I just watched a replay of the final play

[DogMania]

Yes, he should have either shot the ball right away or passed down to AD on the left moving to the hoop. When he did drive, he should have taken it more into the defender instead of whatever you would call what he did. But, easy to second guess. First time I recall Roscoe being in that type of situation and hopefully he'll be a little calmer next time. Roscoe played very well. We had lots of other opportunities to get key baskets with less than the best decisions. Maybe Syracuse is pretty good....just a thought.

After finally watching a recording of that last play, you are spot on, DB. It happened all so fast, I didn't notice AD on the left watching it live, but AD was wide open for an easy dunk and tie.

 

[VAHuskyFan]

(1) I get that refs sometimes swallow their whistles in the final seconds, but generally only when the contact is clearly unintentional. Given that Syracuse was running around strategically fouling everyone in sight at the end of the first half to prevent us from getting a clean shot off, you just can't give them a presumption of innocence at the end of the second half of the same game. Fair knew what he was doing. It was a great play, but he was clearly trying to prevent a clean shot once he saw that he was out of position.

(2) Even if that foul is called, it doesn't give us a W. In fact, the odds say we still lose that game 3 times out of 4. Roscoe is a 70% FT shooter, so it's 50-50 that he makes 2 to send it to overtime and 50-50 again that we come out on top in OT.

(3) Overall, I thought this was a fairly officiated contest. There were a few questionable calls (there always are), but we actually got a few calls for the first time in what seems like weeks. So even though that last foul should have been called, you really can't lay blame for the loss on the officials. Syracuse deserved the win.

 

[FeedTheDove]

(2) Even if that foul is called, it doesn't give us a W. In fact, the odds say we still lose that game 3 times out of 4. Roscoe is a 70% FT shooter, so it's 50-50 that he makes 2 to send it to overtime and 50-50 again that we come out on top in OT.

This is true, however, the foul would have at least given us a chance to send it to OT. Not only would it have given Roscoe the opportunity to knock down the two free throws, but let's say he missed one (whether it be the first or second) There was roughly 3.5 seconds on the clock when the foul actually occurred (the first foul at least.) This is absolutely enough time for an offensive rebound, and a put-back, and also enough time to foul a Syracuse rebounder, putting them on the line, and then giving us another shot to win it or send it to OT. The foul would have set up a number of different scenarios for the outcome of the game... that were never possible without it. Gotta blow the whistle, </3

 

[caw]

No

I'd rather have Giffey in than Roscoe for offense. Either way, on that play one of the guards has to make a play there.

 

[orangehomer]

don't worry about it, if you take care of business this week we will be playing again next week anyway.

 

[Excalibur]

Anyone criticizing the fact that Roscoe is falling away needs to have their head examined. He's falling away because he was pulled backwards.

 

[jibsey]

What we are losing sight of here is that we outplayed the #2 team in the country in the second half (after we were outplayed in the first) and lost a nailbiter in the last second. That basically means we have the talent to make a run in the tournament should we make it. Until this game we were being blown out by the better teams in the BE. Boatright is finally asserting himself, and when Napier starts scoring we can be dangerous. Pitt played Ville pretty tough on the road so that won't be easy.

 

[DogMania]

I'd rather have Giffey in than Roscoe for offense. Either way, on that play one of the guards has to make a play there.

I'm not sure I understand why people wanted Giffey in there at the end rather than Roscoe. Scoe was having an outstanding game. He was one of our most active players on the offensive glass and was the one who seemed most comfortable with receiving the ball in the middle of the paint, which ended up the case with 4+ seconds on the clock. Now of course, we'd all like to have someone like Lamb with the ball in that spot, but no way was SU going to let him have the ball anywhere close to the basket.

You have to give SU credit for trying to take away the players that UConn wanted the ball in their hands, forcing them to give it up to a player who's not used to being in that situation. Maybe if Scoe had been receiving the ball in the middle of the paint throughout the season he might have been more instinctual and had spotted AD open to his left right under the basket.

I just don't see how Giffey could have been a better piece of the puzzle in that game at that time.

 

[FeedTheDove]

There is no way that i would want the ball in giffeys hands in that situation, period. Roscoe did not make a bad decision, he was fouled.

 

[tzznandrew]

I'm not sure I understand why people wanted Giffey in there at the end rather than Roscoe....I just don't see how Giffey could have been a better piece of the puzzle in that game at that time.

Because people really like Giffey more than he has earned. Nice player, but why would he be out there over the kid who had 11 points and 7 rebounds? Giffey had 0 points, 0 assists, and 1 rebound. Because he can pass better? I just don't think the numbers back up his being a better passer.

 

[businesslawyer]

What we are losing sight of here is that we outplayed the #2 team in the country in the second half (after we were outplayed in the first) and lost a nailbiter in the last second. That basically means we have the talent to make a run in the tournament should we make it. Until this game we were being blown out by the better teams in the BE. Boatright is finally asserting himself, and when Napier starts scoring we can be dangerous. Pitt played Ville pretty tough on the road so that won't be easy.

I don't think anyone is losing sight of it. We all know we have the talent to play with top level teams. What we don't know is whether we can and will play 40 minutes without losing focus.

Many think one good win will take this team psychologically over the hump. Which is why it's so frustrating that we had a chance to get there and couldn't take advantage of it.

 

[caw]

Because people really like Giffey more than he has earned. Nice player, but why would he be out there over the kid who had 11 points and 7 rebounds? Giffey had 0 points, 0 assists, and 1 rebound. Because he can pass better? I just don't think the numbers back up his being a better passer.

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.

 

[Excalibur]

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

 

[Rico444]

don't worry about it, if you take care of business this week we will be playing again next week anyway.

I was at the game, and wanted a win as much as anybody, but this is spot on. Regardless of a couple of calls at the end, I'd rather be on the right side of the whistle in the BET or NCAAs. Those are the games that matter.

 

[sparky]

Bad play calling. Whatever happened to running an out of bounds play that leads to a score as opposed to throwing it into the backcourt. With JC there that play would have been different.

 

[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.