I just watched a replay of the final play

[caw]

He had a good game. No reasonable argument otherwise. Point to the first half if you want, but who did have a good first half?

Well 1 good half is not a good game, is it?

Here is a "reasonable argument":

First half: 4 points on 1-2 shooting and 2-2 from the foul line. Zero rebounds.

Second half: 1-4 from the FT line, 3-8 from the field. He had 2 offensive rebounds which resulted in zero points and 1 foul on Melo in a 10 second span then had one other offensive rebound for one of his made buckets. He had 1 defensive rebound. His second half was much better and if he had gone 3-4 or 4-4 from the foul line, I would have said he had a good game. Or if he had say 2-3 rebounds in the first half as well as 4 in the second.

His energy and defense was pretty good all night though.

 

[Huskymaniac]

1. A foul is a foul regardless of how much time is on the clock or if the fouled player should have passed the ball before the foul. The rules don't change. The way the refs enforce them does...period...end of discussion!!!
2. Goaltending, as far as I recall the rules, doesn't require that the ball be sitting ON the rim. It just needs to be in the cylinder above the rim.
3. Roscoe was fouled.
4. That was an offensive goaltend.
5. Even the most dumb refs can read newspapers and watch TV. They have been told that UConn pays recruits (Miles), doesn't keep their players on track to graduate (APR) and uses loopholes to get around rules and punishment (Drummond). To think that there isn't at least ONE ref that isn't at least SLIGHTLY influenced by this is just blind and foolish.

 

[mauconnfan]

1. A foul is a foul regardless of how much time is on the clock or if the fouled player should have passed the ball before the foul. The rules don't change. The way the refs enforce them does...period...end of discussion!!!
2. Goaltending, as far as I recall the rules, doesn't require that the ball be sitting ON the rim. It just needs to be in the cylinder above the rim.
3. Roscoe was fouled.
4. That was an offensive goaltend.
5. Even the most dumb refs can read newspapers and watch TV. They have been told that UConn pays recruits (Miles), doesn't keep their players on track to graduate (APR) and uses loopholes to get around rules and punishment (Drummond). To think that there isn't at least ONE ref that isn't at least SLIGHTLY influenced by this is just blind and foolish.

I may be foolish but thankfully I'm not blind................there were some questionable calls and you're 100% correct the refs change their ways in the final seconds.....I'm not sure what everyone was looking at to be 100 percent correct but it did LOOK like he may have been fouled and he could have been. Nonetheless everyone knows, everyone, they swallow those whistles, it's freakin reality. The kids need to be sure not to put in their hands as time dwindles away. Shoot the ball or get it to the open guy.....that simple. No need to take it into the trees, especialliy when you're not too good at finishing. We need to quite throwing that play on the refs and whining about it - we had options! Coaches blew it too - Jeremy on the perimeter was a joke rather than at the high post knowing they were going to jump him with 2 guys as soon as he got the ball, no way out...........

The Melo putback looked like a goaltend until I saw the replay and I see a hint of air between the ball and the rim, could have gone either way...........the travel was awful and you can't swallow the whistles twice - Fair shuffeld first and then changed his pivot foot to get the shot off....they really missed that one!~!

 

[Husky Dynasty]

You know it's a bad call/no call when even the other team's fans feel and are willing to admit that UConn was jobbed by the refs. As my coworker, who is a huge Syracuse fan and alum so succinctly put it, "that was crap, we should have lost that game - CJ Fair clearly fouled Roscoe Smith on the last play." I responded by letting him know that at least SU outplayed us in the first half...

Even if the proper call wasn't made, we can't afford to put ourselves in a position where we're reliant upon the refs making the right call at the end of a game, as they've proven to be unable/unwilling to do so all year long (*Marquette).

If the team refrains from spotting the other team a 17 pt lead, and plays hard for a complete 40 minutes, they should beat both PC and Pitt, and should find themselves well positioned to do some damage in the damn NCAA tourney.

 

[mets1090]

Letting Lamb get doubled 30 feet from the hoop led to the 2 on 1 that some have argued should have resulted in a no brainer wide open dunk. Therefore, that can't be viewed as a bad call from the coaches. If Scoe drops that off for AD everyone is talking about how it was a great call to get Lamb doubled 30 feet away from the hoop to free up a wide open dunk.

 

[mauconnfan]

Letting Lamb get doubled 30 feet from the hoop led to the 2 on 1 that some have argued should have resulted in a no brainer wide open dunk. Therefore, that can't be viewed as a bad call from the coaches. If Scoe drops that off for AD everyone is talking about how it was a great call to get Lamb doubled 30 feet away from the hoop to free up a wide open dunk.

Sure it can - who would you rather have with the ball in their hands - Jeremy throws the floater or delivers the pass which was there! Having said that they would have keyed on Jeremy so that pass may not have happened but a better alternative was a jumper from Bazz or Boat and crash the boards! You need to open up the court as a coach predicting what the other team will do and who they will key on as if to say "he cannot beat us".......use him as a deke at worst.....no blame anywhere just many scenario's................best scenario is we don't worry about what went down because the Huskies bigs played harder and tougher in the 1st half and we're not down 17 early 2nd half right? ........

 

[cohenzone]

Okay, it doesn't matter. But just for this record, my cousin whose family is true SU, and who himself got his masters from SU and went on to be a sportswriter for a major market newspaper and for a year the President of the National Professional Football Writer's Asso., e-mailed me after the game and expressed the unsolicited opinion that there was no way that wasn't a foul. Of course RS would have had to make both foul shots and that would only have meant OT, so who knows what would have happened had RS gone to the line, but the opportunity should have been there.

 

[upstater]

I love stats as much as the next guy, but assist stats are really a poor way of judging a passer (fun but not really good). Roscoe didn't have a bad game, but I'm not sure if "good" is quite accurate either.

He had a better than good game. Played very well on defense, grabbed rebounds, hit his shots, what more could you ask (other than dropping the ball down to AD at the end?)

 

[caw]

He had a better than good game. Played very well on defense, grabbed rebounds, hit his shots, what more could you ask (other than dropping the ball down to AD at the end?)

4 rebounds in 28 minutes, 2 of which were on the same possession. He was 4-10, with two being layups/tap-ins. The defense was great.

 

[Hans Sprungfeld]

I'm amazed by some of this.

1. It was a foul. Period. And probably a smart one at that. We are not going to get an even break from the zebras this year. I'm as anti-conspiracy theory as anyone but it's getting hard to hold that position.

2. Had Roscoe passed to Drummond, everyone had to pray that no one could grab Drummond before he dunked. I'm not saying the play wouldn't have worked, but in the huddle you have to have been told to be very careful before passing to Drummond.

3. My favorite is that Roscoe shouldn't have touched the ball there. Did you watch the comeback? Our halkfcourt offense was based on getting the ball to Roscoe just underneath the 3 in the 3-2. They were overplaying the guards and opening that space up for Roscoe. Someone wants to have a play that ignores what Syracuse was giving us and what they were leaving open? Great.

It was a toss-up whether to simply press Like or add comments.

I think that with a two-point lead after one or two helpful no-calls, Boeheim coached well and his cohesive team responded well.

The perimeter was guarded to prevent a loss ala Napier against Villanova; UConn was forced to go inside to get no more than a tie; and the likely instruction was to foul, which would be furthermore strategically sound. Either RS or AD would have to have made 2 free throws to send the game into overtime. Boeheim probably liked his chances with that scenario more than the alternatives. Plus, there was a chance that the refs would swallow their whistles, something that shows up in two of three post-games quotes from UConn players who all say that there was a foul.