NCAAW Louisville/Miss St

SC Official

Two plays I’d like to see:

(1) the technical foul at 2:42 in the 4Q
(2) the last play of regulation

grunewar

These were two very interesting calls at crucial points of the game, that were either made, or not.

1) Personally, I thought the first call of "slapping the floor," made in anger and or frustration was a good "T" made right on the spot by the L. Unfortunately, it was a game changer and #5 on one of the better players for Louisville who was gone for good. Tough call.

2) I thought that was a foul. It even took the Louisville player to the floor hard......while they could have made the rebound to win, I thought they passed on the initial foul.

Rough game with a lot of physical play the officials let go. The announcers were harsh and critical of the amount of contact that was passed on - mostly against MSU's 6'7" center.

IMO, this game, and the following one, UCONN vs ND were two excellent games for the sport!

Raymond

grunewar wrote
...

IMO, this game, and the following one, UCONN vs ND were too excellent games for the sport!

Those two games were too good for the sport of women's college basketball? [emoji16]

I didn't see the technical foul. As far as the layup at the end of regulation I can see why the play was passed on. Defender was running side-by-side with the offensive player and the offensive player jumped right into her armpit.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Chuga

IMHO,

The technical was deserved and assessed quickly and correctly

The no call at the end of regulation was a 50/50 call. The L was on the other side of the lane and may not have seen the initial contact before the lay up attempt.

SC Official

As much as we like to say "we don't officiate time and score," we all know that's not 100% true.

Tie game, end of regulation-a foul there has to be high-certainty. It was not anywhere close to an "obvious" foul IMO, and FWIW I'm not even sure I have a foul in the first quarter on this play.

And I had no problem with the T. Some officials might not have whacked there, but if you're a player you have no one to blame but yourself when you do something that causes an official to have to make that decision.

[deleted]

Raymond wrote
Those two games were too good for the sport of women's college basketball?

Pretty sure he meant to type "two".

grunewar

AremRed wrote
Pretty sure he meant to type "two".

Pretty sure HE went back and corrected it too! 😀

[deleted]

Finally saw the two plays. Foul preceding the tech and the tech itself were good. IMO the Louisville coach should have also been whacked for his wave-offs and profanity following the technical.

Contact at end of regulation is an easy foul. Defender was never in LGP.

[deleted]

grunewar wrote
Pretty sure HE went back and corrected it too! 😃

https://xkcd.com/386/

Raymond

AremRed wrote
Pretty sure he meant to type "two".

Pretty sure I had an emoji at the end of that sentence.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Raymond

I have two supervisors who would fire me for not calling a technical foul on that play.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

JRutledge

SC Official wrote
(1) the technical foul at 2:42 in the 4Q

I thought it was a great technical foul and took courage as well. But then again the official in question has probably worked more Final Fours than just about anyone in NCAA history. So I think she is OK with her place in the game.

SC Official wrote
(2) the last play of regulation

Very close play. I am OK with no foul if that kind of play has not been called a foul most of the game. Women's basketball often does not have plays like that with a very big player, so I am actually fine with no foul call.

Peace

JRutledge

Based on past situations, I am under the impression that the NCAA is not the catalyst for banning videos on YouTube. I think it is about CBS. Something tells me that ESPN does not care about videos that high light plays for the purpose I have made them.

But that could change, but I hope these plays stay up for discussion purposes.

Peace

sj

On the last play the defender didn't cause the contact so it's a good no call. Considering time and score it's a great no call.

Camron Rust

sj wrote
On the last play the defender didn't cause the contact so it's a good no call. Considering time and score it's a great no call.

The defender didn't cause contact? You do realize that who causes contact is not the basis for a foul, right?

Either way, in this play, there was contact that came from a defender not in LGP that displaced a shooter and likely impacted her ability to make the shot. At any other time of the game, that would have been a foul. That was only not a foul because they were "letting the players decide the game". :/

bob jenkins

I think it will be interesting to see if that play is on next season's rules video under "protect the shooter" or "officiate the game; manage situations" or something.

Raymond

I still see a defender who's running side-by-side with an offensive player and I still see a defender who never jumped into the offensive player or even moved in the offensive player's direction. The defender even ended up landing away from the shooter, not towards the shooter.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[deleted]

Raymond wrote
I still see a defender who's running side-by-side with an offensive player and I still see a defender who never jumped into the offensive player or even moved in the offensive player's direction. The defender even ended up landing away from the shooter, not towards the shooter.

Foul occurs at 2.3 when offensive player changes her path (which is her right) and then the defender who is not in LGP causes contact on the side of the offensive player.

Raymond

AremRed wrote
Foul occurs at 2.3 when offensive player changes her path (which is her right) and then the defender who is not in LGP causes contact on the side of the offensive player.

I can defend a foul call and I can defend the no call. That makes this a 50-50 play. And on a 50-50 play with a tie score near the buzzer, I'm no calling.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Referee24.7

I'm with Arem on this - after watching the play like 70-80 times, the simple question comes down to what took the player to the floor, and it was the contact, and was the contact legal or illegal?

To the point of the no-call, the worst thing that could happen on that its a tie ballgame, you let the players decide it, and you go into OT, which is what they did. . .