Exactly. Watching the slow - mo makes it even more apparent. Besides, I have no idea who Andraya Carter is and when she said the call sucked, but it really doesn't matter to me. Anybody can say or believe what they want, but the call was obviously correct.
Was it a foul?
- Thread starter CoralSpringsCat
- Start date
It's not really close. And the fault lies in large part with Bueckers, who went way too wide on her cut (seemingly to make sure she was behind the 3-point line) for a legal screen to be set.
And Bueckers herself noted that that one play doesn't decide the game. Her shot could have been blocked, she could have missed it, she could have been fouled and missed both free throws, she could have made it and then Iowa made a shot to win. Lots of things could have happened after that, but one thing is for sure is that it was a foul. Regardless, any chance at there being credibility in complaining about it went out the door when UConn didn't secure the rebound on Clark's missed free throw and kudos to Bueckers for not even going there.
I wish Bueckers had taken a better route on her cut. I wish that Edwards hadn't extended so far out and raised her elbows to brace contact. I could wish for a lot of other things, but the simple thing is that the players did decide the game on the court.
ESPN analyst and former Lady Vol. I only mentioned her because you told PWBoy that "a whole bunch of knowledgeable basketball fans and analysts disagree with you". I am not disagreeing with you, just reminding you that it works both ways.
You still don't get it. Its simple. The referee's (I am one - I have worked HS basketball for 15 years) main responsibility is to 1) enforce the rules, 2) keep players safe, and overall, see to it that the game is decided FAIRLY.
"Fairly" means, simply, that when one player bends/violates the rules such that her team gains an UNFAIR ADVANTAGE, the referee is obligated to intervene with a call. As has been articulately explained by umpteen other posters already (and you've said yourself it was a foul), that screen play gave UConn an unfair advantage.
"Let the players decide the game. Not the refs." The player (screener) DID decide the game. She clearly violated the rule, gave her team an unfair advantage, and the appropiate consequence followed by the referee.
This ridiculous notion that the referee "decided" the outcome of the game, mostly comes from basic disrespect for officials (common on this board) more than anything else. Try officiating basketball - or another sport - yourself, and you'll find a different perspective.
Last edited:
I hate to break this to you, but you are the one who is biased.
Of course you think that way.
Do you really, honestly, think the refs have an obligation to call a 3 second violation in the waning seconds of a season-ending game? "Well, Edey was in there for 4 seconds - see watch the slow-mo replay..." Some jackass does that and he should be banned for life.
The players play all year to reach that point. The refs need to stay the hell out of the way. But thanks for re-asserting what I already knew.... too many refs don't understand that it isn't about them (or their perception of their job) its about the people playing the game. If you can't grasp that concept, I'm not surprised.
The truth is that if Boo Buie were trying to get open for a last second shot to beat UConn and Matt Nicholson gave a hip check while setting the screen, then the refs called an offensive foul, this board would be saying exactly what I'm saying.
I am on the camp that thinks it should not have been called. And it's not philosophical though I can agree with the philosophical point.
It was 100% a foul. But everyone just acts so sure of it because we all saw the replays. We all saw the slow motion. And even so, if you don't see the legs you doubt it. In real time it was a 50/50 call. And you don't call 50/50 fouls at that point.
If the ref did not see it as 50/50 and was very sure, that's a hell of a ref. I am skeptical any ref, in real time, was very sure about it. and that's the reason I believe it should not have been called.
It was 100% a foul. But everyone just acts so sure of it because we all saw the replays. We all saw the slow motion. And even so, if you don't see the legs you doubt it. In real time it was a 50/50 call. And you don't call 50/50 fouls at that point.
If the ref did not see it as 50/50 and was very sure, that's a hell of a ref. I am skeptical any ref, in real time, was very sure about it. and that's the reason I believe it should not have been called.
What other calls do refs supposedly not see in real time that they should not call?
If they don't see a call they should never call it.
But that's not my point, which is if you are not confident you don't call it by instinct in the last couple of possessions. I said perhaps that ref was confident and that's not what happened, but man that was a very hard one in real time.
You missed my point. Your argument implies there are tons of other refs (who are not “a hell of a ref”) in the many other similar “50/50” situations who are incapable of making these calls. That’s just not true or realistic.
The ref was like seven feet away with the screen right in front of him, plus the defender reacted like she had been knocked into the cheap seats. The refs at the finals are very, very good. He called it because it was obvious. He had the best seat in the house in real time.
Yes Sir. Exactly. Gato, you know your basketball stuff, but not this time. Not even in the neighborhood of 50/50. Easy call, he was in perfect position and SAW THE PLAY COMING (thats how referees get calls right), and he was all over the call.
Last edited:
The WNBA and former players weighing in reeks of the jealousy many of them have for Clark. It so short sighted as she has single handedly created a whirlwind of exposure for the Women's game. They will do their best to kill the Golden Goose in the coming seasons.
Many of the women in college WBB compete in two ways - athletically and on appearance. There is a lot of jealousy going on - "Mean Girls" in shorts - plus a lot of unspoken racial tension. Also, if you believe some of what has been alleged, a whole lot of turf defending by lesbian players. If true - and I believe it is - I couldn't think of a less desirable atmosphere to play in. Clark will probably be going from the nurturing culture of Iowa into the lions den unless by chance she lands with a team with supportive player leadership. She should hope Des Moines has a team and a pick.
The men just beat each other to death. The women are far more brutal.
The men just beat each other to death. The women are far more brutal.
The WNBA continuing to insist on defining itself in a very political/racial dimension when it has the opportunity for market growth into the mainstream would only have itself to blame for continuing to be small potatoes.
Just want to register that I don’t agree with the last two posts and I hope that most people on the site share my feeling.
It was fun to see what CC was capable of and her presence caused many to tune in and appreciate the game on the court, along with the drama that surrounds it.
It was fun to see what CC was capable of and her presence caused many to tune in and appreciate the game on the court, along with the drama that surrounds it.
