March 05, 2007

In a battle of image, Duke takes black eye: So Duke wakes up Monday with a fresh black eye and a fourth loss to Carolina in the past five meetings. For the image-obsessed Blue Devils, it gets no worse than being bad and being dirty.

posted by justgary to basketball at 12:27 AM - 63 comments

"I was not trying to hurt or hit the kid." -Gerald Henderson Video of the clobbering. Um... I don't think I believe him. That or he has zero control of his limbs.

posted by SummersEve at 05:39 AM on March 05, 2007

For the first time I was pulling for Duke as I wanted my Terps to get the 4 seed (and an ACC tournament first round bye). I turned off the game with around 5 minutes left, so I didn't see this incident until I clicked on SummersEve's link above (thanks). I read the ESPN column posted and I think I have to agree with the columnist. The foul was flagrant but it wasn't intentional. The Duke kid was frustrated and tried to block the shot with authority and the ball wasn't where it was expected to be and instead he smacked the UNC kid upside his face. The officials did the right thing in ejecting Gerald Henderson. The saddest thing I saw in the article was Coach K attempting to spin the incident and place the blame on Roy Williams for keeping his starters in in mop-up time. That's low. Coach K knows as well as anyone that a game is rarely over until it is over. His Duke team came back from 10 points in under a minute against Maryland a few years back. Coach K wasn't there, but—as the article mentions—Carolina came back from 8 points down in 17 seconds in the 70s. And that was when there wasn't a shot clock. Bad form, Coach K. Besides, Coach K had his starters in, why should he expect Roy Williams to have his in? *shakes head* I sure hope these teams don't meet in the ACC tournament. They need a break from each other. Go Terps! ;)

posted by scully at 06:43 AM on March 05, 2007

Duke's had its hay day, and now at the 1st glimpse of a falling dynasty, and this is the play we get?! It's always easier to show class when your winning, but the true measure of a man is when he is losing. Coach K, just take it on the chin and beat the Heels next year, 'cuz you won't this year. No excuses. I have only one question: How can a foul be "flagrant," but not "intentional?" Hey, Go Bucks!

posted by bavarianmotorworker at 07:11 AM on March 05, 2007

If it wasn't intentional, Henderson has the slowest reflexes in the NCAA. BMW, flagrant means excessive and unnecessary.

posted by bperk at 07:49 AM on March 05, 2007

For anyone that thinks that Coach K had his starters in, Gerald does not start. Unless you didn't notice as well, the original foul on the play, the reason Henderson didn't get a chance to block the shot, was committed by Steve Johnson, a freshman walkon. Jordan Davidson was in the game. So were Marty Pocius and Lance Thomas. No starters.

posted by fatfryar at 08:42 AM on March 05, 2007

As best I can tell from the video linked, there was one walkon (Johnson), one bench player (Pocius), one occasional starter (Henderson) and two starters (Scheyer and Nelson) on the court. If any player plans to go up for a layup when his team is up 12 with 14 seconds left, he should expect to have that shot challenged. It's unfortunate that Johnson fouled Hansbrough before Henderson had a chance to block the hell out of the ball.

posted by mbd1 at 08:55 AM on March 05, 2007

Saying Duke's starters weren't in the game is a bit of a fiction since Paulus fouled out about 5 seconds before this play and McRoberts' foul (when he fouled out) put Hansbrough on the line for this play (i.e. Hansbrough couldn't leave the game since he had to shoot the FTs).

posted by bperk at 10:21 AM on March 05, 2007

I can't believe Coach K. had the audacity to complain about the Heels having their starters in the game. First of all it was a 10 point game - not a 20 or 30 point game, second, last I checked North Carolina had "lost" it's last two games and needed a convincing victory over a "quality" team to regain it's swagger ! In regards to Henderson's foul ? No doubt the intent was to keep Hansbrough from scoring with a hard foul (Hansbrough is a beast down low, it takes a very hard foul to keep him from scoring), however, I do not believe the foul was intended to "injure" Hansbrough, the ejection is in my opinion, however, warranted. All this being said the ACC tournament will be one of the MOST competitive tourneys in it's history !

posted by RicoHanes at 11:06 AM on March 05, 2007

It's always easier to show class when your winning, but the true measure of a man is when he is losing. I think that's a bigger point than anyone wants to admit, probably because it has to do with walk-on-water Coach K. It has been a frustrating year for the Blue Devils, both coach and players. And it doesn't help when they (Duke) are now routinely being handled by their rivals, led by (what they perceive as) the smug Roy Williams. This incident was dripping with major frustration, from Duke losing fairly bad, the game being on the road, and the other team's star being in a position to take a intentional (IMO) shot. Blaming it all on who was on the court at the time is just a big smokescreen (excuse) for the larger issues. When a Carolina team has a chance to do some stomping on their biggest rival, they're going to do it. In a few years, the tables will probably be turned again, with Duke doing the stomping.

posted by dyams at 11:40 AM on March 05, 2007

Krzyzewski showed once again how classless he is, which should come as a surprise to absolutely no one. Billy Packer, somehow, was even worse. "Without question, Gerald Henderson was going for the ball." Really, Billy? Without question?

posted by trharlan at 11:47 AM on March 05, 2007

14 seconds left, big man ends up with the ball in the paint being mobbed by three dukies. Instinct says put the ball up(which he did). Coachs K's comments may have a little bit of merit if NC was running a play in order to run the score up, but Hansborough ended up with the ball after a rebound of a missed free throw. Hansborough's sub was set to come in after that free throw. K's comments are bunk

posted by 1trusparty at 12:00 PM on March 05, 2007

I looked at the video many times and it looks like it WAS intentional. As Hanborough was fouled the ball went straight to his right. Henderson was nowhere near the rim or glass, which is where the ball would have been had it not come out. Henderson ended up swatting Hansborough right in the face, not where the ball would have been or where the ball ended up. It looked dirty to me no matter what spin anyone tries to put on it. You would think that after Isiah Thomas took a beating for his actions in the Knicks-Nuggets brawl, Coach K would at least try a different excuse. If it didn't work for Zeke, it won't work for Coach K- who I lost any respect for.

posted by urall cloolis at 01:02 PM on March 05, 2007

As Hanborough was fouled the ball went straight to his right. Henderson was nowhere near the rim or glass, which is where the ball would have been had it not come out. There are two ways to block a shot: 1. The "Stuff"; This happens when you block the ball while it is still in the opponents hand and the ball does not have a chance to take flight. (This variation often ends in a foul call, because of contact on the wrist or arm after the block) 2. The "Swat"; This happens when the defender "swats" away the ball, after the offensive player has released it. (this variation usually ends with the ball landing in someone's popcorn) Having said that, I believe Henderson was going for variation #1 "The Stuff", but was undercut in the air. As he tried to regain his balance, he swung his arm and hit Hansbrough in the grill. If he really wanted to hurt Hansbrough he could have stayed on the floor and undercut him so that he would fall on the back of his neck. When you play ball, if you want to intentionally hurt someone, you don't jump with them. I know it looked really, really, bad afterwards, but this was just an unfortunate incident.

posted by yay-yo at 02:01 PM on March 05, 2007

Packer pisses me off on this one. The dude might have broken his nose, and all he cares about is protecting his (overrated) Blue Devils. The best he can empathize with Hansborough is that it was "an unfortunate incident." What a joke. That aside, i'm torn as to whether or not it was intentional. I guess i don't know why he would be turning his body away from hansborough if he wanted to hurt him. That being said, the viciousness of the hit makes it equally hard to believe that it wasn't intentional.

posted by brainofdtrain at 02:19 PM on March 05, 2007

Henderson was going in there to cause damage, period. Anyone who has ever played the game knows in that situation, coming in there in that manner, he wanted someone to pay. Maybe he didn't expect Hansbrough to come away all bloody and with a broken nose (which he has), but he knew someone was going to feel some pain. And save the "How do you know what he was thinking" responses. I'd be interested to hear the reaction of other D-1 players. I'd be shocked if they didn't all say Henderson knew full well what he wanted to happen.

posted by dyams at 03:22 PM on March 05, 2007

As a completely impartial third party who cares not for this rivalry, schools or any other sub-plot I have to say this: That young man meant to elbow that other young man. Certainly if he didn't, he isn't helped by the video evidence. If he really wanted to hurt Hansbrough he could have stayed on the floor and undercut him so that he would fall on the back of his neck. When you play ball, if you want to intentionally hurt someone, you don't jump with them. Only if he didn't care if he would be caught or punished would he undercut him. Because one does not break an opponent's neck, doesn't mean one doesn't want to cause pain to an opponent. There is a long and storied tradition of chucking elbows in basketball.

posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 04:11 PM on March 05, 2007

Call me suspicious, but I don't think every partisan in the Youtube thread is actually an alum of the respective schools. Some are probably in administration.

posted by yerfatma at 04:23 PM on March 05, 2007

Frankly, I consider both school's coaches to be on my "punch in the face" list -- thanks Hater -- with Coach K traditionally beating my Hawks, and Roy abandoning my Hawks as you all know. That said, the blow was intentional. It looked awful, and the reason is that it was. Henderson meant to cause pain. His emotions got the best of him, and he tried to hurt Hansborough, and he did. He is human. Give him, and Coach K, a break. Get over it and enjoy March Madness like the rest of us.

posted by hawkguy at 05:52 PM on March 05, 2007

I don't know. Looks to me like a standard Kobe slap that happens in the NBA all the time and certain players get away with.

posted by graymatters at 06:05 PM on March 05, 2007

After wathcing the video several times, it does appear to me that Henderson's arm follows the Heel player's head as he goes down. That would make it an intentional and driven blow. However, it the interest of being fair, I can not claim to have an unbiased opinion on this one (UNC Alum).

posted by FonGu at 06:07 PM on March 05, 2007

Of course, this is not the only time such things have happened. Look here and here and here for proof.

posted by FonGu at 06:22 PM on March 05, 2007

Nice pics Fongu. Yay-yo, have you actually ever played ball or just heard the stories, read the articles, and follow it on TV? Weedy and Dyams got it right. Besides, Henderson was WAY too late to attempt the "stuff" and nowhere near the rim, which is where the ball would have been had he attempted to do so- which I pointed out earlier. If this had happened to a Duke player Coach K would have had a hissy fit, given his "rat pissed off that no cheese is left look" (take a picture of him, add ears and a couple whiskers and tell me it isn't true) and calling for a criminal investigation. NO, I am not a UNC alumn or follower, just calling it the way I see it. That is one of my beloved Hoyas getting molested by a couple Dukies in FonGu's last picture if you must know.

posted by urall cloolis at 06:59 PM on March 05, 2007

I've got no dog in this fight as a Wake Forest fan. When Duke plays UNC I hope they both lose, though I was rooting for Duke Sunday so UNC could join them in playing on Thursday in the tournament. I think Henderson went in with ill intent. He meant to nail Hasbro (did you realize he's heir to the Superball fortune?) and put him on his ass. BUT he meant to hit him in the chest. The original foul kept Hansbrough from getting up as he normally would and instead of chest Henderson's elbow found face. It's the kind of sneaky dirty that goes on all the time in the paint. Flagrant? Yeah, probably. But if the blow had caught his chest and not his face, it would never have been caught. I think I'll give K and Henderson a pass on this one. Oh, and by the way, Billy Packer, much as he pisses me off sometimes, is a Wake Forest guy. He was the point guard on the '62 team that lost to Ohio St. (with Lucas and Havlechek) in the Final Four.

posted by gradioc at 07:09 PM on March 05, 2007

I have been playing basketball for 22 years,and I have never tried to block a shot with a cocked,downward moving elbow.Danny Green pinned a shot to the backboard.Brandon Wright swatted one out towards a teammate.that is how you block a shot.henderson took a cheap shot.the ball was already can see he just closed his eyes and hit whatever he could.he's a typical duke k says they don't play that way.I guess nobody wants to bring up when laettner stomped on that other guys chest in the ncaa tournament back in '91 or '92 either.just listen to the chants at cameron.high test scores,low class.

posted by mars1 at 07:19 PM on March 05, 2007

The foul was not an intentional blow to the face. Anyone and I mean anyone who ever played the game would tell you this. If you are coming after someone you come after them. You would not swing your arm and body away from the person you are trying to hard foul. Also if you are a suposedly Big man you know this will happen in the paint. If Duke would of let him score easily then you would be saying there soft. They foul someone and you want to put them in the Low Class District with UNC. Packer had it correct and if anyone would stop and think they know it also. He got a bump on the nose and that is it. The Duke player should not of gotten thrown out of the game or suspended for a game.

posted by 1badjarhead at 08:04 PM on March 05, 2007

Nice post BADjarhead. I see it was your first. What level have you played at? (yes I played 2 sports in college- soccer and basketball). You are obviously a UNC hater and no disrespect for that, because they are not my team, but it may be clouding your judgment. Yes- it was confirmed today that he does have a broken nose. Have you seen the video of Karl Malone giving I. Thomas over 30 stitches in his face? Malone was taking a short jumper when it happened. Yet he found a way to push his elbow into Zekes face (taught to me by a coach I thought was disrespectful to the game). He may not have meant to cause major injury, yet he did. Malone was sorry for the result, but not for the intent. Have not tried to find the YouTube video, but I am sure someone can find it. If it happened in the first ten minutes of a game Duke was winning, maybe you can argue that point, but at the end of a frustrating loss it showed its true colors. Someone embarassed about getting their ass kicked, frustration and finally no memory. How many games have Duke won by 20 points, yet still trying to score. I guess the new rule should be "if you are winning by X amount of points, you are no longer allowed to shoot." How many points exactly would that be and has Duke ever won by that many. It is not pee-wee ball. Win or lose by as much as you want and take the ass whipping like you do when you are whipping it.

posted by urall cloolis at 08:58 PM on March 05, 2007

Are you serious, brainofdtrain? Are you really saying that Billy Packer loves Duke? Anyone who has ever heard Packer (a Wake Forest grad, for god's sake) announce a game or do his awful Selection Sunday coverage knows that he HATES the Blue Devils. As for the hit itself, its just as countless people have pointed out, that Henderson was going for the block, or maybe a hard foul, only Johnson committed one first, taking the ball out of Henderson's reach and Hansbrough's arms out of the line of his attempted swat. How many time this year have we seen Henderson leap and rip balls out of the air in traffic? For a guy with his athleticism, this kind of athletic block has the same effect on the teams and crowd as a monster dunk on the offensive end does. Henderson was just trying to put his mark on the end of game that clearly had not gone the way that he wished it had. Unfortunately for everyone involved, he made contact with Hansbroughs face instead of the ball or an arm. At least Hansbrough had the class to keep from starting a brawl, keeping a bad situation from turning into an awful one.

posted by fatfryar at 10:32 PM on March 05, 2007

Anyone who says "You have obviously never played the game", should get bitch slapped and banned from this site. That is not a valid argument to anything. Everyone has played a sport at some time in their life (of course there is a rare exception to everything). You don't have to be a pro ball player to watch the video and see what happens. The ball gets poked out, the player reacts to the ball, Hansbrough's face gets in the way etc... Also, remember that this all takes place in 1 sec. I'm not sure how he had time to go from "I'm going to block this shot" to "I'm going to knock this guy out" before he hit the floor (he ain't Vince Carter). UNC vs Duke has been so lame lately that they have to MAKE-UP some controversy. If either of these two teams had a legitimate shot at doing something in the tourney this wouldn't even be a big story. It would just be Duke and UNC playing "good, hard, basketball".

posted by yay-yo at 11:21 PM on March 05, 2007

Anyone who says "You have obviously never played the game", should get bitch slapped and banned from this site. That is not what I said, although I did send the intent, as much as Henderson did. I do know you are not the man that could ever do that to me, whether you dream of it or not.

posted by urall cloolis at 11:57 PM on March 05, 2007

Fryar, i'll take the rebuke on packer about not loving the Blue Devils. Being a wake grad makes loving the dukies pretty impossible. Point taken. My only caveat is that while Packer may not love the Blue Devils, but i doubt he (or any announcer for that matter) hates them. That being said, his work on that incident was a joke; i stand by that until someone can explain to me how i'm wrong.

posted by brainofdtrain at 12:40 AM on March 06, 2007

This says it all.

posted by FonGu at 04:44 AM on March 06, 2007

Thanks fongu, i enjoyed that.

posted by brainofdtrain at 08:37 AM on March 06, 2007

I do not want to get in a pissing match here. I think there is a different perspective on this type of foul from a person who plays the game, or has played the game. 1. At the end of a close game a player is instructed to foul to put the player at the foul strip in hopes that they will miss the free throws and score no points or one point instead of a 2 point field goal, and stop the clock. Most coaches will instruct the defensive player to foul hard. I'm not saying I agree with this, I'm saying that is a tactic taught in practice. With the 3 point shot a team can catch up very quick and that could be the reason for more situations like this. It's a tough game when you are playing in the trenches. 2. I don't especially like Billy Packer either but I think he was right in this case. I do agree with the one game suspension. Billy gets paid to blow things out of proportion and that's is what he did. It's March Maddness and there are TV ratings at stake. I agree hawkguy, lets get over it and proceed with March Maddness. By the way I am not a fan of either program. And one more thing , you can't compare pro basketball with college ball. Completely different rules, and tactics.

posted by sportnut at 08:37 AM on March 06, 2007

I watched this game and saw the incident occur live as it happend on TV. I saw many replays. The foul was not excessive. For once, I agreed with Billy Packer (alright that's enough of that). Hansbrough was twisiting all over the place trying for a good angle to get a putback as any instructed player should. Henderson may not have had the greatest of reflexes but that ball came loose and Gerald Henderson was in flight. He went for a last second misdirected, flubbed ball. With 16 or so seconds to go and the game's outcome certainly decided, why were both Chevrolet Players of the Game still playing? Roy should have pulled Tyler. Gerald being a Frosh maybe but still. I feel bad for Hansbrough, he got the short end of the stick now has to learn to play with a mask. This coming from a Kansas fan who is less than loving of both teams.

posted by 1651 Naismith at 09:50 AM on March 06, 2007

Anyone who says "You have obviously never played the game", should get bitch slapped and banned from this site. As should anyone who says, or infers, "If you played the game, you'd know what I'm talking about," or, even better, "Ask anyone who played the game...they'll tell you the same thing." Physician, heal thyself.

posted by The_Black_Hand at 11:23 AM on March 06, 2007

I don't really care one way or the other about either team, but I feel kinda feel like.... CHEAP SHOT! easy. Experience in a sport doesn't help you understand what goes on out there? That's brutal. I ask my friends who play different sports about strange events like this all the time, and they have insight I don't. Maybe that's why it's called "in"sight? They've been "in" the game, and have a perspective someone who strictly observes doesn't. If you wanna base your arguments on outsight, feel free, but it's not a word for a reason.

posted by 2 time mvp of the shittiest team ever at 11:50 AM on March 06, 2007

Very well said about the "insight" issue, 2 time mvp. Those with first-hand experience at very competitive levels of various sports know not only about the usual actions and behaviors, but the mindset that goes along with those situations. Trying to figure just what was going through Henderson's mind in this particular instance is only speculation, of course, but other athletes understand what anger and frustration can lead to (and how a player can fall back on a convenient excuse, in this case, such as, "I was trying to block a shot"). Well you (Henderson) did a pretty piss-poor job at attempting to block this shot, and the result was a guy's nose smashed all over his face. The evidence ain't in your favor. If Duke was in line for a possible number one seed, I doubt this situation even takes place.

posted by dyams at 12:05 PM on March 06, 2007

Aren't we blowing this out of wack. These were 2 young men trying to win a game in a very heated situation. Things happen in close quarters under the basket. I do feel sorry for Hansbrough mainly because he has very little time to adjust. But as I see it from watching him this year he is a warrior and I bet he plays well in the next weeks to come. By the way "brutal" is when Kermit Washington suckers Rudy "T" running at full speed down the court. I don't think this action was even close to that! Like I said before you have to be a man to play in the trenches, and Hansbrough is certainly that.

posted by sportnut at 12:17 PM on March 06, 2007

Yeah, Coach K to the try a put a spin on the real fact of this matter, his team is made up of dirty players. Sports nut you put a spin that Rudy was suckered punch, but the facts of that are very different. I was at that game and Kermit saw someone running into the play and just turned to defend himself and caught Rudy squared on the jaw. Acc ident. But the Duke matter was pure and brutal cheap shot. It seems that now that Duke in on the down side it has to go to cheap shots at the teams and players that are better. Coach K will be happy because he has another type of this player coming in next year from Southern California Kelly. This kid will fit right in to that style of playl. Shame on Coach K for trying to tell everyone it was a accident but when you look at the films of that play it clearly was done with thought in mind.

posted by ucla512 at 12:56 PM on March 06, 2007

you know i'm a bit surprised so many people think duke is "on the downside." One poor year (that most teams would kill to have) doesn't mean they're on the way out. I seem to remember a few years back when UNC sucked by their standards for 3-4 years and Duke killed them, but they seem to be fine now. I'm no duke fan, but i think the folks saying that they're on the way to long-term mediocrity need to take a deep breath and slow down. Revisit it if in 3 years they are unranked and have long-term sanctions. Apart from that, i doubt they will plummet off the men's bb map.

posted by brainofdtrain at 01:38 PM on March 06, 2007

As I said before players are taught to intentionally foul another player going down the stretch, to stop the clock or send the player to the foul line in hopes he will miss the free throws. It looked to me like a player whose body was out of control and not a player laying in wait to commit an intentional cheap shot on another player. Maybe I'm wrong. I am not a Duke fan by any means but if you think Duke looks for cheap shot artist to recruit I think you are wrong. Duke does not have the time nor the money to do that. And if you think they teach dirty cheap shot tactics in pratice you are wrong again. In regard to your explaination on the Kermit Washinton CHEAP SHOT to Rudy I guess you saw something different than the NBA observer that was there that night, because if I'm not mistaken Kermit's wallet was much, much lighter after that defence of himself not to mention his VERY long suspension. Basketball is very physical and things like this happen all the time, I think we spend too much time looking for blame when it could be the physicality of the sport. But again I could be wrong. And maybe that NBA observer was just picking on poor little Kermit who nearly killed Rudy.

posted by sportnut at 01:55 PM on March 06, 2007

Weedy is absolutely right. I watched it live and I watched a lot of replays afterwards. The video evidence alone would give the weakest attorney their easiest courtroom win. I thought it was intentional from the live footage and the replays didn't change my opinion. I think the penalty was far too light.

posted by irunfromclones at 02:29 PM on March 06, 2007

I also played basketball and I don`t know of a single coach that has ever taught a player to block a shot with his elbow! Henderson`s arm is never extended to meet the ball where he "thinks" it is going to be. His arm was locked and loaded the second he left the floor never extending it to block the shot only ready to deliver the blow to physcho-t`s grill. As for Billy Packer he should just quit right now. I for one didn`t need him telling me 15 times that it wasn`t intentional I watched the 5-10 replays and it became more apparent every time that it WAS intentional. Whatever happened to announcers being impartial?? I will not listen to another game that Billy does for a long time...

posted by hokygeek at 02:35 PM on March 06, 2007

The_Black_Hand Why would you think a person who is playing, or has played a sport would not have a better insight on the sport, than the fan, be it a casual or knowledgeable fan that has NOT participated in the sport? With all due respect doesn't a race car driver know more about driving a race car than the average fan? Doesn't a college or pro golfer know more about golf than the average fan? Doesn't a college or pro soccer player know more about soccer than the average fan etc,etc,etc..... I'm very puzzeled that you think experience and on the job training means nothing. I'm not however saying that the fan does not know what they are talking about. I am saying there is a good possibility the fans insight and perspective on a sport comes from what they see on TV or hear on the radio, and allot of the time that information is for ratings. If you are right then guys like John Madden really don't know what they are talking about, because he PLAYED football. No offense, just curious.

posted by sportnut at 04:10 PM on March 06, 2007

sportnut, the fact that you may have played a sport doesn't necessarily make you more of an expert than somebody who hasn't. Plain and simple. You don't have to wear a jockstrap to know how it works or what it does. Plus, part of it is the haughty, "I played, so I know what I'm talking about" attitude, as if somebody's two years in AAU ball somehow gave them some level of authority or insight that the rest of us somehow lack. It just strikes me as a cliche best used by people who've played at a very high level, somebody like Bill Walton or Troy Aikman, Jim Palmer or Andy North; somebody trying to bring that inside experience to their reporting or commentary. Not some guy on a website trying to sound like an authority.

posted by The_Black_Hand at 05:51 PM on March 06, 2007

Thanks, I think there are many people who chime into this web sight that are certainly not at the level that you speak of but have a vast amount of experience in one sport or another. I know for a fact there are many actual college players who are regular contributors to this site. There are also many coaches in their respective sport that contribute. It is quit clear who can walk the walk and who can't I get frustrated with people who have opinions that come from a spectators backround and do not know the nuts and bolts of the sport they are commenting on. Although, I guess everybody has a right to an opinion. Thanks for the response. Always good communicating with you

posted by sportnut at 06:45 PM on March 06, 2007

Henderson's foul was certainly flagrant if it wasn't intentional; the rule is there to discourage swiping an elbow at a guy who's already being dragged down, and Henderson looked pretty proud right after the play -- not the reaction a classy player has to a bad accident. Roy Williams had Hainsbrough's sub waiting at the scorer's table, but the missed free throw kept him in the game, so Coach K's observation that a star player shouldn't have been in with time running down and the game in the bag is disingenuous at best. Billy Fudge may not be a Duke fan, but he certainly favors teams from Cackalackey, and he worships the ground on which Krazyzewski walks. You notice this over the years if you're, say, a Maryland fan. Go Terps!

posted by Hugh Janus at 09:11 PM on March 06, 2007

I get frustrated with people who have opinions that come from a spectators backround and do not know the nuts and bolts of the sport they are commenting on. Just like that 6 foot blonde with DD's ended up waying 500 lbs. when you met up with her at Starbucks? How the hell would you, or anyone, know who has or hasn't done anything? You can claim to be a college athlete, but for all we, or anyone else on this site knows, you have been in a wheelchair for your entire life. That's the reason why it makes no sense to say "Obviously you never played before!" Not because those who have played don't have more insight (cuz they probably do).

posted by yay-yo at 10:16 PM on March 06, 2007

Pffft. Obviously all of you have never played the Internet, before. I did. Made it all the way to AAA before I blew out my ACL on the Aintitcool News boards. Fucking shame, too. I was good. Now I'm bitter, disgruntled and shouty. Guys - McCarver and Morgan are the prime examples of why "playing a sport" is not necessarily a requirement to understanding (also see Sean Salisbury). Pat Burns, Jeff Van Gundy, Lawrence Frank, Theo Epstein, and a whole shitload of others are prime examples in the other direction. And since I'm CLEARLY smarter than all those guys - I'm just plain prime rib.

posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 08:52 AM on March 07, 2007

also see Sean Salisbury Did you get that text message too?

posted by yerfatma at 09:38 AM on March 07, 2007

Lil' Sean? Harold Reynolds is not happy about that.

posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 10:10 AM on March 07, 2007

O.K. we are talking about college basketball right? Hansbrough stated that Henderson was not being intentional about the foul. This is because he knows he would've done the same thing if the roles were reversed. That's just part of the game. If you're getting your arse handed to you, then your going to get a little retribution back. Any fool that posts anything here that doesn't see that or can't relate has never played any sport what-so-ever. Or was probably just standing on the sideline or riding the bench. I guess it might be different for the gamers playing playstation & x-box. The worst you can do is just slam your controller down and kick the t.v.

posted by dmann74868 at 10:52 AM on March 07, 2007

dmann74868, AMEN, Be careful actually PLAYING a sport or having PLAYED a sport means that you are just blowing your horn, you really know nothing about it. Experience means nothing.HA,HA! Just kidding. I agree with you.

posted by sportnut at 11:24 AM on March 07, 2007

Except that if you read the posts, you'll notice that at least two people who claim to have played the sport offer different conclusions of the play. It's clearly not a consensus provider. Ever seen a movie? Well, I've been in 'em - your opinion of them counts less now, no? Haha! just kidding - it doesn't fucking matter.

posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 12:34 PM on March 07, 2007

I don't think we are taking any kind of poll here on who has the better conclusion of the play. There are as many posts that say the foul happened as a normal part of the game as say it didn't. I guess that's personal opinion, as I said before everybody has the right to one. By the way I didn't say that people who play or have played should have the same take on the foul. And yes if we were debating a movie I would naturally think you had a better insight on the nuts and bolts of what takes place on a movie set, or in the making of a movie than me,you've been there I haven't. And your right about another thing it really doesn't matter.

posted by sportnut at 01:23 PM on March 07, 2007

And yes if we were debating a movie I would naturally think you had a better insight on the nuts and bolts of what takes place on a movie set, or in the making of a movie than me,you've been there I haven't. Why would someone who's been on a movie set have any better grasp of the meaning of a movie? How come you didn't cite Bayes' Theorem to support your contention re: expert opinions?

posted by yerfatma at 02:19 PM on March 07, 2007

Has anyone in the past 10 or 15 years stopped to think that in order to block a shot in basketball you don't necessarily have to strike down on the ball like you're trying to karate-chop through a stack of inch-thick concrete tablets? I guess it all began with the showmanship of trying to reject the shot into the second level of a particular coliseum. Eventually the people in charge of basketball rules need to realize the result of a spastic attempt like Henderson's, when it goes terribly wrong, may result in someone's face getting collapsed. It's almost like if you're going to use excessive force to simply block a shot, and screw it up this bad, you should expect a rather severe consequence. Otherwise games of this type are going to start resembling hockey (as far as potential fights).

posted by dyams at 03:23 PM on March 07, 2007

Being on a movie set... meaning of a movie? Make a correlation, that has a direct...ummm... correlation. Like an actor/actress would better understand acting. A director would better understand directing etc...

posted by 2 time mvp of the shittiest team ever at 04:25 PM on March 07, 2007

Hansbrough stated that Henderson was not being intentional about the foul. This is because he knows he would've done the same thing if the roles were reversed. That's just part of the game. You are assuming that he would have done the same thing, which is far from what Hansbrough said. He was being politically correct and not adding fuel to the fire, possibly (since I can not read his mind, which you seem to think you can) so he does not get tomahawked in the face again when they meet several times over the next couple seasons.

posted by urall cloolis at 05:38 PM on March 07, 2007

Dyams- good post. Remnds me of the best shot blocker ever, Bill Russell (seen on video clips, too young to have seen him live). He used to block a shot with a purpose- to keep posession of the ball and start a fast break, not make a "top ten play of the day".

posted by urall cloolis at 05:53 PM on March 07, 2007

Dyams- good post. Remnds me of the best shot blocker ever, Bill Russell (seen on video clips, too young to have seen him live). He used to block a shot with a purpose- to keep posession of the ball and start a fast break, not make a "top ten play of the day". I'd have to agree with that also. The best blocks are those that you keep and turn into fast-break points. You also have to remember that Bill was a giant among men back in those days and 5'5 guards weren't doing 360 tomahawk slams. It's just so tempting to swat the crap out of it though. It's also kind of a statement when you swat the ball off the court, like "Don't bring that kool-aid to a gin party!" (as they say on S.C.)

posted by yay-yo at 06:26 PM on March 07, 2007

To answer urall that was my first post. I have been reading but was never angry enough to sound off b4. 2 years juco ball. Before the three point shot. Dated myself alittle there but oh well. Nose broken at least twice a year since 8th grade. Played in paint where elbows fly. That is one reason I do not feel sorry for Hans. He was a Mo. boy and saw him in HS. Not bad but owes his teammates a thank you for the fake stand between him and Henderson. He did not want anymore and came up like that as a show. True I am a DUKE FAN. I think anyone who loves basketball would be. Coach K is a great Coach and all the others are chaseing to be like him. I had to put up with Roy here and I was upset that he went to UNC and I would have to put up with his winning again. Judging by the posts by the NC fans I can see he went to the school where he fits best. I will admit Bill Russel was a great shot blocker but Henderson is not seven foot tall either. Now my lack of being as classy as Coach K and my jarhead thoughts take over if they get the chance to meet again I would test that nose again. But like I said thats just me. oooohhhRAaAHHH

posted by 1badjarhead at 06:39 PM on March 07, 2007

He used to block a shot with a purpose- to keep posession of the ball and start a fast break, not make a "top ten play of the day". That's a big part of why things (like Henderson's move) are done the way they are today: Because of the potential highlight on all the TV stations, Sportscenter, YouTube, etc. It's definitely like yay-yo said, though, that it makes somewhat of a statement, "Don't bring that crap in here." I also agree Hansbrough was saying everything he was supposed (expected) to say regarding the incident. That's the smart move of a player on a team that's preparing for a possible-long run in the tournament. I'm not buying for a minute that he and his teammates weren't (and still probably aren't) pissed as hell.

posted by dyams at 06:40 PM on March 07, 2007

You're not logged in. Please log in or register.