages
36,748
Like
68,740
Let duke fans cry, their tears feed me.
 

themorey

2nd String
Joined
Oct 18, 2011
Messages
913
Like
1,852
Duke fans are spoiled by a history of preferential treatment by ACC refs. I for one love to hear them whine and cry like a bunch of spoiled brats. That they did not get all the calls says a lot about the respect for the Cuse program. LGO!
 

PhatOrange

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
25,787
Like
37,507
I think some of the duke fans wee saying they were fine with the no call on tht but the "tickey tack" fouls on Parker and Jefferson is what they were really mad at.

IMO, the refs made a great no call, minimal contact, Rak got all ball. Yah there was very little contact on it though.

They Act like they got screwd by the refs, Grant was fouled twice, one in the first half on a missed putback, and when he got taken to the ground. The. Ennis being ridden all game. And the push in the back that sent CJ to the floor, Thor ton made no play on the ball.

Grant got killed in the first half. Even Vitale said it was a blantant foul.
 

HarrisonJBounel

All Conference
Joined
Dec 29, 2011
Messages
3,212
Like
2,253
Three things impacted the play not being called--first, Rak got all ball with his hand, and the contact that came afterward was minimal / initiated by Hood's follow through, not by Rak hitting his arm and changing the trajectory of the field goal attempt.

Second, Hood tried to jump from too far out, so the refs were perhaps more inclined to not view it as a sure dunk and automatically blow the anticipatory whistle that Millhouse talks about above.

Third, Rak avoided hitting him with the lower body--which would surely have drawn a foul.

It was a great defensive play by our player. Bang-bang play, without a ton of contact or obvious impact on the shot attempt. Could it have been called a foul? Sure. But those pretending that it is was a no-brainer missed call or bitching that it was a clear foul that should have been called are just expressing sour grapes.

All of this. Add the ingredient that Rak didn't look like he was just trying to deny the dunk by fouling Hood. Because he wasn't. He was making, and he made, a legitimate play on the ball, and on the ball alone. Again, dare I say, very Alonzo Mourning-like.
 
Last edited:

tbonezone

Living Legend
Joined
Sep 5, 2011
Messages
15,080
Like
14,594
i've talked to a couple duke fans since the game and that play is always the first thing they mention.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
160,514
Messages
4,343,131
Members
5,639
Latest member
GoldyGopher

Online statistics

Members online
48
Guests online
416
Total visitors
464




Top Bottom