Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
On Twitter: TerpsInsider and PostSports  |  Facebook  |  E-mail alerts: Redskins and Sports  |  RSS

Teague Gets Bucket And Charge

The final score of last night's contest seperated Maryland from Wake Forest, the No. 10 team in the nation, by two points. The Terps were one basket from sending the game into overtime or even winning it outright.

And since it was such a tightly contested affair, several readers emailed me this morning distraught over one play midway through the second half that, in the flow of the game, didn't seem to make sense.

Here was one reader's take:

"When the score was 43-41 and Wake was up by two -- (Jeff) Teague came in and scored but was called for an offensive foul. The basket was nullified but the score still went up to 45-41 and was never corrected! I couldn't believe me eyes! ... If the score was kept correctly then we would have gone into overtime! I was actually hoping that if we lose that we lose by more than two because then my point would be moot."

After confirming with a school official, here is the final account of the referees decision on that play:

With 11:09 to play and Wake up, 43-41, Teague drove to the basket and released a lay-up. The ball went in and a whistle blew. The referee ruled that Teague committed a charge after he released the ball, which meant that the basket counted. Teague was charged with his second personal foul of the night, and play resumed.

So the score was kept correctly, after all.

Kind of an odd sequence of events. Do you all notice that happen much in the games you watch?

By Steve Yanda  |  March 4, 2009; 3:28 PM ET
Categories:  Men's basketball  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Familiar Occurence Hurts Terps
Next: Lynetta Kizer Named ACC Rookie of the Year


Actually debated this rule with a roommate once. Seems some people are not aware that you can score even if you commit a charge, as long as the ball was released first.

I don't mind the rule, it's just that it is almost never called. Refs prefer to take the points away in almost every instance of a charge, regardless of when the ball left a player's hands.

Posted by: Barno1 | March 4, 2009 4:37 PM | Report abuse

While that was a ridiculous call, I think the game-changing call was on a drive by (i'm not sure which Wake Forest player, probably Teague), and the player clearly slipped on the floor and traveled. Instead, they called Vasquez for a foul. Wake held possession and scored. Those 2 points turned out to be huge.

Posted by: fussy | March 4, 2009 4:55 PM | Report abuse

It is a rare call but correct. If the ball leaves the players hand before contact, the basket counts even if the offensive player commits the foul. The rule has been this way forever. Surprised more people do not seem to be aware of it.

Posted by: virtueandvice | March 4, 2009 5:06 PM | Report abuse

The announcers on TV did a good job of explaining it. I agree with fussy, the phantom foul on Vasquez was more appalling and probably more critical.

Posted by: Joran | March 4, 2009 5:27 PM | Report abuse

Although this was the correct call, didnt the same thing happen to adrian bowie where he made the basket as well but they called a charge. Sure seemed like the same play with different calls...

Posted by: mdb280 | March 4, 2009 6:01 PM | Report abuse

I also thought the phantom foul on Vasquez was bigger... The replay showed the guy just lost balance and tripped himself up with no contact. Wake scored a 3 pointer (not a 2 pointer) later on that possession, and I said to myself at the time, "That better not be the final margin of the game."

Posted by: mikeinrockville | March 4, 2009 8:40 PM | Report abuse

It was a good call on the charge--Teague clearly shot the ball before any contact occurred.

I'd like to go back and see if Neal's 3-pointer at the final buzzer was good or not. It clearly looked from where I was sitting that the light around the backboard was on before he shot it. Makes little difference of course, which I guess is why the refs didn't take the time to review it--but it turned a 5-pt game into the 2-pt. game that make this a relevant discussion.

Posted by: ccking | March 5, 2009 6:57 AM | Report abuse

Makes little difference of course, which I guess is why the refs didn't take the time to review it--but it turned a 5-pt game into the 2-pt. game that make this a relevant discussion.

Posted by: ccking | March 5, 2009 6:57 AM

It made a helluva a big difference to gamblers. Spread was 2.

Posted by: Barno1 | March 5, 2009 7:52 AM | Report abuse

Which, of course, was why you heard a thunderous applause from a portion of the crowd when he hit the shot. What, you didn't really think people cared that much that Neal hit a meaningless shot did you?

Posted by: Barno1 | March 5, 2009 7:54 AM | Report abuse

Now we are worried about the point spread?

Where is the purity?

Give me a break.

Posted by: petecard | March 5, 2009 8:18 AM | Report abuse

They played their a**** off and GW coached a great game. Unfortunately, great coaching and hustle can't overcome this team's consistent inability to hit important shots (3ea three's by one un-named guard) and layups (stopped counting at 7). Maybe next year GW can hire Kristie Toliver, the best 3 point shooter in a MD uniform for the past two years, to be his shooting coach?

Posted by: BD-EC | March 5, 2009 9:37 AM | Report abuse

A two point game...stop kidding yourself, Neal made a trash 3 as time ran out to make it that way so its not like Maryland had the chance to tie or win...get over yourself

Posted by: bryan579 | March 5, 2009 1:28 PM | Report abuse


In a tight game w/under 3 minutes, one play can change the outcome of the game. If there's no "foul" on Vasquez, take away the 3, and MD's up and perhaps MD is going to the line instead of taking desparation shots like they did the last 2 or 3 possessions. Hard to say definitively one way or the other.

Posted by: island1 | March 5, 2009 1:49 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company