Stop, thief! Syracuse 72, UConn 67
by Kevin Meacham on Feb 11, 2010 12:08 AM EST
Email
Print
And that should about wrap up UConn's NCAA Tournament hopes in a nice little box, to be sent away to some Atlantic 10 team that would be under .500 with our schedule. No, I'm not bitter or anything.
#2 Syracuse beat UConn at the Carrier Dome tonight, 72-67, sending the Huskies to their seventh loss in 10 games.
The Orange led by seven at halftime, outplaying UConn but remaining within striking distance. From there, Syracuse whipped UConn's ass for the first eight minutes of the second half, and UConn whipped Syracuse's ass for the next 11.
Huge credit to Kemba Walker (who continues to show that as he goes, the offense will go) and Jerome Dyson (who hit a couple huge 3's during the comeback). UConn finally looked like the 18-6 team they could be, rather than the 14-10 team they are, for the last half of the second half.
And then John Cahill whipped everybody's ass in the last minute (not for the first time this season).
Cahill's phantom timeout, granted after Scoop Jardine's shot was blocked and rebounded by Stanley Robinson, turned the game on its head. Instead of the Huskies controlling possession with 33 seconds left in a tie game, Syracuse inbounded the ball. Or at least they were going to until a not-awful-but-given-the-circumstances-come-on-give-us-a-break foul call on Majok sent Wes Johnson to the line for two free throws.
That sequence will be all anyone remembers about this game. It's unfortunate that it had to be that way, because this was an excellent, exciting basketball game for the last 12 minutes of the second half. But let's be honest: the call didn't decide the outcome, even if it shifted the probabilities quite a bit. UConn did more than enough to throw the game away in the last 90 seconds, without John Cahill's help.
This was just another game that got away for UConn, referee call or no referee call. The Huskies once again played even with a top 10 team (displaying intensity and heart that was noticeably absent in losses to Providence and Louisville), and once again found a way to come up small in the game's biggest moments. Holler if you hear me, Jerome Dyson taking a not-open 30-footer with 18 seconds left, trailing by two.
As an aside, man...we really could've used Jim Calhoun out there tonight.
A moral victory here and there is fine, but the Huskies are already in too deep a hole to take more moral victories. At 14-10, and 4-7 in the league, UConn pretty much needs to win five of their seven remaining games (four of which over similar or better teams; three of which likely needing to be on the road - three more than the Huskies have this year) to even sniff the bubble. Even if that happens, with UConn's one decent win (Texas) looking worse and worse, the Huskies would probably have to get to the semifinals of the BET to be sure of a bid.
Yes, it's possible. No, it's not likely. Yes, we will continue to hope against hope (until the next heartbreaking loss, anyway) that this listing ship can be saved.
But everything after about the 1:40 mark of the second half was just the latest in a series of kicks to the balls from the basketball gods. And what else can we conclude, other than that this is not UConn's year?
Our only consolation is that today was (by far) the highest traffic in the 17-month history of this blog, and for that we thank you. Things got a little heated in the open thread, understandably, but let's try and keep it civil from here on out, OK? (That goes for both fanbases.)
Well, our other consolation is that Porter will be living up to his end of HoyaSuxa's bet and dancing to the Syracuse fight song on video. So check here in next day or two for that. In the meantime, cheer yourself up with this hilarious news blooper.
31 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Hell of a game.
As a Syracuse fan, I can do nothing but put my head down and pretend the call was supposed to go our way, even if I don’t necessarily agree with that stance.
I do applaud, however, your ability to critically analyze your own team without focusing wholly on the call and playing the blame game on the officials.
And speaking of those officials, I really wish the players could have played tonight without the refs affecting the game, and that goes for both sides. Watching from the student section, the game was sloppy all around by both teams (with small windows of awesome play for both sides) and the referees, too.
I was nervous coming in, and I still think UConn is much better than the record shows.
As much as it pains me to say it, Dyson and Walker are two tough-as-hell kids that impressed me tonight, particularly during the comeback.
Referees really need to stop babying basketball players. On average they are like 6’6", 240pounds.. they can take a fucking slap to the arm on a reach in or a little push to the back.
Would make things a helluva lot more interesting and would take the game out of that shitbag Cahill’s hands.
I wish I was tall and black
Agreed
I know if I was on the other side, I would say it was a horrible call as well. However, as others have mentioned, if the call went UCONN’s way, SU fans would be just as heated because Boeheim was clearly signaling for the timeout while SU was in possession of the ball.
Either way, UCONN played their hearts out. Either side realizes the game could have gone either way. Maybe we will meet again in the BE tournament so you will have a chance at revenge. 7OT’s maybe?
by UCONNislame on Feb 11, 2010 12:49 PM EST up reply actions
sorry
I’d like to to apologize for starting that ruckus last night. I was a little pissed off in the minutes following the game.
My bad. Won’t happen again.
Props
Props for the apology to the board Fergy. I know it can get heated after your team loses. Believe me, as an SU fan, I know how it feels!
For the record, I think you guys are better than your record as well and you have some gutsy players. As a CT native, I root for you guys every game except for when you play the Cuse.
And sorry if I was too harsh after the SU victory. I didn’t mean to ruffle feathers THAT much. :)
by UCONNislame on Feb 11, 2010 12:32 PM EST up reply actions
Cahill
should have been ready for the time out. In the NFL, ref’s know the situations so well that tehy wait over by the coaches. The coach says “as soon as _ happens, I want a time out.” The refs know to call it. This is true in college football as well. In the NBA “If we get the rebound I want a time out.” Jimmy B called the time out before scoop got the ball… You didnt get jobbed. It was a late whistle, but a fair whistle.
(besides, had the play continued… scoop would have gotten two shots on the play and won the game)
Cahill is an awful ref
Hoya fan here, I really feel for UCONN, they got totally screwed over in this game with the ridiculous magic timeout call.
Cahill was the same ref who cost Georgetown the Duke game last year, calling a phantom technical foul on Greg Monroe while he was on the bench (replays showed Monroe didn’t say anything) putting Monroe in foul trouble and allowing Duke to pull away with the game.
It's not me, It's you
by SomebodyBuyAustinaSteak on Feb 11, 2010 9:52 AM EST reply actions
Just to play devil's advocate
I think it’s more than likely that Boeheim wanted a time out as soon as his team got the offensive rebound since he knew the shot clock differential was like 2 seconds.
If you can put the shoe on the other foot for just a second, how would you feel if we were in that scenario, Kemba drove to the hoop eradically (as he has done all season) while Blaney was on the sideline calling for a time out and Cahill didn’t happen to acknowledge it until after we lost the ball.
People would be saying: “OMG JIM CAHILL HOW DID YOU NOT SEE BLANEY CALLING FOR A TO”
I say give him the benefit of the doubt, Boeheim is a HOF coach, he wanted a timeout, and he got it.
From the NCAA Rulebook:
Section 13. Timeouts Charged
Art. 1. A timeout shall be granted and charged after a player or head coach
makes a visual or oral request and:
a. When a player of that team is in control of the ball (this includes
throw-ins and free throws); Exception: Rule 5-12.1.c.
b. When the ball is at the disposal of the player; or
c. When the ball is dead.
I think if you look back at the replay Boehim started shooting as soon as Jardine got the ball, so there’s your “oral request” and your “ball is at the disposal of the player”. Maybe Cahill didn’t call it until late but Boehim was waving his arms and all that jazz and if he didn’t get it you can more than likely bet the Syracuse board would be blowing up over Cahill missing the signal.
If we want to complain about something how about shot selection at the end? Either drive to the hoop or let Kemba take those midrange jumpers he was knocking down consistently toward the end, not a 30 foot Jerome Dyson 3.
total BS
the rules clearly state that a timeout can’t be granted unless the requesting team has possession.
Rule 5, Section 10, Art. 4, page 93 states: "The game clock and shot clock, if running, shall be stopped when an official: grants a coach’s or player’s visual or oral request for a time out." (emphasis added)
Additionally, Rule 5, Section 12, Art. 1, page 95 adds: "No timeouts shall be granted: unless there is a player control by the requesting team." (emphasis added) Rule 5, Section 13, Art. 1, on page 96 also states "A timeout shall be granted and charged after a player or head coach makes a visual or oral request and when a player of that team is in control of the ball."
It's not me, It's you
by SomebodyBuyAustinaSteak on Feb 11, 2010 10:52 AM EST up reply actions
Meaning under the rules at the time of the TO granting
Syracuse had to have had the ball. They didn’t. It was an undefendable call.
The Syracuse trolls on this blog are simply wrong and should go back to defending women-beaters, or whatever they do in their free time.
It's not me, It's you
by SomebodyBuyAustinaSteak on Feb 11, 2010 10:55 AM EST up reply actions
He's a Georgetown fan, Tex.
Y’all have your own rivalry to worry about.
Orange Bowl/dual Final Fours or bust in 2011. We're going all-in.
by Kevin Meacham on Feb 11, 2010 2:20 PM EST up reply actions
I think there is an issue of interpretation here.
If we can stipulate the facts in order of occurrence as follows, I think the refs got it right:
1. Scoop rebounds
2. Boehiem calls for time out
3. Scoop loses possession
4. Cahil awards timeout
The rule, as you put in your comment states: “A timeout shall be granted and charged after a player or head coach makes a visual or oral request.” Again, assuming that you agree with the sequence of events (which isn’t definatively clear) I would argue that the timeout should be awarded as soon as Boeheim made the request, not when Cahill acknowledged the request. So the fact that he signaled timeout well after Robinson had the ball is irrelevant because SU was entitled to have TO called and retain possession by operation of Boeheim’s request.
Taking a step back, I think this makes sense for the rule because the NCAA would not want put the refs in a position where they should be required to pay attention to something other than the play on the court, namely the coaches.
All that being said, I think review should be in place to get the timing right about when the timeout gesture was made with relation to possession of the ball.
by Rocket Ship Science on Feb 11, 2010 2:24 PM EST up reply actions
You have the order right, I think
I don’t think Boeheim started calling a timeout until Jardine started his drive, so 1 and 2 aren’t as close as they appear, but I’d have to look over the video again.
I might add one thing (and I think this is why UConn fans are upset)
1. Scoop rebounds
2. Boeheim calls for timeout
3. Scoop loses possession
4. Cahill acknowledges Boeheim’s calling timeout
5. Cahill awards timeout
ZLS44 posted a FanShot of Stanley Robinson standing with the rebound and Cahill staring directly at the play, not acknowledging Boeheim. It wasn’t until after the block/wrist slap and rebound that Cahill did.
My current feeling is that the call was probably right according to the letter of the law. But it sure looked like either 1) Cahill is incompetent or 2) he was giving the home coach the benefit of the doubt, and waited until the result of the play to give the timeout.
All of this, of course, does not absolve Dyson (for shooting a bad 30-footer) and Majok (for intentional fouling) from blame. Just so we’re clear.
Orange Bowl/dual Final Fours or bust in 2011. We're going all-in.
by Kevin Meacham on Feb 11, 2010 2:34 PM EST up reply actions
Yes thats right.
My point is that that anonymous source from Andy Katz is wrong on interpretation. SU should be the entitlement to timeout and possession simply because Boehiem called for it before Scoop lost possession.
If you look at the rules, Rule 5, Section 10, Art. 4, page 93 states: “The game clock and shot clock, if running, shall be stopped when an official grants a coach’s or player’s visual or oral request for a time out.” (emphasis added)
Compare that with Rule 5, Section 13, Art. 1, on page 96 “A timeout shall be granted and charged after a player or head coach makes a visual or oral request and when a player of that team is in control of the ball.”
Viewing these rules together is important. The first (clock stopping) is contingent on the ref doing something and the second (whether or not SU is entitled to a timeout) is contingent on the coach doing something. Therefore, SU’s entitlement to the timeout is created when Boeheim makes a request when scoop has the ball. Whether or not the official grants it at that exact point in time makes no difference.
Additionally, Rule 5, Section 12, Art. 1, page 95 adds: “No timeouts shall be granted: unless there is a player control by the requesting team.” This rule can’t be interpreted to mean that the requesting team has to have possession at the time the ref makes the call because that would mean that a player who dives for a ball calls a time out legitmately only to have it knocked away before the ref acknowledges it, is not entitled to the time out.
by Rocket Ship Science on Feb 11, 2010 3:50 PM EST up reply actions
Yes
should be coming this afternoon, maybe tomorrow if I get held up.
by Andrew Porter on Feb 11, 2010 11:03 AM EST up reply actions
the call came late but...
it was clearly the correct call.
I mean, none of us are arguing that boeheim DIDN’T call for a TO when they had possession, right?
So, what’s our logic here? “The ref should have ignored Boeheim’s time-out call!” Is that the best we can do for why we should have won the game? If so, we’re F’d for the rest of the season.
by inhuman beatbox on Feb 11, 2010 11:21 AM EST reply actions
the logic is the rule says that when the timeout is granted
the requesting team must have possession. That didn’t happen.
So you’re argument is “it was clearly the correct call” even though it was in blatant violation of the rule?
It's not me, It's you
by SomebodyBuyAustinaSteak on Feb 11, 2010 11:34 AM EST reply actions
Even though I hate the player
It’s a hilarious screen name.
you may want to re-read the rule because you seem to be ignoring one important word
the call is granted AFTER a player or coach makes a verbal or visual request when his team has the ball, or it’s dead.
If we’re trapped in a corner and we call a time-out and in the millisecond between us calling for the timeout and the ref signalling for it the ball gets stripped, we still get the timeout.
even if your interpretation was correct (uhm, it’s not that’s why players can call time-outs when they’re falling out of bounds even though it hardly ever gets signaled by the ref until they land), the only reason they wouldn’t have had possession is that the ref was slow to blow the whistle.
Here’s how you know it was the correct call, if the shot had dropped we would have been cheering that it didn’t count because of that TO (and it wouldn’t have).
The outcome of the play makes it seem like a bad call. But it was still the correct call.
More importantly this this kind of grasping at straws whining is what bad teams used to do towards us and it depresses me.
by inhuman beatbox on Feb 11, 2010 11:54 AM EST up reply actions
Timeout Rule has many flaws
The problem with the rule is that if its not a timeout until the whistle is blown, then almost every timeout given well falling out of bounds or while tied up on the floor should also not be issued. Surely there is no way that the whistle blows before the players feet touch the ground out of bounds. Also I don’t believe in a tie up on the floor that someone elses hand is not already in there for a jump ball situation. Not saying I agree with the call, but if they are not consistent with the rule all the time then it really holds no weight the way its written right now.
Different Point of View
Frankly, it should have been a lot easier to end this game. Keep in mind, at this time there were 35 seconds on the clock, and 32 on the game clock when Scoop had the ball at the top.
My picture came out smaller than I wanted it to, but if anyone with ESPN360 wants to watch, 1:59:19 to 1:59:20 shows that Gavin Edwards fouled Scoop Jardine on the wrist. It wasn’t called in the game. There’s so much nitpicking going on, and you could find fouls that aren’t called all game long. However, that should have been the call to make anyway.
Either way, I’m not sure the game was “stolen.” You guys still had the ball with a chance to win with enough time on the clock. Dyson just missed the shot.
Interesting discussion
of the timeout rule going on over here: http://www.nunesmagician.com/2010/2/10/1305355/exposure-of-a-terrible-ncaa
Go, fight, and win.
A lot of new commenters here.
I don’t know how many are Cusers, but if any of ya’ll are UConn fans, stick around and comment regularly (not that the Cusers are unwelcome). This is the best place for UConn sports besides Gampel Pavilion.
On this TO: I’ve been thinking about it, and I agree with Russell Blair and inhuman beatbox: Cahill stinks, we know that, and he definitely screwed UConn earlier this year. But really, Jimmy B was calling the TO legally and at the right time, and time should have been called when Scoop was at the top of the key. Thus: the right called was made, though late. You cant blame this one on the refs at all.
Should Cahill be fired? Yes. Should he be drawn and quartered? Yes. But all he’s guilty of here was fabricating empty controversy by not registering Jimmy B’s voice, or having some disconnect between his brain and his whistle.
No excuse for Dyson, though. HE lost the game with shot selection (after a TO, no less! During which, apparently, Blane-Dog told the team, “Just pass it around behind the 3-point line for a while!”).
Fold the football program, and deposit monies previously budgeted for said program into a savings account in Coach Calbertus Magnus's name.
Stop Whining!
You guys have gotten so many breaks over the years I don’t want to even hear it. Yes, Cahill should look for a different line of work. But Boeheim clearly was calling a time out while Scoop still had possession of the ball. That’s why the refs went to the monitors. You guys were going to the NIT anyways. Two years ago SU had a 24-8 record or something like that, with some key wins might I add, and we still got snubbed and got sent to the NIT. You guys with a 13-9 before last night were headed that way anyways.
Matt
Part of the problem is that
this is the SECOND time Cahill has made a controversial call late that lead directly to a UConn loss. I usually account for him stealing one game each year from UConn, but he’s working overtime this year.
by Andrew Porter on Feb 11, 2010 2:30 PM EST up reply actions
Dyson's missed shot...
directly related to a UCONN loss as well as missed free throws and a myriad of other things. That call, in and of itself did not result in an UCONN loss. Did Cahill’s call have something to do with the way the next 30 seconds transpired? Sure. However, I don’t agree that his call was necessarily wrong.
Case in point: have you ever seen a situation where a player is in mid-air has possession of the ball who calls timeout before he actually falls out of bounds? If you are basketball fans, you have likely see that countless times. In those circumstances, the refs award the timeout even though the whistle may not be heard until after the player’s feet hit the floor out of bounds. Same thing happens when a player is on the floor and calls a timeout in a scrum. In my opinion, Cahill took a little too long to blow the damn whistle but the call in and of itself was not incorrect and it was not definitively why you lost.
Stay with me here, and dont treat this reply like a UConn fan whining.
Because farther up in this here comment section, I made it clear that I think that UCONN DID NOT GET JOBBED BY CAHILL LAST NIGHT. Right now, I’m going to reply to the first four lines of your above post, including the subject line. For the purposes of illustrating my point, assume that Cahill actually DID job UConn last night (which, again, I do not agree with):
It is a silly and fallacious argument to point out UConn’s other bad plays and say that BECAUSE UConn players made mistakes, the ref’s call is not the reason they lost. Do you understand that the ref is not supposed to affect the outcome? While UConn players, whether it be by missing FT’s or Dyson missing a shot, are SUPPOSED to affect the game?
In other words, there’s a difference in kind between a mistake by a player and a mistake by a ref. What you’re saying is that if a kid gets a 59 on test, but two of the points taken off were due to the teacher mismarking one of his answers wrong when it was right, he should still fail because he got a bunch of other questions wrong.
Fold the football program, and deposit monies previously budgeted for said program into a savings account in Coach Calbertus Magnus's name.
But wait...
Are you saying I can’t hate Cahill? It’s my irrational hatred of sports officials that keeps me warm lo these winter months.
Seriously, it was a “bang bang” play, and if Dyson takes a makeable shot instead of that abortion this would be just a funny aside.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
