The Hancock call gets more attention because it was at the end of the game when Wichita had the ball back with a shot to tie it. The questionable call took that away. Clearly, that is why this call is receiving a lot of discussion. Thought that one was pretty obvious.

The Siva call was also late, and like I said took away an opportunity for Louisville to do what they do best. One was not more situationally more relevant than the other.

I thought it was an overall bad call. Looked like a foul or no whistle to me.

 

The "foul" was after Hancock got both hands on the ball. He didn't contact the arm until Baker turned away...

The Siva call was also late, and like I said took away an opportunity for Louisville to do what they do best. One was not more situationally more relevant than the other.

 

12 seconds in the game late? One was more relevant than the other.

As to which team I would want to play if I were UofL, that is tough. I would not want to play the Cuse zone. However, Michigan has the most talent of any team in the Final Four so I would prefer to play the less talented team (Syracuse). Tough call but I think I would choose Syracuse. I think the UL pressure and depth would bother Syracuse more than Michigan.

Must have been watching with those red goggles on Ram, must have been... no other way to explain it.

That was sarcasm....

 

 

 

And mine was a light hearted jab. :lol2:

UL's pressure in the last eight minutes was intense. WSU had some trouble inbounding and almost took a few 10 second counts. Hats off to Henderson, six big points from the corner, UL had a nice night from that spot.

For those complaining about the officiating, Wichita could not have gotten a better game called. The officials called it tight out front most of the game and wouldn't let UL get away with their hands on pressure. That took away UL's biggest weapon - the press. That is a big part of why Wichita didn't turn the ball over. Plus, the officials got UL in foul trouble. Deng sat on the bench almost all of the last 12 minutes of the game. Wichita was killing it from the foul line. I think UL has more to complain about with the officiating than Wichita.

Louisville escaped with both Smith and Siva not playing very well. I doubt they get away with that on Monday, unless Hancock plays like an all-american again, you have to root for that kid though.

Media asked Baker and Marshall about the call. Baker said he put the ball on the floor and let Hancock get his hand on it. Someone asked Marshall how quickly the whistle should be blown in that situation, and his response was as soon as both players have their hands on the ball. He had no issue with the call.

And mine was a light hearted jab. :lol2:

I just don't get it?

Media asked Baker and Marshall about the call. Baker said he put the ball on the floor and let Hancock get his hand on it. Someone asked Marshall how quickly the whistle should be blown in that situation, and his response was as soon as both players have their hands on the ball. He had no issue with the call.

 

Hard to really go on that, that is called losing with class.

It really was a call that could have gone either way (or no whistle at all) and to say otherwise is laughable. It was not CLEAR one way or the other.

Very good game to watch. Wichita State played far better than I imagined, but UL made the plays they needed in order to advance. Not their strongest performance, but it was enough.

It really was a call that could have gone either way (or no whistle at all) and to say otherwise is laughable. It was not CLEAR one way or the other.

But the important thing, as always, is that it was called the same both ways, and that how they called the game stayed the same.