THE BIGGEST HOSING IN THE HISTORY OF THE SCHOOL

[Consigliere]

Interesting how some folks are choosing to debate the technicalities and somewhat conveniently ignoring the optics, especially in a bang bang play. IMO, it's objectively difficult to argue otherwise that the high leading of the elbow being the proximate cause to the substantial blow to the defenders face, nose, etc. And, in doing so, creating the significantly higher chance/potential of serious injury. Hence, per the rule, the refs all agreed to upgrade it to a Flagrant 1.

Perhaps, arguably, if Mintz's elbow hits the sternum, shoulder blade area, etc. instead of the face, the ref calls a block. However, that's not what happened.

The block / charge was a bang bang play and could have gone either way. Watching live I immediately thought charge. Watching slo mo replay I can see the rationale for block. As I said, in first half it was a no callin the first half.

The elbow was inadvertent contact and no one will convince me differently. There was no rotation, leading with the elbow or swinging to clear space. It was a clear basketball crossover move and within the offensive player’s cylinder of control

 

[orangecuse]

not a chance a block will called in our favor in any of these big games in any of these discussed, and that won't be wrong if one goes by the "rules", and yes for sure as to the flagrant 1, also by a strict interpretation of the rules.

As to the former, as Consig noted, this is not how it's gone and called in all the years of our fandom with the belief you need to be "set" for a prescribed period of time, and I'm sure it won't be the case either when we need the charge called in the opposite situation, it'll be wrongly called a block against us, because, you know, "interpretation" of the rule will be the buzz word to screw us. That you can bank on ratcheting up the frustration level another 10 notches.

The block / charge was a bang bang play and could have gone either way. Watching live I immediately thought charge. Watching slo mo replay I can see the rationale for block. As I said, in first half it was a no callin the first half.

The elbow was inadvertent contact and no one will convince me differently. There was no rotation, leading with the elbow or swinging to clear space. It was a clear basketball crossover move and within the offensive player’s cylinder of control

No doubt, as many things in life, where there is any wiggle room for interpretation, one with interpret something as they see fit.

In regards to the former and as "Consig" noted, it's 100% irrelevant in this instance, this was far from your garden variety type charge being argued. Rules change, moreover, the general climate in today's game, especially in relation to blows to the face that can lead to serious injury, etc. Incidental/inadvertent contact or not (it's hard to argue that Mintz didn't have to lead with the high elbow in the manner in which he chose to do so) they/refs far more times than not, will rule in favor of the one who took the unnecessary/unwarranted blow to the face.

They want things of this nature out of today's game. No different that the way in which the NFL (even college) has gone full tilt to protect the QB's.

 

[NineOneSeven]

Dude elbowed him directly in the face after dribbling like a manaic down the court and inexplicably euro-ing into Davis. Tough play, tough call, tough loss, but let's just... not do that.

 

[50YRsofCuse]

I reviewed the UNC game several times via replay. There were 9 instances (7 by NC and 2 by Cuse) in the first half where the ref(s) could have called fouls on players that initiated the contact (one was a NC hard push on a rebound) but for the most part the refs let the players on both teams play.

In the second half up until 5:50 remaining, the refs allowed the teams to play without excessive foul calling. Then, this was about the time Bacot went to the bench for a breather. Not sure if it was a coincidence but the referees started calling the game tighter than previously. They weren’t as consistent as before and it seemed like touch fouls by Cuse players were being called and harder fouls by UNC were being missed.

I disagree with the flagrant 1 foul on Judah. From one angle, it was a definite charge and a second angle it looked like Davis only had one foot in position while the other foot was still moving. It looked like Judah was bringing his arm/shoulder into position to shoot vice intentionally hitting Davis. They both were moving: one to defend and the other to score.

The play where Judah fouled out would had normally been a non call as was the call seconds earlier when the UNC player shoved Judah off balance with his hands to make space/room to receive the pass. Judah in recovery stumbled and the foul was called on him.

Around 21.4 remaining, Bacot clearly moved Hima to clear him out of position for a rebound on the foul shot preceding JGIII attempting to save the ball (that he had last touched) to a NC player for a score. it was a no-call that should had been a foul.

 

[djcon57]

Can we please stop this? It's way better if we all just assumed people mean what they say

Seriously, so sick of the hypotheticals on this board "If JB did/said this, you wouldnt like it"

No I would because my opinion isnt based on an agenda. Same here.

I thought it was a charge. Not because I'm not a fan, but because I thought it was a charge.

The first Mintz charge should have been block imo, I must have become a fan on just that play.

 

[blust2i3d4]

Referees should be investigated. Down to blowing the whistle with .8 to go to try and get the UNC cover. 3 of Jesse’s fouls were BS. MOUNIR PUSHED IN THE BACK BY BACOT IN THE ft to win. And obviously the flagrant. JB has to sound off. Inexcusable. 24 ft to 3… The boys played too hard for this outcome. Pathetic

JG3 was possessed. The ball hit the back of Bacop. If JG3 has not tried to save it, it would have been Syracuse's ball with 2 points ahead in less one minute to end the game. It already happened to JG3 one month ago to save ball for the guest team. He is so unlucky.

 

[two3zone]

Seriously, so sick of the hypotheticals on this board "If JB did/said this, you wouldnt like it"

No I would because my opinion isnt based on an agenda. Same here.

I thought it was a charge. Not because I'm not a fan, but because I thought it was a charge.

The first Mintz charge should have been block imo, I must have become a fan on just that play.

Ehh. You’re not like 90% of the people here.

 

[djcon57]

Ehh. You’re not like 90% of the people here.

if that’s true, then good. I don’t want to be.

 

[Cusefan0307]

 

[Cusefan0307]

So apparently Roger Ayers doing Duke and UNC games is a thing.. The same can be said for him and calling charges in big spots if you look it up on twitter.

 

[rrlbees]

JG3 was possessed. The ball hit the back of Bacop. If JG3 has not tried to save it, it would have been Syracuse's ball with 2 points ahead in less one minute to end the game. It already happened to JG3 one month ago to save ball for the guest team. He is so unlucky.

The ball was off joe

 

[CuseCPT]

In honor of our Wolfpack guests I made this as a welcoming gift.

 

[blust2i3d4]

The ball was off joe

Hit Bacot first. Then if Joe ahd not touch it near the foul line, it would be Syracuse ball.

 

[rrlbees]

Hit Bacot first. Then if Joe ahd not touch it near the foul line, it would be Syracuse ball.

Hit Bacot and caromed off joes wrist/hand before he dove for it.

 

[CuseFaninVT]

Can be moving backwards, but watching Davis’s right foot as Mintz started his crossover I thought it was clear that he was also moving laterally. Is that allowed if he can’t get to the spot and establish position prior to contact?

Yes

 

[FrancoPizza]

You can’t just run into people (or elbow them in the face) and just because they’re not stationary mean it’s a defensive foul. If that was the case you’d just sign 5 linebackers who can hit free throws and have them bull charge into every defender and shoot 120 free throws a game.

I know. It’s ridiculous how insecure the fanbase has become that they’ll throw away common sense and try to reinvent the rule book to justify a perceived injustice. if Mintz was the one that got bowled over and they called a blocking foul they’d be saying the opposite.

 

[xc84]

JG3 was possessed. The ball hit the back of Bacop. If JG3 has not tried to save it, it would have been Syracuse's ball with 2 points ahead in less one minute to end the game. It already happened to JG3 one month ago to save ball for the guest team. He is so unlucky.

While I don't have a clear replay, I thought Joe's left hand was down out of bounds when he saved with his right it meaning he was out of bounds when he hit the ball and it should have ended there. Anyone have a good view of that?

 

[xc84]

I will answer my own question. Found the replay from the out of bounds angle and his left hand was not down yet when he batted the ball. On the other hand (as others have said), Hima was blatantly fouled from behind on the rebound that led to it.

 

[Fly Rodder]

Hit Bacot and caromed off joes wrist/hand before he dove for it.

doesn't matter who it was off and frankly, I can't see enough on a replay to make a judgement call, and I don't care. It's two games in a row out of three where Joe saved a ball under the opponent's basket contrary to elementary basketball coaching and it bit Syracuse two games in a row out of three. Stop doing it.

 

[blust2i3d4]

While I don't have a clear replay, I thought Joe's left hand was down out of bounds when he saved with his right it meaning he was out of bounds when he hit the ball and it should have ended there. Anyone have a good view of that?

ESPN.com has the scene on their top basketball page in slow motion. I don't know why so many people are trying to correct me while the evidence is clear on ESPN.

 

[xc84]

ESPN.com has the scene on their top basketball page in slow motion. I don't know why so many people are trying to correct me while the evidence is clear on ESPN.

who is trying to correct you?

 

[tbonezone]

armondo bacot averages 7 fts a game. against the cuse he took 3. took 15 shots. (dunks)
nobody cries when we shoot 15 more fts than our opponent. flip it and it's criminal. hypocrisy 101.
cuse is plus positive on fouls and fts this season by a wide margin. maybe we're the ones who need the refs to win ? and when it seldom don't go our way. kwit beechin.