After MbootyMah uploaded his video, I asked him if he could send me just the replay of that play.
This is the best view that CBS gave and I have watched it several times on my Tivo frame by frame.
The still shots taken were probably taken with a camera that took many still shots every second, not something someone could see with their eye.
Here is the full high def replay of that moment. It is a 50mb and is a full uncompressed mpeg of the slow motion replay CBS showed.
You can see that Sloan moved the ball from his right to his left and Shipp's movement also went in the same motion. His hand climbed up at the same time Sloan was trying to move the ball to the left. Watching that replay in slow motion you can't even tell Shipp touches his wrist.
Here are screen shots frame by frame from the video. Only in 3 frames of a slow motion replay can you see Shipp anywhere near the arm. A referee is supposed to see that? That is nothing more than a "brush up" and where I come from (the mean streets of Orange County) that is ALL BALL!
As far as Collison on the elbow, maybe a referee could have seen that, but Sloan had already switched the ball to his left hand by then. This video is created from the stills slowed down frame by frame. You can clearly see the contact is when he is moving the ball to the left hand, he is actually throwing his elbow AT Collison. Watch it a few times and you can see Sloan is moving back to the left, back and to the left, back and to the left.
You expect someone to call a bump to the non ball holding hand in the last second of the game? If anything they should have called Sloan for throwing his elbow at Collison's hand!
So Aggie09, and anyone else who thinks a foul should have been called in the last second of the game. Cry your crocodile tears somewhere else!
I declare this issue closed!
Last edited by BobTheBruin on Tue Mar 25, 2008 10:50 am, edited 1 time in total.
Bob, thanks for that. i only wish that the local media (LAT, etc) was as responsible as you and did their homework. why they cannot be happy with the teams success is beyond me! instead, the focus was on how lucky the team has been with the "bad" or questionable calls (no calls).
my original email to Robyn Norwood of LAT after she wrote about our favorable calls comparing us to Duke:
http://telemachus.smugmug.com/gallery/4 ... ZYsdz-A-LB
> watch that link and tell me Paulus would have been called for the foul had he been in Collison's position.
> also, your suggestion, under the guise of, "Texas A&M probably just wishes NCAA rules allowed for a day-after clarification on the no-call on the Aggies' final shot.", is silly. We would then have to go back and micro-analyze each and every call/non-call made during the game. in each and every game where there has been a questionable call at the end this season, UCLA has gotten hosed on a number of obvious calls through the course of said game.
> From: Robyn.Norwood@latimes.com
> Subject: RE: no guarantees
> Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 11:39:48 -0700
> To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> I don't believe in conspiracies at all, and calls during the course of the game certainly affect it too but are less remembered than the crucial late ones. But when you put Stanford, Cal, and Texas A&M together it starts to look more like a trend than a coincidence. And that means the Bruins have really made it, when people think that like Duke, Carolina--and yes, the old UCLA dynasty before them--they are getting "all" the calls. They're a terrific team, but they've been living dangerously lately.
> Thanks for reading,
> Robyn Norwood
> L.A. Times
my last reply back to her which she did not respond to:
I can see what you are saying, but where I disagree is I think Duke and UNC get those good calls throughout the course of the game all the way to the finish. I do feel UCLA has been a bit fortunate with the calls at the end but during the rest of the game, I really don't think we get the Duke/UNC treatment is all.
Also, the calls at the end of the game are so hard to make in real time, it is a little unfair to plaster that picture of the last attempt by Sloan of A&M. It sort of takes away from the hard fought victory and clutch shots made by Kevin Love and Darren Collison. I would have loved to see a panoramic picture of the Collison layup to take the lead for good or the Love fadeaway from the local paper.
I STILL can't figure out how Sloan lost the ball. A couple HD frames and a few seconds of x-mo later and I'm as befuddled as ever. Did anyone else see? Did Sloan lose the ball as he manuvered his hands or did he just straight drop it? I can't see where any of our guys pushed the ball out from the angles shown... Please help!
"Believe everything you hear; there would be chaos if everyone thought for themselves."
I agree that no one can say that a foul definitely should have been called. It was almost impossible to see with the naked eye.
But conversely no one can say that a foul should NOT have been called either.
If a foul HAD been called, the still photos would have completely vindicated the ref, right? No one could have argued it.
My only point is that we were kind of fortunate that no foul was called. Why can't we just admit that? Why is that so hard?
If the conditions were reversed, and Josh had been the one shooting the shot to tie the game and photos showed that Sloan had grabbed his arm, just how gracious would Bruin fans be about it?
"Believe everything you hear; there would be chaos if everyone thought for themselves."
i absolutely DO agree with your statement:
which is precisely why no foul was called and no foul should have been called.
the problem some of us have is the local media showing STILL pictures and suggesting that a foul should have been called when:
i also agree that the focus needs to be western kentucky now. let's hope the team does not put itself into a position that comes down to the last call once again. but, if it does, let's also hope the local media will be objective rather than bend so far over backward not to be partisan that it once again favors the opposition.
Haha, yeah I am glad someone caught that. My tongue was definitely in my cheek for the whole post.
Mort is also right, yeah there was very brief contact and it could have been called either way. It was by no means the obvious foul shown by the LA Slimes picture.
Is really isn't a good idea to come blasting into three defenders (including the center) hoping a flick to the wrist will be called.
Others here had shown how several 'no calls' went TAMU's way as well throughout the game. Sloan's body slam of DC was particularly egregious. But what this says is that the refs that night were letting these guys play, and were not calling the game tight. In this light, it is not surprising that they did not call a foul on Sloan's last drive to the hoop. THAT IS, if they saw it. Perhaps Josh had a feel for what the refs were calling/not calling as a foul and knew what he could get away with, even if he was seen. He realized how the refs were calling the game, then he played accordingly.
not the ones that takes us to the final four!
I agree with what your saying Mort, but it's really hard to see the foul at live action. People look at the still photo and assume that it was a COMPLETE hack. Watching the video in slow motion doesn't reveal an obvious foul. Every freaking sports journalist assumed that they could have seen the foul. Perhaps these writers have the wrong profession. They should be officiating since they have high-speed-camera quality eyes.
I agree. No human eye would have picked it up. I watched the game again (thanks to mbootymah) and could not see Josh hitting Sloan's arm, even in slo-mo a couple of times. Sloan was fading to the left towards Josh, so you would not think Josh was pulling Sloan towards him with his left arm. Even Dickie E & Jay Bilas did not catch it, and they also had the benefit of slo-mo. That's a hightech video camera already looking straight at the action, & it still not visible; contrast that to the refs, who had a different angle, & with 40-50 yr old eyesight.
I know, I know, go back to work & the family...
LOL. You're right, ATB. But "Handgate" is just too much fun to discuss.
The beauty of having thread titles is that people can pick out which threads they're sick of and just ignore them. We've done pretty well in limiting The Foul discussion to this thread.
And don't forget that Bob has the power to delete the thread any time he wants. It's highly possible that he's secretly enjoying this discussion, too.
After all, it was he who strongly implied the possibility of a grassy knoll type of conspiracy. But the clips he posted were just not conclusive. There's a blurry but suspicious image in the background that I can't identify. Did anyone attend the game with their handheld video camera?
Nope, sorry, I was in the Book Depository, er, Powell, but as I walked away by the 405, a fragment of Josh Shipp's hand hit me, so he couldn't have fouled Sloan. There had to be a second fouler.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests