Missouri vs. UCLA

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by jeremy341a

Would you have called it intentional in your high school game?

Intentional. Either a "regular" intentional, or a "hard foul" intentional. I may give some thought to a flagrant, but would probably not make that call.

[tomegun]

I think it is a Flagrant Foul 1 or intentional in high school. I watched it as it happened from my hotel room and thought FF1 from the start.

For some reason the volume on the channel wasn't working and I couldn't hear how many fouls UCLA had. I can understand fouling once the team gets into their offense, but it looked like UCLA was fouling too early - as soon as the ball was in bounds in the backcourt.

[stiffler3492]

Originally Posted by tomegun

I think it is a Flagrant Foul 1 or intentional in high school. I watched it as it happened from my hotel room and thought FF1 from the start.

For some reason the volume on the channel wasn't working and I couldn't hear how many fouls UCLA had. I can understand fouling once the team gets into their offense, but it looked like UCLA was fouling too early - as soon as the ball was in bounds in the backcourt.

From a strategy stand point I think they wanted to foul to run time off the clock, and ideally make Mizzou go the length of the floor in as little time as possible. Obviously Mizzou got into the frontcourt, and then the controversy happened.

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by tomegun

For some reason the volume on the channel wasn't working and I couldn't hear how many fouls UCLA had. I can understand fouling once the team gets into their offense, but it looked like UCLA was fouling too early - as soon as the ball was in bounds in the backcourt.

I thought the same thing. UCLA had 2 fouls with about 10 seconds left. If your goal is to get to OT, why not just commit one foul - or at the most two - once the ball is in the frontcourt? That way if the game goes to OT you still have fouls to give.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Intentional. Either a "regular" intentional, or a "hard foul" intentional. I may give some thought to a flagrant, but would probably not make that call.

If you're going to call intentional this didn't fall into the hard foul category. Even at regular speed it didn't look like the UCLA player put a lot of muscle into his move.

Originally Posted by The_Rookie

NCAA Question related to this play...

Mizzou coach had no timeouts..if he requests the crew to look at monitor and the foul is NOT upgraded to Flagrant 1...would he be charged a timeout and since he has NONE..would a T be assessed for excessive TO?

Actually, Missouri did have a time out remaining but...if he asked for a review and was out of time outs and it was determined an F1, F2 or F2 contact hadn't been commited then yes, Missouri would be charged a time out and pick up an administrative tech for its troubles.