ND vs. X

[AlumKCof93]

I went back and looked at the Xavier free throw that preceded Atkins and the Xavier kid did the same thing.  That was an awful way to end a great game.

[Niv Berkowitz]

I despise nd. That said, u let the players finish that game. If it were us on the losing end of that? Good God this board would blow up!

[Donnybrook]

It was like 90% Duke fans. They were a 2 seed and lost to a 15 seed. It's the first round. If MU was playing in Chicago at 6 and was a 2 seed and lost to Lehigh I'd leave and drive back. No way I'd stay. Now if I were a 3 seed and lost the 1st Final 4 game or 11 seed and lost the 1st Sweet 16 game there's a difference.

Dook fans are driving home and drinking their sorrows away. The few Lehigh fans are out at the bars partying like crazy. I'd be doing the same in either of their spots. After MU beat Xavier I stuck around for about 5 minutes of warmups for the Cuse/Indiana State game and was way too amped up to stay, so I left and went out in Cleveland last year. No way I was sitting through an entire 40 minute warmup and 2 hour game after a nice "upset."

I live a 15 minute walk from Penn Station. I was travelling on business the week of the MU/UNC game. Flew into LGA an hour & 15 prior to game time, booked it to Newark, planes, trains & automobiles style, slipped in across the street of the Rock 20 before game time for two quickies (NCAA no alcohol) and watched our a$$es get kicked. I wanted nothing more than to go home after that tough loss but stuck around because college hoops is a beautiful game. Looking at seedings is a moot point, this is the NCAA tournament. Sop up every moment. Did I have sour grapes, F* yeah. Did I leave. F* no!

ND became the dumbest team in America in the last 10 seconds tonight.

[SoCalEagle]

Saint mary's got called for a travel on the baseline at the end of that game. Should that one have been overlooked too?  Rules are the rules. This isn't playground ball. ND gave that game away after taking a 63-60 lead.

[MU82]

ND is ND. We are Marquette. I am thrilled the Choking Irish lost.

As for letting the players decide the game, all Notre Dame had to do was not airmail that pass out of bounds a little earlier when they had the lead and the ball, and maybe they wouldn't have needed it to come down to a call in the closing seconds. ND had the game in their hands and they pissed it away. Refs don't decide games. ND led most of the game and made too many mistakes to win.

As for the call, it was a huge story just 24 hours earlier in the Syracuse game. It was the correct call both times. Grant was well past the line. Just because Brey and his coaches didn't emphasize it, it doesn't mean the refs should ignore it. It was a great call and a gutsy call.

Charles didn't like the intentional foul when ND reached out and grabbed the jersey right in front of the ref before the inbounds pass, either. That also was a perfect call. Just because Charles doesn't like something, it doesn't mean it's wrong. He thinks all three refs should swallow their whistles in the final minute of a close game. I love Charles, but that's stupid.

ND loses early in the tourney again. The only thing any real Marquette fan can say is: "Yes!"

[Coleman]

Saint mary's got called for a travel on the baseline at the end of that game. Should that one have been overlooked too?  Rules are the rules. This isn't playground ball. ND gave that game away after taking a 63-60 lead.

I hate this reasoning. Rules infractions are committed on every posession, whether it's a carry, travel, 3 seconds, 5 seconds, foul, etc. The refs cant, and dont, make every one of these calls. Its the ref's job to call it equally of both sides of the court and make sure the game is safe and both teams are on a level playing field. They never make every call. In fact, they missed the exact same one on Xavier right before this, as was mentioned. You don't make these kinds of calls at the end of games.

[SoCalEagle]

So you (as a ref) see the travel on the baseline by saint mary's, but you don't make the call because it's a close game and you want to let them play?  Why ignore the rules because it's close at the end?

[karavotsos]

Ummm, no.  You do not call the meaningless lane violation that you did not call on the previous play and probably have not called a million times before.

[Donnybrook]

It doesn't matter. I remember seeing this called when I was in the 6th grade (23 years ago) and to this day I know to not enter the 3-point area during a free throw. Rules are rules, don't hedge your bets when the game is on the line. 
-STUPID pass
-Lane violation
-Obvious intentional foul

ND got what they deserved. They played dumb in the last minute and lost.

[SoCalEagle]

Meaningless? I guarantee you it's not meaningless to the other team. What other violations are not to be called at the end of a game? 3 seconds? Over and back? You're just opening a can of worms if you see a violation and decide not to call it.

[GGGG]

The call has to be made.  "Letting players play at the end" generally means not calling a ticky tack foul, but it doesn't mean you overlook other, obvious violations.

[GGGG]

And by the way, MU DID lose on a call like this...when Lazar stepped over the end line against Mizzou.   That call needed to be made then, and it need to be made yesterday.

[Benny B]

If Murray St crosses the line early at the end of today's game, you damn skippy the refs should be calling it.

[MerrittsMustache]

The call has to be made.  "Letting players play at the end" generally means not calling a ticky tack foul, but it doesn't mean you overlook other, obvious violations.

This. Exactly.

[MU82]

Here's hoping Junior doesn't throw a pass 20 feet over Jae's head when we have the lead and the ball in the final seconds. If our lads take care of their business, I won't worry about the refs taking care of their business.

[lab_warrior]

And by the way, MU DID lose on a call like this...when Lazar stepped over the end line against Mizzou.   That call needed to be made then, and it need to be made yesterday.

+1000

That's the first thing I thought of, before laughing my ass off at ND losing.  It really sucked, but you can't NOT call that, be it lane violation, travelling, reach in foul, etc.

If I can chime in on this captivating "College Basketball Refereeing Ethics 101" discussion section--the kid committed a lane violation.  There is no doubt that was the correct call, just like the kid from St. Mary's travelled.  Ironically, isn't this the very thing lots of folks use to bitch about the NBA--that the refs never call anything?  

Also, it's Notre Dame.  I am ELATED they lost.  F*** 'EM.

[brewcity77]

Also, it's Notre Dame.  I am ELATED they lost.  F*** 'EM.

In general, I always cheer for the Big East in the tournament, if for no other reason than the tourney credits we receive for league wins. But I'm never that upset when ND goes out, because they're ND.

And today, I decided to look up their tourney record, because they always seem to go out early. Since they were dumped in the first round in 1988, they have only made the Sweet 16 once in 10 appearances. Buzz has as many Sweet 16s in 4 years as ND does in 24 years. And if he wins today...

Yeah, ND sucks.

[mu_hilltopper]

When Lazar stepped over the line, we still needed to go 94 feet in 5 seconds, get a FG to send it in to overtime.  Chances of that happening are not impossible .. not great, either.

I submit that's quite different from the ND situation, where NOT calling that lane violation .. ND would have been down just 1 point with 3 seconds to go and another FT coming .. so, say 70-80% chance they hit the FT and slim chance they DON'T go to OT.

On a purely procedural call that had nothing to do with the actual play, by a matter of perhaps 6 inches .. the refs stopped ND from having a pretty good chance.

[karavotsos]

Meaningless? I guarantee you it's not meaningless to the other team. What other violations are not to be called at the end of a game? 3 seconds? Over and back? You're just opening a can of worms if you see a violation and decide not to call it.

Actually, the ref opened a can of worms by making the call.  I guaranty no one would be talking about that play if the ref had done nothing. (OK - maybe Seth Davis would.) The ball goes through the hoop.  Atkins takes the second shot.  Either he misses it or makes it and the game goes on.

No one on XU, no XU fan, is going to complain that there was a lane violation on a made free throw and attribute losing to the uncalled lane violation. 

[GGGG]

When Lazar stepped over the line, we still needed to go 94 feet in 5 seconds, get a FG to send it in to overtime.  Chances of that happening are not impossible .. not great, either.

I submit that's quite different from the ND situation, where NOT calling that lane violation .. ND would have been down just 1 point with 3 seconds to go and another FT coming .. so, say 70-80% chance they hit the FT and slim chance they DON'T go to OT.

On a purely procedural call that had nothing to do with the actual play, by a matter of perhaps 6 inches .. the refs stopped ND from having a pretty good chance.

Wait...are you using this as the justification for swallowing the whistle?  Who cares how good of a chance it is.  If Xavier would have lost because they didn't make the correct call, that's a bigger screwing than the call against ND.

[NCAARules]

On a purely procedural call that had nothing to do with the actual play, by a matter of perhaps 6 inches .. the refs stopped ND from having a pretty good chance.

Out of curiosity - if the ND player down on the block had stepped in early (before the shot was released) would you have had a problem with it being called - even if the subsequent FT was a make?

[mu_hilltopper]

As the probability of definitively swaying the game goes up, the refs should swallow their whistle more, on meaningless infractions.

MU was probably going to lose anyhow .. the ref calling Lazar's infraction likely didn't affect the outcome.  ND was probably going to tie, the ref's call negated that.  

Filed under: let the kids play.  

There are literally hundreds of uncalled infractions ignored in each game because they are minor.  Calling one that literally changes the outcome of the game .. no one wants that.

Now, I understand calling a contact foul, sure.  Someone gets mugged on the last second shot, I'm fine with calling that.  

This was meaningless infraction on a made FT that as karavotsos wrote, no one in the building would have noticed or complained about.  

[karavotsos]

Out of curiosity - if the ND player down on the block had stepped in early (before the shot was released) would you have had a problem with it being called - even if the subsequent FT was a make?

I would. 

Orenze Onuaku foot-faulted on every free throw he attempted for his entire senior year, and it was never called.  (It went untested in the NCAA tournament because he injured his knee.)  Since then I have been of the opinion that at least 95% of free throw lane violations are inconsequential and go uncalled.  If you watch games, guys go into the lane early all the time.  The only time the lane violation call is really made is when you have a free throw shooter who has a hitch in his shot and guys are falling all over each other trying not to go in the lane early.  No one complains about lane violations not being called.  It has just become part of the game.

To start making the call in the final seconds of a game is ridiculous.

Also, if pulling on a jersey is an intentional foul, shouldn't Wisconsin average 5-6 intentional fouls per game?

[GGGG]

As the probability of definitively swaying the game goes up, the refs should swallow their whistle more, on meaningless infractions.

What if he would have missed the FT, and the guy who entered the lane early got the rebound and score the winning basket?  That is no longer a "meaningless" infraction.

[wadesworld]

Also, if pulling on a jersey is an intentional foul, shouldn't Wisconsin average 5-6 intentional fouls per game?

That is as intentional of a foul as it gets.  You can't stop a guy from running to get open on an inbound pass.  If the guy doesn't grab his jersey they inbound it and run up the court and run time out.  You have to give them a chance to get the ball in and foul.