QF #3 Hopkins vs #6 Virginia Sunday @2:30

[coda]

Anyone else think the Hop defense was gassed?

I think everyone was gassed by the second overtime. Well, except for #1 in blue.

I think Lars said something like I am just happy Hopkins didnt go after Wayer in the OT, because he could barely stand.. something to that effect

[jhu72]

Anyone else think the Hop defense was gassed?

Everyone on the field was

Didn't help that they lost Brett Martin, their best SSDM and energy guy, at the most crucial stretch of the game. That's the way the cookie crumbles sometimes

... I think losing Martin was a big deal to the team psychologically. He is one of their most reliable players, best DM. It was a significant loss. It deflated the team at a point when they had everything going their way. But as you say, cookies crumble.

[BigTom5]

Hop let one slip. You have to be questioning overall philosophy going into a shell before the 4th quarter even starts.

Correct, totally let one slip. UVAs offense could not finish to save their life. The fact that Cormier missed his first 10 shots, all normally dunks for him, most with his hands free, was like hitting the lottery. That and Lars starting a goalie who he admitted wasn’t seeing the ball all week in practice, should have been enough of an advantage to get Hop a win.

Cormier was being face guarded all game, and had 3 guys on him ever time he touched the ball, that is why Boyden had 3 goals, Shelly had 3 goals, and Millon had 3 goals, now your going to say the all time leading goal scorer in NCAA history can't finish? good call...

Hopkins clearly chose to have someone on Cormier's hands at all times, at the expense letting others (especially Boyden) get shots. It wasn't a bad strategy. Almost worked.

I guess you don’t know ball as well…

LOL. I'm not sure I would use "face-guarding", but they also didn't slide off of Cormier much, if at all. But since you really "know ball", maybe you can walk me through the slide scheme?

No problem.

Here is a link to the game, takes 5 minutes to watch all the shots: https://youtu.be/HziQBOwshY4?si=PYQFIJP75vM8jsyk

Will break down the first half for you:
Q1 10:30: Wide open on front pipe, hit crossbar
Q1 4:45: Open on high crease, hits left pipe
Q1 4:41: Wide open on front pipe, save Irelan
Bonus 4:28 - that slash on Shellenberger is very very soft
Q2 9:55- Dodges to middle, shoots from 9yds wide
Q2 2:57: Man Up, wide open look from the lower left corner, hits left pipe
Q2 1:36: Irelan out of the cage, cormier catches on the back pipe and misses a wide open net

They slid off Cormier, left him open continuously, he just didn’t make them pay (and hit a lot of pipes). Watch those clips and tell me otherwise…

I understand that Cormier got shots. He did not get his usual fill of open mid-range looks resulting from his defender sliding to the ball. My point is that the Hopkins rarely slid from him and that he was a point of emphasis. One the first shot, they set an off-ball pick on the crease and the Hopkins SSDM screws up and doesn't switch it. No slide. The second shot he is bracketed by two poles; its a great feed by Millon, but there's really no time-and-room. He gets the shot off regardless but it is contested. Third shot Hopkins defender is ball-watching off the restart. No slide. The fourth shot, Cormier is doubled, tries to swim the double, and manages to get off a weak contested shot. Fifth shot is man-up, agree this is the type of look that he usually cans. Sixth shot, Shellenberger hangs up his defender, he finds Cormier when Ierlan goes behind to play the hang-up, but Cormier has Raposo's stick in his hands an the shot hits Ierlan when he's several feet wide of the cage.

Again, JHU made it a point to limit the number of time-and-room shots that Cormier can destroy you with. Some of that was bracketing him on the crease, some was not sliding off of him (there's a reason you didn't hear Szuluk's name that much). His goal was one of the few real time-and-room looks he got the entire game.

Not only are your skills primitive, but so are your comprehension skills. Just because Cormier is in between two defenders doesn’t mean he was “bracketed”, it means he is sitting in a soft spot. If he was truly bracketed, the two guys around him would have gotten a check off before he catches and shoots. In all thr timestamps I laid out, Szuluk wasn’t even the nearest defender to Cormier, because he had slid or was hedging to slide. He was open all the time and got those same mid-range and crease shots he always gets (took 11 shots, averages 10.5 a game, and they were all good looks).

It’s ok to admit you are wrong when someone else presents a strong counterargument. It happens to the best of us. No need to keep digging your heels in.

[tech37]

Cormier had many good looks but I think Ierlan got in his head early with his stellar play.

[BigTom5]

Cormier had many good looks but I think Ierlan got in his head early with his stellar play.

I agree. He was totally in his own head, Irelan induced or otherwise. His quiet day wasn’t caused by some defensive scheme designed to limit his looks. He got plenty of great looks and was continuously open, just didn’t make Hop pay.

[primitiveskills]

Hop let one slip. You have to be questioning overall philosophy going into a shell before the 4th quarter even starts.

Correct, totally let one slip. UVAs offense could not finish to save their life. The fact that Cormier missed his first 10 shots, all normally dunks for him, most with his hands free, was like hitting the lottery. That and Lars starting a goalie who he admitted wasn’t seeing the ball all week in practice, should have been enough of an advantage to get Hop a win.

Cormier was being face guarded all game, and had 3 guys on him ever time he touched the ball, that is why Boyden had 3 goals, Shelly had 3 goals, and Millon had 3 goals, now your going to say the all time leading goal scorer in NCAA history can't finish? good call...

Hopkins clearly chose to have someone on Cormier's hands at all times, at the expense letting others (especially Boyden) get shots. It wasn't a bad strategy. Almost worked.

I guess you don’t know ball as well…

LOL. I'm not sure I would use "face-guarding", but they also didn't slide off of Cormier much, if at all. But since you really "know ball", maybe you can walk me through the slide scheme?

No problem.

Here is a link to the game, takes 5 minutes to watch all the shots: https://youtu.be/HziQBOwshY4?si=PYQFIJP75vM8jsyk

Will break down the first half for you:
Q1 10:30: Wide open on front pipe, hit crossbar
Q1 4:45: Open on high crease, hits left pipe
Q1 4:41: Wide open on front pipe, save Irelan
Bonus 4:28 - that slash on Shellenberger is very very soft
Q2 9:55- Dodges to middle, shoots from 9yds wide
Q2 2:57: Man Up, wide open look from the lower left corner, hits left pipe
Q2 1:36: Irelan out of the cage, cormier catches on the back pipe and misses a wide open net

They slid off Cormier, left him open continuously, he just didn’t make them pay (and hit a lot of pipes). Watch those clips and tell me otherwise…

I understand that Cormier got shots. He did not get his usual fill of open mid-range looks resulting from his defender sliding to the ball. My point is that the Hopkins rarely slid from him and that he was a point of emphasis. One the first shot, they set an off-ball pick on the crease and the Hopkins SSDM screws up and doesn't switch it. No slide. The second shot he is bracketed by two poles; its a great feed by Millon, but there's really no time-and-room. He gets the shot off regardless but it is contested. Third shot Hopkins defender is ball-watching off the restart. No slide. The fourth shot, Cormier is doubled, tries to swim the double, and manages to get off a weak contested shot. Fifth shot is man-up, agree this is the type of look that he usually cans. Sixth shot, Shellenberger hangs up his defender, he finds Cormier when Ierlan goes behind to play the hang-up, but Cormier has Raposo's stick in his hands an the shot hits Ierlan when he's several feet wide of the cage.

Again, JHU made it a point to limit the number of time-and-room shots that Cormier can destroy you with. Some of that was bracketing him on the crease, some was not sliding off of him (there's a reason you didn't hear Szuluk's name that much). His goal was one of the few real time-and-room looks he got the entire game.

Not only are your skills primitive, but so are your comprehension skills. Just because Cormier is in between two defenders doesn’t mean he was “bracketed”, it means he is sitting in a soft spot. If he was truly bracketed, the two guys around him would have gotten a check off before he catches and shoots. In all thr timestamps I laid out, Szuluk wasn’t even the nearest defender to Cormier, because he had slid or was hedging to slide. He was open all the time and got those same mid-range and crease shots he always gets (took 11 shots, averages 10.5 a game, and they were all good looks).

It’s ok to admit you are wrong when someone else presents a strong counterargument. It happens to the best of us. No need to keep digging your heels in.

Whatever, man. You said they were sliding off him continuously. This is obviously important to you, so go for it.

[cmbtp88]

Hop let one slip. You have to be questioning overall philosophy going into a shell before the 4th quarter even starts.

Correct, totally let one slip. UVAs offense could not finish to save their life. The fact that Cormier missed his first 10 shots, all normally dunks for him, most with his hands free, was like hitting the lottery. That and Lars starting a goalie who he admitted wasn’t seeing the ball all week in practice, should have been enough of an advantage to get Hop a win.

Cormier was being face guarded all game, and had 3 guys on him ever time he touched the ball, that is why Boyden had 3 goals, Shelly had 3 goals, and Millon had 3 goals, now your going to say the all time leading goal scorer in NCAA history can't finish? good call...

You obviously didn’t watch the game closely (or don’t know what you are looking at). He wasn’t face guarded at all. He wasn’t triple teamed. He got the same looks he always gets. He had shots on the crease when cutting the front and back pipes, he got 6 yd shots from the high crease, he got time and rooms from the left wing. He just didn’t can any of them. Was an atypical off game, which happens in the sport, not some defensive scheme or adjustment.

I watched the game in person and on replay. Every time he touched the ball he had 2 other defenders collapse to him. and he was being face guarded at times. Even the commentators mentioned it on the tv. You should watch the game again. He did miss 2 shots he normally would finish, but Ierlan was playing great. I'm sure that effected his choices. I don't mind you saying it was an off game for him, I would agree with that. It was a defensive scheme, they packed the paint big time against us and it worked, they did that the second half of our first game too. glad VA survived whilst he had that off game. I do think that by doing what they were doing in the tight area did open things up from the outside more. Why i think Shelly and Boyden had a few more shots with their hands free. Hoping he's feeling it this week!

[cmbtp88]

Hop let one slip. You have to be questioning overall philosophy going into a shell before the 4th quarter even starts.

Correct, totally let one slip. UVAs offense could not finish to save their life. The fact that Cormier missed his first 10 shots, all normally dunks for him, most with his hands free, was like hitting the lottery. That and Lars starting a goalie who he admitted wasn’t seeing the ball all week in practice, should have been enough of an advantage to get Hop a win.

Cormier was being face guarded all game, and had 3 guys on him ever time he touched the ball, that is why Boyden had 3 goals, Shelly had 3 goals, and Millon had 3 goals, now your going to say the all time leading goal scorer in NCAA history can't finish? good call...

Hopkins clearly chose to have someone on Cormier's hands at all times, at the expense letting others (especially Boyden) get shots. It wasn't a bad strategy. Almost worked.

I guess you don’t know ball as well…

I can tell you know ball...typical hopkins fan, even when they lose they always know ball better than everyone else....

[cmbtp88]

Sorry to p*ss in the punch bowl, but the NCAA rules committee and the referees were made to look incompetent by the UVA goal which resulted in the game going into overtime. It was not a close call! The player stepped on the line prior to the ball entering the goal and prior to his own release of the ball. Close examination of the video clip on a computer shows this. This was not a case of not enough information to overturn the call. It was clear. There are only two ways the referees could have missed this call, 1) the equipment they were using or 2) they didn't want for human reasons having to do with blame for changing the outcome of the game. They were going to take that blame in either case, I could not be avoided. Perhaps they had a preference for which side of the blame they thought more acceptable.

Some have said the crease lines should be a color capable of showing better contrast - this is a good idea, but again not necessary in this case. The correct call could have been made as the coloring stood. Trying to do this analysis on inferior equipment or in the glare of the sun could cause problems.

No matter the reason - they missed the call! MLB does a much better job with video review, they use first rate video equipment in a darkened room where glare is not an issue and remove the human factor by making the call remotely (an individual who will not take heat from a coach in his face).

The other possibility is stop doing video review if you are not going to commit to doing the best job you can.

There's one maddening and completely avoidable aspect of video review that has made it a disaster across the sports where it's been applied (with one exception). That is, making the technology subject to the call on the field. Why should the call on the field matter? Presumably, you're reviewing plays that are subject to a high rate of error when called in real-time. Let the technology make the call. Oherwise, you end up with a situation where there is an image of the guy stepping on the crease (objective) that is over-ridden by a human official getting to decide whether that should make him reverse his call (subjective).

Premier League soccer and the NFL are good examples of how this has made the sport worse. Professional tennis, on the other hand, gets it right. Humans aren't involved in line calls anymore. The technology decides. Easy.

I am pretty sure professional tennis is done electronically, hence the shadow ball marks on the lines in 3 seconds...i think the call on the field is only used when video replay is questionable right. Obviously it wasnt clear if he did step on the crease or not. I was at the game but when you watch the replay of the game and they were showing it, even when they zoomed it from the angle they had it wasn't 100% clear, they would have been guessing one way or the other i think. I was surprised there wasnt a better replay angle.....that would have helped....sure next weeks games will have more cameras, know that doesnt help with this call

[Sagittarius A*]

I am pretty sure professional tennis is done electronically, hence the shadow ball marks on the lines in 3 seconds...i think the call on the field is only used when video replay is questionable right. Obviously it wasnt clear if he did step on the crease or not. I was at the game but when you watch the replay of the game and they were showing it, even when they zoomed it from the angle they had it wasn't 100% clear, they would have been guessing one way or the other i think. I was surprised there wasnt a better replay angle.....that would have helped....sure next weeks games will have more cameras, know that doesnt help with this call

It was obvious. I was there too and it was 100% obvious on the jumbotron that is foot was on the crease line. The entire stadium booed when the replay call was announced. I also looked at the replay of the televised game. QK, who is no Hopkins homer, said immediately that his foot was in the crease before even seeing the replay. After the replay he said the foot was on the line and the call should be overturned. It doesn't get any clearer than that.

Replay was instituted for crease violations after a Duke player clearly stepped in the crease yet his OT goal was allowed last year and Duke advanced. The whole point of adding replay for in the crease calls is that the Refs ACTUALLY LOOK AT THE REPLAY.

The NFL had the same problem when they started replay. Officials would not over turn anything, even obvious calls. So the NFL started firing officials and magically, obvious calls started getting overturned. Go figure!

This situation is unacceptable and needs to be escalated, not swept under the rug. The NCAA should fire the officials involved immediately and return some semblance of sanity and integrity to the game. Otherwise, replay is useless without a fair human element.

UVA's final four is tainted.

[HopFan16]

It was obvious.

Legit thought you died

[blue angels]

I am pretty sure professional tennis is done electronically, hence the shadow ball marks on the lines in 3 seconds...i think the call on the field is only used when video replay is questionable right. Obviously it wasnt clear if he did step on the crease or not. I was at the game but when you watch the replay of the game and they were showing it, even when they zoomed it from the angle they had it wasn't 100% clear, they would have been guessing one way or the other i think. I was surprised there wasnt a better replay angle.....that would have helped....sure next weeks games will have more cameras, know that doesnt help with this call

It was obvious. I was there too and it was 100% obvious on the jumbotron that is foot was on the crease line. The entire stadium booed when the replay call was announced. I also looked at the replay of the televised game. QK, who is no Hopkins homer, said immediately that his foot was in the crease before even seeing the replay. After the replay he said the foot was on the line and the call should be overturned. It doesn't get any clearer than that.

Replay was instituted for crease violations after a Duke player clearly stepped in the crease yet his OT goal was allowed last year and Duke advanced. The whole point of adding replay for in the crease calls is that the Refs ACTUALLY LOOK AT THE REPLAY.

The NFL had the same problem when they started replay. Officials would not over turn anything, even obvious calls. So the NFL started firing officials and magically, obvious calls started getting overturned. Go figure!

This situation is unacceptable and needs to be escalated, not swept under the rug. The NCAA should fire the officials involved immediately and return some semblance of sanity and integrity to the game. Otherwise, replay is useless without a fair human element.

UVA's final four is tainted.

The Refs made the call, acknowledged how close it was, and correctly reviewed it. They then came to the conclusion that it was inconclusive. Thank God for Replay........ HOP Homers are not going to change the reality because they want it to be a particular way. It was definitely not clear to the entire Referee crew and many of the rest of us. Whiners gonna whine anyway.........

[Hooz123]

I am pretty sure professional tennis is done electronically, hence the shadow ball marks on the lines in 3 seconds...i think the call on the field is only used when video replay is questionable right. Obviously it wasnt clear if he did step on the crease or not. I was at the game but when you watch the replay of the game and they were showing it, even when they zoomed it from the angle they had it wasn't 100% clear, they would have been guessing one way or the other i think. I was surprised there wasnt a better replay angle.....that would have helped....sure next weeks games will have more cameras, know that doesnt help with this call

It was obvious. I was there too and it was 100% obvious on the jumbotron that is foot was on the crease line. The entire stadium booed when the replay call was announced. I also looked at the replay of the televised game. QK, who is no Hopkins homer, said immediately that his foot was in the crease before even seeing the replay. After the replay he said the foot was on the line and the call should be overturned. It doesn't get any clearer than that.

Replay was instituted for crease violations after a Duke player clearly stepped in the crease yet his OT goal was allowed last year and Duke advanced. The whole point of adding replay for in the crease calls is that the Refs ACTUALLY LOOK AT THE REPLAY.

The NFL had the same problem when they started replay. Officials would not over turn anything, even obvious calls. So the NFL started firing officials and magically, obvious calls started getting overturned. Go figure!

This situation is unacceptable and needs to be escalated, not swept under the rug. The NCAA should fire the officials involved immediately and return some semblance of sanity and integrity to the game. Otherwise, replay is useless without a fair human element.

UVA's final four is tainted.

Doubt the 4K+ UVa fans booed.

Derealization is an alteration in the perception or experience of the external world so that it seems unreal. It is a dissociative symptom of many conditions. I suggest you seek treatment.

Enjoy the offseason. Don't blame replay for your dusty team, git gud, loser.

[Sagittarius A*]

I am pretty sure professional tennis is done electronically, hence the shadow ball marks on the lines in 3 seconds...i think the call on the field is only used when video replay is questionable right. Obviously it wasnt clear if he did step on the crease or not. I was at the game but when you watch the replay of the game and they were showing it, even when they zoomed it from the angle they had it wasn't 100% clear, they would have been guessing one way or the other i think. I was surprised there wasnt a better replay angle.....that would have helped....sure next weeks games will have more cameras, know that doesnt help with this call

It was obvious. I was there too and it was 100% obvious on the jumbotron that is foot was on the crease line. The entire stadium booed when the replay call was announced. I also looked at the replay of the televised game. QK, who is no Hopkins homer, said immediately that his foot was in the crease before even seeing the replay. After the replay he said the foot was on the line and the call should be overturned. It doesn't get any clearer than that.

Replay was instituted for crease violations after a Duke player clearly stepped in the crease yet his OT goal was allowed last year and Duke advanced. The whole point of adding replay for in the crease calls is that the Refs ACTUALLY LOOK AT THE REPLAY.

The NFL had the same problem when they started replay. Officials would not over turn anything, even obvious calls. So the NFL started firing officials and magically, obvious calls started getting overturned. Go figure!

This situation is unacceptable and needs to be escalated, not swept under the rug. The NCAA should fire the officials involved immediately and return some semblance of sanity and integrity to the game. Otherwise, replay is useless without a fair human element.

UVA's final four is tainted.

Doubt the 4K+ UVa fans booed.

Derealization is an alteration in the perception or experience of the external world so that it seems unreal. It is a dissociative symptom of many conditions. I suggest you seek treatment.

Enjoy the offseason. Don't blame replay for your dusty team, git gud, loser.

Ever hear the term "Sportswashing?"

[coda]

I am pretty sure professional tennis is done electronically, hence the shadow ball marks on the lines in 3 seconds...i think the call on the field is only used when video replay is questionable right. Obviously it wasnt clear if he did step on the crease or not. I was at the game but when you watch the replay of the game and they were showing it, even when they zoomed it from the angle they had it wasn't 100% clear, they would have been guessing one way or the other i think. I was surprised there wasnt a better replay angle.....that would have helped....sure next weeks games will have more cameras, know that doesnt help with this call

It was obvious. I was there too and it was 100% obvious on the jumbotron that is foot was on the crease line. The entire stadium booed when the replay call was announced. I also looked at the replay of the televised game. QK, who is no Hopkins homer, said immediately that his foot was in the crease before even seeing the replay. After the replay he said the foot was on the line and the call should be overturned. It doesn't get any clearer than that.

Replay was instituted for crease violations after a Duke player clearly stepped in the crease yet his OT goal was allowed last year and Duke advanced. The whole point of adding replay for in the crease calls is that the Refs ACTUALLY LOOK AT THE REPLAY.

The NFL had the same problem when they started replay. Officials would not over turn anything, even obvious calls. So the NFL started firing officials and magically, obvious calls started getting overturned. Go figure!

This situation is unacceptable and needs to be escalated, not swept under the rug. The NCAA should fire the officials involved immediately and return some semblance of sanity and integrity to the game. Otherwise, replay is useless without a fair human element.

UVA's final four is tainted.

I was in the game thread and said I think he is in the crease, but I am not sure there is enough evidence to over-turn it. This play was not like the Duke goal .

https://www.pennlive.com/pennstate/2023 ... jones.html

you can see there is no doubt that Duke guy was on the crease. Millon was debate about was his foot touching the crease. I think it the tip of his shoe touched the line, but pretty sure most rational people would say that it was a really tough call.

[Hoxwurth]

I was in the game thread and said I think he is in the crease, but I am not sure there is enough evidence to over-turn it. This play was not like the Duke goal .

https://www.pennlive.com/pennstate/2023 ... jones.html

you can see there is no doubt that Duke guy was on the crease. Millon was debate about was his foot touching the crease. I think it the tip of his shoe touched the line, but pretty sure most rational people would say that it was a really tough call.

As others are noting, this Millon crease review is nothing like the Duke one from 2023 where the player's toe was across the entire crease line.

It's certainly possible that Millon's toe was barely in the crease, but replay isn't intended to be perfect, it's intended to fix blatant mistakes. For example, the Maryland fans are right that the tying goal UVA scored in the tournament went off the crossbar and never hit the net. The complaining here about such a close call is absurd--whatever was called on the field was always going to stand.

[norcalhop]

I was in the game thread and said I think he is in the crease, but I am not sure there is enough evidence to over-turn it. This play was not like the Duke goal .

https://www.pennlive.com/pennstate/2023 ... jones.html

you can see there is no doubt that Duke guy was on the crease. Millon was debate about was his foot touching the crease. I think it the tip of his shoe touched the line, but pretty sure most rational people would say that it was a really tough call.

As others are noting, this Millon crease review is nothing like the Duke one from 2023 where the player's toe was across the entire crease line.

It's certainly possible that Millon's toe was barely in the crease, but replay isn't intended to be perfect, it's intended to fix blatant mistakes. For example, the Maryland fans are right that the tying goal UVA scored in the tournament went off the crossbar and never hit the net. The complaining here about such a close call is absurd--whatever was called on the field was always going to stand.

When the announcer literally says it's going to be overturned, yes it is controversial.

[coda]

I was in the game thread and said I think he is in the crease, but I am not sure there is enough evidence to over-turn it. This play was not like the Duke goal .

https://www.pennlive.com/pennstate/2023 ... jones.html

you can see there is no doubt that Duke guy was on the crease. Millon was debate about was his foot touching the crease. I think it the tip of his shoe touched the line, but pretty sure most rational people would say that it was a really tough call.

As others are noting, this Millon crease review is nothing like the Duke one from 2023 where the player's toe was across the entire crease line.

It's certainly possible that Millon's toe was barely in the crease, but replay isn't intended to be perfect, it's intended to fix blatant mistakes. For example, the Maryland fans are right that the tying goal UVA scored in the tournament went off the crossbar and never hit the net. The complaining here about such a close call is absurd--whatever was called on the field was always going to stand.

When the announcer literally says it's going to be overturned, yes it is controversial.

Anish was saying the whole time he did not think there was enough evidence to overturn it. Quint said I think his right foot hits the line. Even in the booth, they were not definitive about the play. That in and of itself will make a call controversial.

[Hoxwurth]

I was in the game thread and said I think he is in the crease, but I am not sure there is enough evidence to over-turn it. This play was not like the Duke goal .

https://www.pennlive.com/pennstate/2023 ... jones.html

you can see there is no doubt that Duke guy was on the crease. Millon was debate about was his foot touching the crease. I think it the tip of his shoe touched the line, but pretty sure most rational people would say that it was a really tough call.

As others are noting, this Millon crease review is nothing like the Duke one from 2023 where the player's toe was across the entire crease line.

It's certainly possible that Millon's toe was barely in the crease, but replay isn't intended to be perfect, it's intended to fix blatant mistakes. For example, the Maryland fans are right that the tying goal UVA scored in the tournament went off the crossbar and never hit the net. The complaining here about such a close call is absurd--whatever was called on the field was always going to stand.

When the announcer literally says it's going to be overturned, yes it is controversial.

Anish was saying the whole time he did not think there was enough evidence to overturn it. Quint said I think his right foot hits the line. Even in the booth, they were not definitive about the play. That in and of itself will make a call controversial.

If it were clear, the Hopkins fans would post screencaps showing how "obvious" the call was. When you have to zoom in and start guessing about what's more likely than not, the call is not obvious. Relying on Quint's initial reaction instead of the actual picture speaks for itself.

[coda]

I was in the game thread and said I think he is in the crease, but I am not sure there is enough evidence to over-turn it. This play was not like the Duke goal .

https://www.pennlive.com/pennstate/2023 ... jones.html

you can see there is no doubt that Duke guy was on the crease. Millon was debate about was his foot touching the crease. I think it the tip of his shoe touched the line, but pretty sure most rational people would say that it was a really tough call.

As others are noting, this Millon crease review is nothing like the Duke one from 2023 where the player's toe was across the entire crease line.

It's certainly possible that Millon's toe was barely in the crease, but replay isn't intended to be perfect, it's intended to fix blatant mistakes. For example, the Maryland fans are right that the tying goal UVA scored in the tournament went off the crossbar and never hit the net. The complaining here about such a close call is absurd--whatever was called on the field was always going to stand.

When the announcer literally says it's going to be overturned, yes it is controversial.

Anish was saying the whole time he did not think there was enough evidence to overturn it. Quint said I think his right foot hits the line. Even in the booth, they were not definitive about the play. That in and of itself will make a call controversial.

If it were clear, the Hopkins fans would post screencaps showing how "obvious" the call was. When you have to zoom in and start guessing about what's more likely than not, the call is not obvious. Relying on Quint's initial reaction instead of the actual picture speaks for itself.

I think he was in, but I do understand that its not 100% obvious looking at the replay.