Women's Final Four

[ODog]

Originally Posted by AremRed

I didn't think it was flagrant either but a definite common foul. Which would have still resulted in UConn free throws.

OK, but even the common foul happened some 15-20 seconds BEFORE they stopped play to review it. So, as someone who doesn't know NCAAW (or even NCAAM) rules, can someone who does walk me through:

1.) What triggers their ability to review this? A coach or player complaining they were hit in the face on a previous possession? The wild flop to the floor that plants the seed "Oh, we'll have to review that once Miss. St. takes their opportunity to try for goal"?

2.) If their review had led to the conclusion "Not much there; common foul at best," could they STILL award the bonus free throws? What about if the review turned up nothing ... just go to POI?

I'm glad UConn didn't end up scoring on the possession that followed the FTs. That would've been a tough pill to swallow for Miss. St.

[Multiple Sports]

While I agree that many people will say there isn't a lot there, however by definition it can be viewed as an F1. IMO, officials on the men' s side have a tendency to pass on an F1 on that play but I think the women's game is more literal therefore resulting in an F1.

Now the whole argument as to time, score, the fact that the play was originally a no call is a whole other debate......

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by ODog

OK, but even the common foul happened some 15-20 seconds BEFORE they stopped play to review it. So, as someone who doesn't know NCAAW (or even NCAAM) rules, can someone who does walk me through:

1.) What triggers their ability to review this? A coach or player complaining they were hit in the face on a previous possession? The wild flop to the floor that plants the seed "Oh, we'll have to review that once Miss. St. takes their opportunity to try for goal"?

2.) If their review had led to the conclusion "Not much there; common foul at best," could they STILL award the bonus free throws? What about if the review turned up nothing ... just go to POI?

I'm glad UConn didn't end up scoring on the possession that followed the FTs. That would've been a tough pill to swallow for Miss. St.

Yes the coach can ask for a review similar, to a correctable error, and similarly administered.

And I said similarly, not "exactly".

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

[A Pennsylvania Coach]

Originally Posted by ODog

OK, but even the common foul happened some 15-20 seconds BEFORE they stopped play to review it. So, as someone who doesn't know NCAAW (or even NCAAM) rules, can someone who does walk me through:

1.) What triggers their ability to review this? A coach or player complaining they were hit in the face on a previous possession? The wild flop to the floor that plants the seed "Oh, we'll have to review that once Miss. St. takes their opportunity to try for goal"?

Had there not been a dead ball, time could've expired before that play was reviewed. Would they still review it?

[Rich Ives]

1) She was hit in the throat

2) I gather none of you have been. If you had you'd know the reaction wasn't faked.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

1) She was hit in the throat

2) I gather none of you have been. If you had you'd know the reaction wasn't faked.

She was not hit in the throat like a punch. Yes I have been contacted in the head and neck area and did not react like that. And that is not the point. She IMO embellished the contact that normally happens in the course of any sport. They MSU player was just raising her arms as a receiver would be raising their arms and had some contact with the player. I see a lot more contact not get even a reaction and she acted like she was shot from the grassy knoll. It was not like the MSU player threw and elbow or pushed off. And if you watch enough basketball and certainly work enough basketball, players embellish contact all the time. Lebron James acts like this where he is barely touched. I have seen his reaction too and have the same reaction to his situations as I do to this UConn player. I am just glad this did not end up being the reason this game went to another OT or lost the game because of the way this was handled. I have also seen similar plays in NCAA Men's game called nothing or a common foul. FF to me was a bit much, but I do not act like I understand the NCAA Women's differences.

Peace

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

She was not hit in the throat like a punch. Yes I have been contacted in the head and neck area and did not react like that. And that is not the point. She IMO embellished the contact that normally happens in the course of any sport. They MSU player was just raising her arms as a receiver would be raising their arms and had some contact with the player. I see a lot more contact not get even a reaction and she acted like she was shot from the grassy knoll. It was not like the MSU player threw and elbow or pushed off. And if you watch enough basketball and certainly work enough basketball, players embellish contact all the time. Lebron James acts like this where he is barely touched. I have seen his reaction too and have the same reaction to his situations as I do to this UConn player. I am just glad this did not end up being the reason this game went to another OT or lost the game because of the way this was handled. I have also seen similar plays in NCAA Men's game called nothing or a common foul. FF to me was a bit much, but I do not act like I understand the NCAA Women's differences.

Peace

The grassy knoll has me interested. Can you put the play up? Thx

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

1) She was hit in the throat

2) I gather none of you have been. If you had you'd know the reaction wasn't faked.

Touched in the throat, yes. Hit in the throat, no.

As Jeff said, she simply raised her arms over her head to intercept the imminent pass.

[Referee24.7]

Being that they were within the "window" to go look at the monitor and review the play, they were correct by doing so and although maybe the reaction to the contact was a bit much, by the way the NCAA rule is written, the crew was 100% correct in assessing a FF1.

The play that happened after the FT's and at 12.3 where both bodies went down (offense and defense), that no-call was surprising to me. . .

[Texas Aggie]

Yes I have been contacted in the head and neck area

Forcibly? Was targeting called?