D1 Boy's QUARTERFINALS

I have to give props to the Paridis kid, as so many players today work on stupid shots and ESPN hilight shots, but those don't win games, basic foul shooting does!

Totally agree with you nhhoopsguy. Just about every one of Paradis' made free throws were in the middle of the rim and nestled softly down the net.

This past week I went to 5 playoff games before tonight's rescheduled game at North. In those 5 games if I had a dollar for every missed free throw in those 5 games I wouldn't have to go into work tomorrow.

Spaulding was 19 - 27 and North was 14 - 21 from the charity stripe. This was a combined 33 for 48 for nearly 70%. This was certainly better than any of the 5 other games I went to this week. It was nice to see a basic fundamental thing win a playoff game.

For those of you who need your speakers blown out, here's the call of the Roberts 3 from last night:

http://soundcloud.com/justin-mcisaac/roberts-for-3-again

"THAT KID'S GOT ANTI FREEZE IN HIS VEINS. NEVER MIND ICE WATER!!!!!!"

Check out Jeremy's interview after last night's game with Noe, Roberts and Paradis. It's one of the best if not best interviews the NH Notebook has had with players after a game this season. All 3 players are well spoken and give some great answers to Jeremy's questions. Check out the scene where some Red Raiders' fans come up in back with large faces of the 3 players. Awesome!!

If you don't have a horse in the Final Four race in D1 you can't help but root for these Red Raiders.

I just emailed The Dan Patrick Show telling them in short The Spaulding STORY. I also forwaded the sound cloud clip. They love these types of stories. Hopefully get Spaulding and Justin some national pub.

GNG wrote: I just emailed The Dan Patrick Show telling them in short The Spaulding STORY. I also forwaded the sound cloud clip. They love these types of stories. Hopefully get Spaulding and Justin some national pub.

Haha that's great GNG- I'm a HUGE DP show fan, I usually watch the replay on DirecTV when I get home from work /radio nerd

With Floras back for Merrimack, this should be a great game tomorrow- and of course we'll be broadcasting it :-P

FWIW: For those that want to "view" the technical - it's on the video on Jeremy's site around 3:20-3:30 in. It wasn't a shove per se, rather a chest bump which I'll assume came with a word or two based on body posture. He essentially walked right up and bumped - that's probably the easiest call you get to make regarding unsportsmanlike behavior. This happened within 15' of where an official was standing *and* looking for action off ball (like you're taught).

Here's the link:

http://www.nhnotebook.com/

You can't really see the "shove" that led to the retaliation, but I bet Jeremy has the footage of the two or three prior seconds that he might be willing to analyze. Regardless, the North player needed to keep his composure, especially right in front of the ref.

I didn't watch the whole nine minutes, but I let it run a minute or so after the incident. Check out the 3:55-4:05 mark, and the lady in the foreground when Spaulding makes a three. I can only imagine it's somebody's mom yelling "you have GOT to defend the 3 !!"

FFW to 3:15 Unfortunately emotions get the best of a lot of people on the court. Sounds like the rest of the game went fine. Spaulding made some THREE's!!!

Basically at the time the technical was issued the game was turning into more of a wrestling/hockey/football game than basketball. It was gettign out of hand and I was really getting concerned for the safety of the kids on the court. For crying out loud there was 3 refs out there sothere should be NO reason why a player could run directly up to an opponent, shove them to the floor and have no foul be called. This happened twice and it wasn't until it happened a third time that a foul was finally called. While the refs did wait too long before blowing the whistle at least they called a technical because they ahd to do something to get the game under control.

Good stuff on here about the game last night. Thought Jeremy's video was great.

I'm going back to a format with my two semifinal previews this week that I had done years ago and really liked. Thought the readers of this forum would appreciate it as much as anyone; I've interviewed 5 or 6 different coaches from each division about their thoughts on the four final four teams. They are blind quotes so no coaches name will be used, just their honest opinions on the four teams and how they match up, how to attack them and so forth.

Some great insight and obviously the coaches know these teams better than anyone. Excuse me for plugging a column of mine but I think it will be a good read.

I'll see everyone on Tuesday. Pop over and say hello at the press section.

I was not there.....but Justin on WTSN 1270 had the game as a physical battle from the start. He made a comparison/reference or two to football.

After reading the post is clear North got jobbed by the refs,

it all started with Gautheir getting undercut by a Spaulding player tyring to box out ( the one who hurt his back) and end in the refs missing the Spualding player shoving Mellin leading to Mellin t.

This seems to happen to much they let them play to the point that it becomes dangerous then a T is called. Just call the game the way it should be the whole time.

goldenbear wrote:After reading the post is clear North got jobbed by the refs,

There were 4 or 5 people on here saying the game was called consistently both ways, and a video posted of the T, so I don't really see how one can say North got "Jobbed". Yes, the game was called tighter after the T, but that's what happens in every single basketball game ever.

As for the T itself, when you take 4 steps and chest bump a dude 3 seconds after the whistle, 6 feet away from the ref, that's usually going to be called.

Justin I think your the only one on here that did not say it was retaliation

I did not see the original push by the Spaulding player after seeing the tape and hearing what happened from T & F, the T was just the wrong call they missed the first one and that turned the whole game.

I like Spaulding my aunt worked the for years my uncle is heavily involved with the Legion there along with Hockey now, my cousin played with Jaime Keefe and I was there when Rochester won the Legion title over 20 years ago now.

And those kids played a great game and not going blame them for taking advantage of refs mistake they made all the players when they had and were awesome OT.

However a T can not be called there the way it was called it should have been a double T and thus no momentum would have been changed by a single call.

See what I mean...now 2 threads....

Why is it the referee's fault when a good team loses in a close game? Does the winning team feel they got away with one? Is that what they say after the game? How many free throws had North missed up to that point? How many layups, How many jump shots? Were those the referee's fault too?

Whether you agree with allowing the physical play or not, it happened. Was it called or not called, was it called only one way, was it "part of the game"?. You are taking an "isolated incident" in the game where someone went above and beyond the threshold and saying it's all the referee's fault. Go back to the other stream and read my comment - who taught the players to play that way? It wasn't the referees. It also seems like the game was "consistently" called - nothing I've read seems to indicate otherwise.

On that one play you cannot call a double T. Absolutely not, no way, no how, you'd be run out of the building. Overall it was a physical game; however, in one instance a player took exception to an action on the court and decided to take matters into his own hands and got caught. Not only was he caught doing something unsportsmanlike, but he did it in front of a referee, after a whistle, in what now people call a critical junction of the game. If he hadn't decided to do that then, would that point have been so critical? Do you blame the player at all? Was that player or perhaps North players in general the recipients of the majority of physical play during the game (doesn't sound like it). In fact, 28 minutes into the game, I'll assume that there was a lot of give and take by that player and others.

your right the player was responsible for his response, if he does not retaliate the T is not called,,

but it was a retaliation do of course you can give a double T, one player trips or pushes another player

the other player comes back at him and chest bumps why cant you give them both a T?

Answer that and use an situation not just this one

The second guy normally does get caught on all levels of basketball and football, so I am not going to single just these refs but a double T and send them both to the bench is appropriate,

G-Bear, when I looked at the tape on NHN I saw the following things with regards to the 3 man crew:

Trail official: The one in the far backcourt had just released players in his visual area including ball handler and defender and another couple of players.

Center official: Was looking at Gauthier dribbling over division line with defender on him.

Lead official: The one running towards North's offensive baseline with his head looking back over his shoulders (What referees are taught to do).

So, trail official had just released a few players in his PCA(primary coverage area) and did not see the push of Mellin near mid court by the Spaulding player.

Center official was concentrating on Gauthier and defender, so he doesn't see push of Mellin by Spaulding player either.

Lead official: Try running forward and looking back at the same time. You will have a blind spot. The lead official's blind spot was where Mellin was pushed.

It might sound incredulous to North fans, but there are some things in a basketball game that a 3 man crew will miss visually. This is just a fact. They did not miss the retaliation push by Mellin. Retaliation only in retrospect and further viewings, but at the time the T was called on Mellin the officials were going by what they saw immediately, not what was missed, BECAUSE OF THE HUMAN ELEMENT that officials are humans and not robots.


You can't give a double T when one of the actions for one of the T's wasn't seen by any of the officials. Because the first action happened in live basketball time it would've been assessed as a personal foul instead of a technical, unless one of the officials saw it as an intentional or a flagrant, then we could get into another slew of scenarios.

We could go to video reviews in games on plays like that and others and instead of the game taking 1:15 to play it could take 1:30 to 2:00 to play. Would any body want this to happen?

Great post T F

and I will take any criticism to the Bleachers about refs started a thread over there

no replay in HS

but in college yes

I do think it was intentional most people in the stands on North side were saying they need to foul (not dirty) because I think Spaulding was trying to foul do to the injury of one their players

the foul on Gauthier was a bit rough but I total understand why the kid did it he hurt his back and was in a lot of pain , sohe basically jsut lugged forward

T f another question or two for you

In your mind did the T have to be called on Mellin?

the way they were letting them play do you think that leads to stuff like that?

I was at the game earlier in the year and an official warned players to stop banging real rough play both sides, but no foul right away

that lead to a few altercations later. I just your point of view on it.

Yes, the T had to be called on Mellin. He chest bumped the Spaulding player and he went down to the court. 100% technical because it happened during a dead ball. If that was during a live ball it might have been called a team control foul on North and it would've been Spaulding's ball with no FTs.

Now, if Mellin would've bumped the Spaulding player during a dead ball and the Spaulding player would've just been moved back a step and stayed upright, maybe the calling official (the lead), would've just warned the 2 players. We'll never know this scenario. The only scenario we'll ever know is the one that actually happened and yes it did deserve the technical.

This is why contact like that in dead ball situations are a technical as opposed to contact during live ball situations which are player control or team control fouls.

Can you imagine players nailing each other more frequently in dead ball situations. If a technical wasn't assessed and just a regular foul was given for dead ball contact I assure you it would happen more often on the court.

T f I have more questions I want to answer but I put in the bleachers to get it off of here,