Instead of a no-call it should have been, they call a charge on VT on a VILL screen set on the inbounds play with 1.3 seconds. Allowed Villanova to get and make 2 FTs to tie and send it to OT.
BS.
BS.
Eh, it was the right call, the kid ran over the screener.
What is interesting, is that I think we actually compare well to Nova. Styles are probably opposite (seems like they're better on defense than offense), but if they're #3; I think our ranking may not be as egregious
Big 10 scholarships are only guaranteed for 4 years. are we sure he had one if he came back?Sorry in advance if this was talked about already... but was there any other reason besides playing time as to why Pemsl left? Doesn't look like he is getting much playing time at VT either
Big 10 scholarships are only guaranteed for 4 years. are we sure he had one if he came back?
Why does it matter if it’s a “blindside” screen? That’s the whole point of the play, to catch the defender by surprise! We ran a play like that in HS and won district finals because of it. We actually set the defender up tho, running the guy taking it out the opposite direction then slipping in the screener in. Ill agree that in this case it was questionable whether the screener was set, that’s my only beef with the call.The problem I had with it is that it was a 'blind side' screen, on an in-bounds play. The VT guy had his back to the screener and had no clue he was there.
Would have had no problem with the call if the Hokie had turned his head to see the Wildcat and still plowed over him, but that wasn't the case.