|
|
Post by bulkey on Apr 6, 2024 20:27:43 GMT -5
Not completely, of course, but we're all aware of how absurdly Clark has been promoted and in turn promotes audience. Unfortunately, the record audience was talking about how, once again, they can't get the WCBB game right. It wasn't the facilities; it wasn't the 3-point line; it was the bush league reffing.
|
|
|
|
Post by vtcwbuff on Apr 6, 2024 20:39:13 GMT -5
A foul was called on Edwards because she fouled her opponent. If you watch the video it's obvious that Edwards moved her feet. The point is should the ref have called it. Flip a coin depending on if you are a UConn fan or an anti UConn fan.
The other point is, it isn't going to change anything. Time to move on.
|
|
|
|
Post by mulliganspa on Apr 6, 2024 22:34:41 GMT -5
A foul was called on Edwards because she fouled her opponent. If you watch the video it's obvious that Edwards moved her feet. The point is should the ref have called it. Flip a coin depending on if you are a UConn fan or an anti UConn fan. The other point is, it isn't going to change anything. Time to move on. Many non UCONN fans have weighed in the consensus is that it was a bullshit call. This is a contact sport. Like football, the refs could call some kind of a foul on every play. They don’t because, in a contact sport, it’s up to the refs to know when to blow the whistle and when to swallow the whistle. Since neither player involved had the ball and there were only seconds left, “swallow” is the correct option. Refs never call off-ball fouls with seconds left in a game that is undecided. They barely call legitimate fouls on the player guarding the shooter. They let the players decide the game. And, I’ll decide when it’s time to move on. |
|
|
|
Post by yetanotherwilliams on Apr 6, 2024 22:37:56 GMT -5
Still another point is, that, according to CNN, the Iowa player who ran into Edwards is receiving venomous social media messages from disappointed UConn fans.
For playing basketball.
One more example of the horrendous and despicable coarsening of our culture we've experienced in the last seven or eight years.
|
|
|
|
Post by bulkey on Apr 6, 2024 23:12:12 GMT -5
A foul was called on Edwards because she fouled her opponent. If you watch the video it's obvious that Edwards moved her feet. The point is should the ref have called it. Flip a coin depending on if you are a UConn fan or an anti UConn fan. The other point is, it isn't going to change anything. Time to move on. Many non UCONN fans have weighed in the consensus is that it was a bullshit call. This is a contact sport. Like football, the refs could call some kind of a foul on every play. They don’t because, in a contact sport, it’s up to the refs to know when to blow the whistle and when to swallow the whistle. Since neither player involved had the ball and there were only seconds left, “swallow” is the correct option. Refs never call off-ball fouls with seconds left in a game that is undecided. They barely call legitimate fouls on the player guarding the shooter. They let the players decide the game. And, I’ll decide when it’s time to move on. +1 Even in football, it is expected that in game-deciding plays only fouls that directly and substantially affect the play (usually obvious and extensive pass interference) get called. Anything short of that fans consider referee interference. Geno was big enough to contextual it, saying that after Clark missed the 2nd foul shot, had UConn got the rebound, there would have been time for a final shot. He was critical of the call, but equally critical of his own team's failure. As always, he's a superb teacher. Clearly a great many watchers--not just UConn fans--thought the call bush league. My other point was how sad is the situation that women's college basketball can't seem to get out of the way of the power structure that bestows on it bad practice facilities, hotels in dangerous places, mismeasured 3 point lines, and now refs who create problem, even as it attracts the biggest audience ever. |
|
|
|
Post by paigefan on Apr 6, 2024 23:25:33 GMT -5
A foul was called on Edwards because she fouled her opponent. If you watch the video it's obvious that Edwards moved her feet. The point is should the ref have called it. Flip a coin depending on if you are a UConn fan or an anti UConn fan. The other point is, it isn't going to change anything. Time to move on. Many non UCONN fans have weighed in the consensus is that it was a bullshit call. This is a contact sport. Like football, the refs could call some kind of a foul on every play. They don’t because, in a contact sport, it’s up to the refs to know when to blow the whistle and when to swallow the whistle. Since neither player involved had the ball and there were only seconds left, “swallow” is the correct option. Refs never call off-ball fouls with seconds left in a game that is undecided. They barely call legitimate fouls on the player guarding the shooter. They let the players decide the game. And, I’ll decide when it’s time to move on. This pretty much perfectly sums up my thoughts on this. I have seen a lot of comments elsewhere that just look at the black and white of whether it was technically a foul, but there is a lot of nuance in this. If the refs calls everything that was technically a foul the game wouldn't finish because everyone would foul out. |
|
|
|
Post by ursusminor on Apr 7, 2024 13:50:59 GMT -5
Many non UCONN fans have weighed in the consensus is that it was a bullshit call. This is a contact sport. Like football, the refs could call some kind of a foul on every play. They don’t because, in a contact sport, it’s up to the refs to know when to blow the whistle and when to swallow the whistle. Since neither player involved had the ball and there were only seconds left, “swallow” is the correct option. Refs never call off-ball fouls with seconds left in a game that is undecided. They barely call legitimate fouls on the player guarding the shooter. They let the players decide the game. And, I’ll decide when it’s time to move on. This pretty much perfectly sums up my thoughts on this. I have seen a lot of comments elsewhere that just look at the black and white of whether it was technically a foul, but there is a lot of nuance in this. If the refs calls everything that was technically a foul the game wouldn't finish because everyone would foul out. And that is why consistency is key. The calls in the first quarter should be the same as the fouls in the fourth. If the refs do want to change things up, say if it's gotten chippy and they want to call more fouls, they should notify the coaches that it's gonna get tighter. My local little league softball program had the same ump for almost every game last year. One time they expressed concern that they weren't a great ump, and I told them, "You call exactly the same strike zone every game. I don't care if it's not textbook, because it's extremely consistent for both teams. That's fantastic." |
|
|
|
Post by yetanotherwilliams on Apr 7, 2024 17:17:24 GMT -5
This pretty much perfectly sums up my thoughts on this. I have seen a lot of comments elsewhere that just look at the black and white of whether it was technically a foul, but there is a lot of nuance in this. If the refs calls everything that was technically a foul the game wouldn't finish because everyone would foul out. And that is why consistency is key. The calls in the first quarter should be the same as the fouls in the fourth. I agree with that. Which is why I think that the "you can't call that foul in the last three seconds!" argument is unsound If you're going to call a foul in the first thirty seconds for a certain alleged infraction, you should call it a foul in the last thirty seconds. Players can adjust to and accept consistency; nobody can adjust to inconsistency. |
|
|
|
Post by linkster on Apr 7, 2024 19:01:35 GMT -5
Still another point is, that, according to CNN, the Iowa player who ran into Edwards is receiving venomous social media messages from disappointed UConn fans. For playing basketball. One more example of the horrendous and despicable coarsening of our culture we've experienced in the last seven or eight years. Is that the same CNN that staged fake skud missile attacks during Bush Sr's Iraqi War? When you want the game to grow idiots will be among the new fans to add to those who are already fans. |
|
|
|
Post by yetanotherwilliams on Apr 7, 2024 20:22:26 GMT -5
Still another point is, that, according to CNN, the Iowa player who ran into Edwards is receiving venomous social media messages from disappointed UConn fans. For playing basketball. One more example of the horrendous and despicable coarsening of our culture we've experienced in the last seven or eight years. Is that the same CNN that staged fake skud missile attacks during Bush Sr's Iraqi War? Gees, it's amazing how face conspiracy theories can be debunked and still live on for decades. And the hard-to-spell four-letter word you're looking for is 'scud.' Have a great off-season, and next fall let's hope the world is in a better place, and that the Huskies' will come back stronger than ever. When you want the game to grow idiots will be among the new fans to add to those who are already fans. |
|
|
|
Post by jonathan on Apr 9, 2024 1:15:38 GMT -5
And that is why consistency is key. The calls in the first quarter should be the same as the fouls in the fourth. I agree with that. Which is why I think that the "you can't call that foul in the last three seconds!" argument is unsound If you're going to call a foul in the first thirty seconds for a certain alleged infraction, you should call it a foul in the last thirty seconds. Players can adjust to and accept consistency; nobody can adjust to inconsistency. Yes, and that is exactly why they shouldn't have called it. If it is a foul in the first two minutes, it is a foul in the last two minutes. Likewise, if it ISN'T a foul in the first two minutes, it isn't a foul in the last two minutes. They weren't calling a lot of fouls. But, much worse, they were basically calling nothing on Iowa. 4 FT attempts by UConn. FOUR!!! Iowa held a really good offense 11 points below their season average without fouling? No way! THAT was the real story here and not the questionable offensive foul with 3 seconds left. But they are linked. There is a funny trend in UConn tournament games. When the other team is called for way below their season average in fouls, UConn's offense stagnates and they lose. Everyone knows the game plan to beat UConn. We need the refs to call the fouls. |
|
|
|
Post by magic on Apr 9, 2024 8:23:27 GMT -5
I have watched the refs keep the men's games close at halftime by doing the same thing . No calls on Uconn foe , then somehow in the second half fouls mostly tend to even out. Keeps tv viewers. But, I believe that there is an underlying anti Uconn sentiment in WCBB. I'll bet if you could chart offensive fouls called against teams we'd find Uconn near or at the top in regards to major college programs. DD could probably come up with the stat. Maybe I'm wrong, but Huskies seem to get alot of offensive fouls called on them.
|
|
|
|
Post by jonathan on Apr 9, 2024 8:42:56 GMT -5
I have watched the refs keep the men's games close at halftime by doing the same thing . No calls on Uconn foe , then somehow in the second half fouls mostly tend to even out. Keeps tv viewers. But, I believe that there is an underlying anti Uconn sentiment in WCBB. I'll bet if you could chart offensive fouls called against teams we'd find Uconn near or at the top in regards to major college programs. DD could probably come up with the stat. Maybe I'm wrong, but Huskies seem to get alot of offensive fouls called on them. I agree, that would be interesting. Offensive fouls are often 50/50 and could be called the other way. Not only is it one more foul on the offensive team, it is one less foul on the defensive team. If any team has way more offensive fouls than average, that would statistically be unlikely and would point toward bias. Still, in my mind, the real issue is the lack of foul calls on our opponents. I have seen it too many times in our losses for it to be coincidence. Other teams play us "physical" and it is allowed and it disrupts our offense. Recent teams haven't been good enough to overcome it. |
|
|
|
Post by doggydaddy on Apr 9, 2024 9:59:05 GMT -5
I have watched the refs keep the men's games close at halftime by doing the same thing . No calls on Uconn foe , then somehow in the second half fouls mostly tend to even out. Keeps tv viewers. But, I believe that there is an underlying anti Uconn sentiment in WCBB. I'll bet if you could chart offensive fouls called against teams we'd find Uconn near or at the top in regards to major college programs. DD could probably come up with the stat. Maybe I'm wrong, but Huskies seem to get alot of offensive fouls called on them. I don't need to come up with a stat. I agree with your assessment. |
|
|
|
Post by doggydaddy on Apr 9, 2024 10:00:46 GMT -5
I have watched the refs keep the men's games close at halftime by doing the same thing . No calls on Uconn foe , then somehow in the second half fouls mostly tend to even out. Keeps tv viewers. But, I believe that there is an underlying anti Uconn sentiment in WCBB. I'll bet if you could chart offensive fouls called against teams we'd find Uconn near or at the top in regards to major college programs. DD could probably come up with the stat. Maybe I'm wrong, but Huskies seem to get alot of offensive fouls called on them. I agree, that would be interesting. Offensive fouls are often 50/50 and could be called the other way. Not only is it one more foul on the offensive team, it is one less foul on the defensive team. If any team has way more offensive fouls than average, that would statistically be unlikely and would point toward bias. Still, in my mind, the real issue is the lack of foul calls on our opponents. I have seen it too many times in our losses for it to be coincidence. Other teams play us "physical" and it is allowed and it disrupts our offense. Recent teams haven't been good enough to overcome it. Absolutely. |
|
|
|
Post by yetanotherwilliams on Apr 9, 2024 14:09:29 GMT -5
I think that the problem is that the officiating seems to be regulated at the conference level, not at the national level. In their Big East blow-outs, I think the officiating there is hugely favorable to UConn, just as it was in the AAC. When Nika or Aubrey bumps an offensive player when trying to get a steal, they almost invariably get away with it And, while I can't prove it, it always seems to me that traveling calls run vastly in favor of UConn.
Also, even though UConn shot more 3-pters than everyone in their conference but Creighton and DePaul (which indicates that UConn tends to rely more on outide shooting more than all but a few teams) they shot WAY more free throws (593) than any other Big East team. Providence (566) was a distant second and St Johns (490) was a remotely distant third. Of course, more skilled players will often draw more and commit fewer fouls than less skilled players, but the differential here is really significant.
However, when UConn departs from the friendly confines of conference play, they will often draw officials, whose conferences (especially the SEC) seem to have an entirely differenct standard for what constitutes a foul -- and they often run into trouble.
It's not, IMO, that UConn gets picked on in tournament play; it's simply that they no longer receive the benefit of the favorable conference officiating (thanks to their deserved reputation as a team that excels at fundamentals) that we have grown so acclimated to. Remember how often Nika and Aaliyah got called for aggressive fouls in their first two years? Did they really channel their aggressiveness that much in the last two years? Slightly, perhaps, but not significantly so, IMO. It's just that once they became stars they were able to get away contact that inexperienced players get called for. At every level of basketball, stars are given favorable treatment, don't you agree? And who has had more stars than UConn in women's college basketball over the years?
|
|
