ADVERTISEMENT

Some National Media show bias in calling UConn foul call “controversial “

2330859

Four-Star Poster
Nov 28, 2002
11,610
9,103
26
In either real time, or in the replay ……. there is no question the illegal pick was the correct offensive foul call.

I have been as critical of WBB officiating as anyone, but last night’s game between Iowa and UConn was as well-officiated as any game that I have seen. The last call was not only the correct call, it serves as one of the most obvious examples of what one cannot do when setting a pick. Moving the foot towards the defender is sufficient to qualify as a violation, but raising the arm up and making contact with the defender is equally sufficient…….both occurred on that play.

Any media member trying to suggest that call was either controversial, or borderline is showing bias for UConn, or against Iowa.
 
In either real time, or in the replay ……. there is no question the illegal pick was the correct offensive foul call.

I have been as critical of WBB officiating as anyone, but last night’s game between Iowa and UConn was as well-officiated as any game that I have seen. The last call was not only the correct call, it serves as one of the most obvious examples of what one cannot do when setting a pick. Moving the foot towards the defender is sufficient to qualify as a violation, but raising the arm up and making contact with the defender is equally sufficient…….both occurred on that play.

Any media member trying to suggest that call was either controversial, or borderline is showing bias for UConn, or against Iowa.
Absolutely the correct call!

The UConn player tried to stretch the pick. The push off was totally unnecessary and something that could lead to fisticuffs in the YMCA leagues back in the day.
 
ESPN decided to show a certain NBA player's tweet describing his disagreement with that offensive foul call. This individual has a history of this kind of behavior.

It doesn’t matter when the call was made. With 5 seconds remaining or 5 minutes, it was the correct call.
 
There is a general problem with BB officiating. What is called as a foul earlier in the game is no longer called as a foul in the closing minute/seconds of the game. Officiating should be about enforcing the rules and never about "I don't want to decide the outcome of the game."
 
The problem I see with officials and this has been all year but it is worse in the tournament. They will let you knock the heck out of your opponent and no foul called. Then you go down at the other end of the court and they call a touch foul.
 
The problem I see with officials and this has been all year but it is worse in the tournament. They will let you knock the heck out of your opponent and no foul called. Then you go down at the other end of the court and they call a touch foul.
Those phantom touches. Women's BB is the worst for these.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cap'n Jim
Totally agree with group here, it was a foul and the controversy is contrived and silly. ESPN in their effort to sell women's basketball and their preferred programs will wind up hurting the game.
 
There is a general problem with BB officiating. What is called as a foul earlier in the game is no longer called as a foul in the closing minute/seconds of the game. Officiating should be about enforcing the rules and never about "I don't want to decide the outcome of the game."
The idiot on 93.7 The Ville radio didn't see it that way. I couldn't believe what he was saying that the game was decided by the ref instead of the player.

The replay clearly shows an illegal screen on Uconn. Now if an intentional foul was called, that would be controversial.
 
ESPN is still up UConn WBB’s butts. Half of their damn team is made up of former UConn players.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT