This Will Be the Last Thing I Have to Say About This

So in the final analysis, most folks seemed to adopt a position akin to my own which was that Henderson was reckless and swung wildly but did not do so with any intent to harm Hansbrough. That being said, it was still a swing of the arm which contacted the face of another player and by definition in warranted an ejection from the game plus the one game suspension that follows. As just so we are clear the following very well respected and well spoken individuals also adopted a similar position:

Mike Kzryzewski(Duke Head Coach)
Roy Williams(UNC Head Coach)
John Swofford(ACC Commissioner)
Adam Gold(850 the Buzz)
Joe Ovies(620 the Bull)
Mark Packer(Primetime with the Packman)
Bill Simmons(The Sports Guy)
Pat Forde(College Basketball Writer,
Caulton Tudor(News and Observer)
Tony Kornheiser(ESPN)
Michael Wilbon(ESPN)

And among the group of people who thought the foul was unintentional and did not warrant an ejection or one game suspension:

Billy Packer(CBS/Raycom Sports/Mr. Cash)

So a big thanks to Billy Packer for confirming to us what we already knew and that he is utterly and painfully clueless. I honestly hope he is assigned to cover any region but the one UNC is in.


25 Responses to This Will Be the Last Thing I Have to Say About This

  1. hhn111 says:

    I’m sure we’ll hear plenty of this incident from Billy Packer during the ACC tourney with him doing the commentary for Raycom. He’ll also bring up that K’s should be credited with the L’s in ’95 for his back surgery, blah blah blah…can’t beat a dead horse enough in regards to this item.

  2. Josh Bowling says:

    I agree that Henderson may, I mean may, not have intended to harm Tyler to the extent that he did, but he most definately meant to hit him. These players are too skilled in going after balls to mistakenly hit a face that is almost 3 feet away from a basketball without intending to. Our stance on this just empowers these players to continue to engage in activity that results in such actions as these. I understand people wanting to be deemed as above “partisan bickering” and “above the frey” so to speak. I am convinced that our stance on Henderson is not because he is a rival player from Duke, but because we have looked at the film, weighed the evidence, and have come to a conclusion that he hit Tyler with intent to foul hard. Now it May be that he did not mean to cause Such harm to Tyler as he did, but nevertheless, he did.

  3. Josh Bowling says:

    And also, Henderson’s reaction after the foul, and after the game, should be incriminating enough on its own. There is no evidence in all that transpired that would convince anyone that this is an unintentionable action. Well, maybe except Packer himself. Letting this issue die off only goes to fuel our rivals fire to commit this in a similar manner latter. Remember how easy we were on Dockery last year. Now look at what Tyler has had to go through this year. And make no mistake about it, that is because we did not make enough of an issue out of it last year. And don’t forget Hendersons mannerisms after the foul and the game, certainly not enough to make me want to dismiss this as an accident!

  4. williamodouglas says:

    He engaged in an unnecessary action in a wholly reckless manner. In law, recklessness is considered to be a kind of intent.

    The law recognizes specific intent and general intent. 1st degree murder requires a specific intent to kill someone. 3rd degree murder or manslaugher involves general intent, which means that the person is engaging in an action that a reasonable person would know had a possiblity of creating harm to another, without any corresponding benefit or utility. If you are driving 100 miles and hour to the hospital with someone dying and you kill someone without “meaning to” on the way, that might be a defense.

    If you drive 100 miles because it is fun, but you didn’t “mean to” kill anyone, that is no defense and the person is guilty of manslaughter.

    If Henderson had done this earlier in the game, there might be an argument. When he engaged in that action, it was pointless and he is deemed to have a general intent that playing out of control like that might hurt someone.

    If I were Duke, I would shut up about it. This is terrible publicity for a school that already is known for rowdy fans and lacrosse players.

  5. Josh Bowling says:

    I tell you William, I still challege intent altogether. As I look at those clips, I see a desire to hit Hansbrough. Now I do challege the intent to harm him to the extent that he did. But I am convinced that he directly intended to hit Tyler. Look at the last six frames and see where the ball is and see where Henderson is looking. Now on the last four frames you will see all that is in his vision is Hansbrough, while he stretches out his arm directly towards Hansbrough. An attempt to block that shot would have required Gerald to have had his body about 50 to 60 degrees to the left of his stance. From a rotating standpoint with Gerald’s arm, his total arm movement and facial direction was directly towards Tyler. And if my hypothesis is true, which it very well may not be, but if it is, that has very bad incriminating intentions on Gerald and the kind of person he is. We will have to see how his actions and mannerisms play out the rest of his career at Duke. The more I look at this and the more I see the frames and Gerald’s anger while engaging at a direct swipe at Tyler, the worse I feel about it. This is really sad. I don’t think Tyler does anything that would inspire such hatred towards him. Yeah, he plays his butt off. When I play, I have had my butt handed to me by others that played with more intensity than me, but if my talent is not able to get me the victory, then I gladly concede that one must be better than me. This is just a spoiled person who got beat and it is a retaliation of anger. If you can’t beat them, “BEAT them”!

  6. williamodouglas says:

    I don’t deny that Josh. I am only trying to deal with what is obvious and can be proved, regardless of hidden motive. Unfortunately, only he knows what is in his heart. I have done stupid things on occasion and it seems that as far as we can see, he doesn’t have a previous history of this. I think we probably recruited him, although he and Ellington probably decided pretty early.

    I honestly blame Coach K more at this point. He claimed today that Gerald is the unfortunate one in all this. I believe that the Coach sets the standards from the top. The only time Carolina had incidents that were embarassing were under Guthridge and Doherty, but even then, nothing approaching this. I have never seen a Dean Smith team behave like that. I went to games in Carmichael and the Dean Dome in the mid-80’s and we never misbehaved towards the opponents because Smith wouldn’t stand for it.

  7. C. Michael says:

    The thing that still gets me is the assertion that Hansbrough shouldn’t been in there with 14 seconds left. In a vacuum, that may be correct, but if you look at the entire sequence of events, you begin to see Roy was in the right:

    42 sec: Paulus hits a 2 to bring Duke w/in 11. Duke goes into a full court press. (Obviously, you don’t sub here b/c a steal and a three makes it an 8 pt game with ca. 35 sec. All UNC fans know that is a game!)

    30 sec: After sucessfully inbounding the ball, Bobby Frasor (A non-starter) is fouled by Paulus (a starter). Frasor hits the first and Roy prepares his subs to go in after the second make… but Frasor misses, Hansbrough gets the rebound and is fouled by McRoberts (a starter). Roy sends in wholesale subs and Copeland waits to go into the game for Tyler.

    Looking at that, I have a hard time seeing what Roy could have done differently. (Other than being clairvoyant and knowing Frasor would mis the 2nd foul shot!)

  8. […] down the play second by second. Scott Fowler is reasonable too. Doyle calls K out. Tar Heel Fan is done talking about it. North Carolina has a 51% chance of winning the ACC Tournament. Power Rangers are […]

  9. Tar Heel Fan says:

    I think most of the talking heads have agreed that they thought he intended to deliver a hard foul. I was a little softer in my position before I did those frames up. Adam Gold argued that it all happened too fast for Henderson to stop from swinging his arm and since he had his eyes closed he was not aware of the ball’s location. My problem with that is you have to assume he was leaping into the air with his eyes closed which seems a little odd to me.

    I think in the end he got what he deserved. I think the ACC officials(for once) handled it correctly and made it less of an issue that it would have been had they not suspended him.

  10. Tarheelgirl7 says:

    Coach Williams was in the right, there is no questions about that as far as who was in the game. The guys on the floor come off when Tyler was shooting free throws and Tyler was next to come out so for Coach K to ask why “those guys” were on the floor just tells me he didn’t know what else to say!

  11. Displaced Heel says:

    I have wondered what the discussions would be if Henderson had fouled Hansbrough in the same way earlier in the game, i.e., when there was a chance for dook to pull it out (as if!). I don’t think that Henderson meant to hurt him like that, but I do think that the frustration and the innate desire of a player to play added up to Henderson fouling like he did. There have been plenty of times that Hansbrough has been sent to the floor, and plenty of times he has gotten up without a broken, bloody nose. I know that all the discussion that has gotten of the way of the game (Hansbrough shouldn’t have been in, no chance to win, blah, blah, blah) have taken the discussion from the action on the court.

    Please don’t think I am taking up for the dook program–I think rat bastard has built a program and culture that is something to truly be ashamed of, and makes me happy that only a small percentage of dookies are from the Old North State. However, I do tend to give the freshman player the benefit of the doubt–no player on any team should be out there to not play hard. This doesn’t excuse the foul; that never should have happened. I just wonder if the call, disqualification, and ensuing discussions would be anywhere near what the were yesterday and are today.

  12. williamodouglas says:

    I disagree with you TarHeelFan that Coach K belongs on that list. What he actually has said is that the decision by the officials and the ACC is incorrect, but that he “accepts” it. One can only engage in conjecture as to what would have happened had K not “accepted” the decision.

  13. williamodouglas says:

    On Monday, Krzyzewski again said he accepted the ruling for the suspension. He watched the replays “numerous times” when Duke returned to Durham and saw Henderson, with an open hand, turning his body on his way down.

    “If it was intentional, probably his hand would have been closed and he would have met him head on,” he said. “… The person it’s most unfortunate for is Gerald. It was not his intent, it was not what was going on during the play. I believe that with all my heart and head and whatever.”

  14. williamodouglas says:

    Krzyzewski said yesterday that he is more knowledgeable about what happened because he reviewed the incident on tape extensively Sunday night after returning to Durham. He said that he saw new evidence that Henderson did not intentionally strike Hansbrough.

    Krzyzewski saw Sunday night that Henderson’s right hand was open, rather than in a fist. He said that he did not see Henderson’s open hand while watching the incident immediately after the game with the help of CBS, which televised the game, before talking to the media.

    The open hand proves to Krzyzewski that Henderson was not trying to hit Hansbrough. Krzyzewski reiterated a point made Sunday after the game, that Henderson’s arm is not extended in a punching fashion.

  15. Dr. Seuss says:

    I think Jim Rome said it best.
    Jim Rome’s comments from the Jim Rome Show on ESPN, copied from

    After seeing Duke’s Gerald Henderson bust Tyler Hansbrough in the beak and hearing Duke coach Mike Krzyzewski deny it was cheap shot, by saying, “That’s not the way he plays and not the way we play”, you have to wonder exactly what game Coach K was watching. Because that is the way Henderson plays and it is the way Coach K’s team plays. How do I know, because I have two eyes.

    Did Coach K order the code red? I really don’t know. But I know this; they got hammered by Carolina…again. And they didn’t like that Hansbrough was still on the floor late in the game and they were looking to send a message. Well, they did, with the message being, we’re not nearly the program we used to be either in ability or class.

    Krzyzewski essentially admitted it was intentional when he said, “The game was over before that. I mean the outcome of the game, let’s put it that way. That’s unfortunate, too, that those people were in the game in that play. Maybe this wouldn’t have happened.”

    If your guy wasn’t still on the floor at the end of the game, maybe my guy wouldn’t have jacked-him in the grill. Ie. It was deliberate.

    One more question, K, if the game was over, why were you still calling time out with 50 seconds to go? If the game was over, why did you still have Hnderson on the floor. The answer is, because the game wasn’t over, and that’s why Roy Williams still had Hansbrough on the floor. You’re program is down, your team isn’t what it once was, and Carolina rolled you up again. You need to own that. And stop telling us that sort of thing doesn’t happen with your program, when it just did and everyone saw it.

  16. Dr. Seuss says:

    How did dook end the Wake blowout? Reply
    0:49 38-59 Josh McRoberts made Two Point Dunk Shot.
    0:34 Ishmael Smith missed Three Point Jumper. 38-59
    0:34 38-59 Josh McRoberts Defensive Rebound.
    0:08 38-62 Greg Paulus made Three Point Jumper.
    0:05 Ishmael Smith missed Two Point Layup. 38-62
    0:05 Ishmael Smith Offensive Rebound. 38-62
    0:04 Ishmael Smith made Two Point Layup. 40-62
    Wow! McBob and Paulus in at the end of a twenty point blow-out and NOBODY bloodies them for running up the score? No K-apologies for leaving his starters in and having them firing a three when the game is already decided?

  17. Josh Bowling says:

    Thanks for pointing that our Seuss. Duke has long had a reputation for blowing people out with starters playing until the last minute. Remeber that late 90’s dominace? Blowing teams out by 40 points. I remember, and the starters did it. Now I don’t have a problem with that at all. A team’s purpose should be to win by as much as they possibly can. Just be consistant with your argument Coach K. It is hard to have a repetetive pattern of leaving starters in when it is a blow-out and criticize another for doing so when you clearly haven’t conceded defeat yet.

  18. Tar Heel Fan says:

    I will also point out that about the third thing out of Billy Packer’s mouth was questioning why Hansbrough was still in the game. Now, I think he was saying it in a “he could get hurt” kind of way and not the “it was his fault for being in there” way K seemed to be asserting.

    As for K pointing it out, it was misdirection on his part. He created a totally separate debate which has gotten almost as much discussion as the actual foul.


    I thought I had read somewhere that K came back and said the suspension was fine, cannot seem to find it now. I still think he is close to the top list than Packer’s position.

  19. Dr. Seuss says:

    Yeah, that was some of the best PR work K has ever done. Without a doubt there has been as much if not more talk about Tyler being in the game as there has been about the actual foul. K is a jackass but not a dumb ass. The subtle way that he backdoored it in to his post game comments was classic Rat Face. He is good. Too bad his team isn’t. I hope NCSU wipes the floor with their pathetic excuse for a basketball team. I mean McBob is their go to guy for cryin’ out loud!!; that’s pretty freakin’ sad.

    To allude to Jim Rome’s comments one last time, Mike’s program is “… not nearly the program (it) used to be either in ability or class.”

    As a UNC fan, I don’t say this often, but GO PACK!

  20. Josh Bowling says:

    If Tyler’s assessment is indeed true, then I am happy to support him. I hope that if no intention was to hurt him, that he truly feels that way. My purpose in all my post in a nutshell is to support my player. When I see my player under attack, I will defend him. I used all the evidence there was to weigh at the time and drew my conclusions. I just really hope that Tyler truly does feel the way that he states he feels. Because what he said and what most of us have said are in step with each other. What I don’t want to happen is for Tyler to take this position because he feels it is the most popular one to take. If Tyler really thinks it was intentional, then I want him to state that exactly. I will support him if that is the case, and we have enough evidence at hand to support him to a full extent. With all that transpired that night, I believe if this were up to a non-biased judge to rule on, we would win. I am very proud of Tyler and how he conducts himself, especially given the physical nature people are allowed to play him with. And if it is truly Tyler’s perspective, I think it is an honorable stance. I just don’t want him to feel that way for any other reason but his own analysis. I don’t want him also to take that stance because he feels he couldn’t have as much support as if he stated he thought it was intentional. We do need to let this go away to an extent, but this does not at all need to completely die out. We let that Dockery incident go easy last year, and a result the combatants came fully armoured for Tyler this year. Mark my words, if this goes away soon enough and is forgot about, Duke will be empowered to do it again. And again. Maybe not next game, but almost surely next year, if we are so fortunate to have him back. Let history be our guide as to what happens if you let things like this die off too soon without much repurcussions like we did last year. Our players deserve it not to happen again. And a lot of that depends on us.

  21. Dr. Seuss says:

    Tyler’s response was the right one, no matter how he really feels. It would be much more empowering for Henderson and/or the dookie fans if he said that he felt it was intentional. Other than that, the only thing left for him to do as far as mitigating the incident is to lead his team to the ACC CHAMPIONSHIP!

  22. Dr. Seuss says:

    Btw, you can’ t tell me that the ncaa officials are taking note of what is going on. By not krackin’ some blew devil skulls Sunday, and by coming out with that statement today, Tyler SHOULD HAVE earned a great deal of respect from everyone, including the officials.

  23. Dr. Seuss says:

    Is there a well known NCSU website where I can go and read about how bad they are going to kick Dook’s @$$?

  24. Josh Bowling says:

    In one manner I agree. Even if Tyler thought that it might be intentional, the “noble thing” to do might would be to try to let it go. But I really want that to stand only if he is convinced that it was unintentional. But it is better to speak the truth now and deal with it outright. What have we accomplished if Tyler is convinced it was intentional and he simply stated a lie. He would have to deal with the frustration of going at it alone while others are content letting it go as unintentional. That would eat up at him and eventually effect his game more than it already may be. He could very well keep that inside him and when he steps on the floor again w/Henderson, the anger could re-emerge. If he is allowed to vent this issue out now, and know he has his fans’ full support, he could get on with it and move past it. It is always best to never try to live out a lie. In this case, I really hope Tyler feels the way he stated, for himself, and not to please others that Try to Sound “educated”,”above the frey” and “above partisan bickering” by seeking middle ground and saying it was unintentional just for the sake of wanting to be deemed intelligent.

  25. williamodouglas says:

    I am surprised no one in the media is bringing up the Dockery incident from last year in Durham. I honestly think that Krzyzewski has lost his edge, the same way Bobby Knight did in the early 1990’s. I think that it is much easier to maintain a program with a personality like Dean Smith’s, where not everything is based upon having the players in the constant state of being hyped up, animated and aggressive. It is no wonder K had a nervous breakdown in 1995. People can only take so much of that because it exhausts them.

    That is what a lot of hockey players said about Mike Keenan. They said the first year he coached you he really could get you fired up but by the second year all the tricks were getting old and by the third year you hated his guts.

    K certainly seems to be losing his edge as an evaluator of talent. Duke people are saying just wait until our next class gets here. Well, why should they be any better than all your other McDonald’s guys, like Paulus and McRoberts and Shavlik?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: