0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Quote from: sonofdaxjones on December 03, 2010, 01:10:52 PMQuote from: cork_sniffer on December 03, 2010, 12:48:53 PMQuote from: Sugar Dick on December 03, 2010, 12:40:59 PMnone of those pictures evidence a foulyeah, the tv replay failed to show a good angle on it but the announcers and refs got to see the replay from a different angle apparently as both the tv angle, the coaches and the announcers were shielded from the play as they were behind Little when it happened. “I think the replay showed there was a foul (by Malcolm Lee), and I’ve always felt as a coach that the referees need to call a foul the same way in the first minute as they do in the last minute,” former St. John’s coach Fraschilla said.“While it was a very tough break for UCLA, it looked like it was a foul. To me, it looked like although he (Little) was fading when he got fouled, he started his shooting motion and was smart enough to continue his shooting motion, so the referees gave him the two shots. Remember, UCLA was in the two-shot bonus. It was going to be a two-shot foul anyway so it didn’t matter.”The officials went to the monitor before sending Little to the line with a chance to break the 76-76 tie.“The rule is you have to go to the clock to make sure the foul didn’t take place after there’s triple zeros on the clock. It was clear the foul took place before the clock got to triple zero,” Fraschilla said. “Again, it’s a very tough break for the team that gets the foul called on ’em, but it’s part of basketball. When I hear people say, ‘Let the players decide it, not the officials’ ... a UCLA player decided it unfortunately by fouling,” Fraschilla stated.Anytime you need this much space to explain yourself . . . you've lost. I used two sentences and quoted an article. that's too much? you've lost it.
Quote from: cork_sniffer on December 03, 2010, 12:48:53 PMQuote from: Sugar Dick on December 03, 2010, 12:40:59 PMnone of those pictures evidence a foulyeah, the tv replay failed to show a good angle on it but the announcers and refs got to see the replay from a different angle apparently as both the tv angle, the coaches and the announcers were shielded from the play as they were behind Little when it happened. “I think the replay showed there was a foul (by Malcolm Lee), and I’ve always felt as a coach that the referees need to call a foul the same way in the first minute as they do in the last minute,” former St. John’s coach Fraschilla said.“While it was a very tough break for UCLA, it looked like it was a foul. To me, it looked like although he (Little) was fading when he got fouled, he started his shooting motion and was smart enough to continue his shooting motion, so the referees gave him the two shots. Remember, UCLA was in the two-shot bonus. It was going to be a two-shot foul anyway so it didn’t matter.”The officials went to the monitor before sending Little to the line with a chance to break the 76-76 tie.“The rule is you have to go to the clock to make sure the foul didn’t take place after there’s triple zeros on the clock. It was clear the foul took place before the clock got to triple zero,” Fraschilla said. “Again, it’s a very tough break for the team that gets the foul called on ’em, but it’s part of basketball. When I hear people say, ‘Let the players decide it, not the officials’ ... a UCLA player decided it unfortunately by fouling,” Fraschilla stated.Anytime you need this much space to explain yourself . . . you've lost.
Quote from: Sugar Dick on December 03, 2010, 12:40:59 PMnone of those pictures evidence a foulyeah, the tv replay failed to show a good angle on it but the announcers and refs got to see the replay from a different angle apparently as both the tv angle, the coaches and the announcers were shielded from the play as they were behind Little when it happened. “I think the replay showed there was a foul (by Malcolm Lee), and I’ve always felt as a coach that the referees need to call a foul the same way in the first minute as they do in the last minute,” former St. John’s coach Fraschilla said.“While it was a very tough break for UCLA, it looked like it was a foul. To me, it looked like although he (Little) was fading when he got fouled, he started his shooting motion and was smart enough to continue his shooting motion, so the referees gave him the two shots. Remember, UCLA was in the two-shot bonus. It was going to be a two-shot foul anyway so it didn’t matter.”The officials went to the monitor before sending Little to the line with a chance to break the 76-76 tie.“The rule is you have to go to the clock to make sure the foul didn’t take place after there’s triple zeros on the clock. It was clear the foul took place before the clock got to triple zero,” Fraschilla said. “Again, it’s a very tough break for the team that gets the foul called on ’em, but it’s part of basketball. When I hear people say, ‘Let the players decide it, not the officials’ ... a UCLA player decided it unfortunately by fouling,” Fraschilla stated.
none of those pictures evidence a foul
Quote from: cork_sniffer on December 03, 2010, 01:12:32 PMQuote from: sonofdaxjones on December 03, 2010, 01:10:52 PMQuote from: cork_sniffer on December 03, 2010, 12:48:53 PMQuote from: Sugar Dick on December 03, 2010, 12:40:59 PMnone of those pictures evidence a foulyeah, the tv replay failed to show a good angle on it but the announcers and refs got to see the replay from a different angle apparently as both the tv angle, the coaches and the announcers were shielded from the play as they were behind Little when it happened. “I think the replay showed there was a foul (by Malcolm Lee), and I’ve always felt as a coach that the referees need to call a foul the same way in the first minute as they do in the last minute,” former St. John’s coach Fraschilla said.“While it was a very tough break for UCLA, it looked like it was a foul. To me, it looked like although he (Little) was fading when he got fouled, he started his shooting motion and was smart enough to continue his shooting motion, so the referees gave him the two shots. Remember, UCLA was in the two-shot bonus. It was going to be a two-shot foul anyway so it didn’t matter.”The officials went to the monitor before sending Little to the line with a chance to break the 76-76 tie.“The rule is you have to go to the clock to make sure the foul didn’t take place after there’s triple zeros on the clock. It was clear the foul took place before the clock got to triple zero,” Fraschilla said. “Again, it’s a very tough break for the team that gets the foul called on ’em, but it’s part of basketball. When I hear people say, ‘Let the players decide it, not the officials’ ... a UCLA player decided it unfortunately by fouling,” Fraschilla stated.Anytime you need this much space to explain yourself . . . you've lost. I used two sentences and quoted an article. that's too much? you've lost it. I didn't say sentences, I said space.
Quote from: sonofdaxjones on December 03, 2010, 01:18:08 PMQuote from: cork_sniffer on December 03, 2010, 01:12:32 PMQuote from: sonofdaxjones on December 03, 2010, 01:10:52 PMQuote from: cork_sniffer on December 03, 2010, 12:48:53 PMQuote from: Sugar Dick on December 03, 2010, 12:40:59 PMnone of those pictures evidence a foulyeah, the tv replay failed to show a good angle on it but the announcers and refs got to see the replay from a different angle apparently as both the tv angle, the coaches and the announcers were shielded from the play as they were behind Little when it happened. “I think the replay showed there was a foul (by Malcolm Lee), and I’ve always felt as a coach that the referees need to call a foul the same way in the first minute as they do in the last minute,” former St. John’s coach Fraschilla said.“While it was a very tough break for UCLA, it looked like it was a foul. To me, it looked like although he (Little) was fading when he got fouled, he started his shooting motion and was smart enough to continue his shooting motion, so the referees gave him the two shots. Remember, UCLA was in the two-shot bonus. It was going to be a two-shot foul anyway so it didn’t matter.”The officials went to the monitor before sending Little to the line with a chance to break the 76-76 tie.“The rule is you have to go to the clock to make sure the foul didn’t take place after there’s triple zeros on the clock. It was clear the foul took place before the clock got to triple zero,” Fraschilla said. “Again, it’s a very tough break for the team that gets the foul called on ’em, but it’s part of basketball. When I hear people say, ‘Let the players decide it, not the officials’ ... a UCLA player decided it unfortunately by fouling,” Fraschilla stated.Anytime you need this much space to explain yourself . . . you've lost. I used two sentences and quoted an article. that's too much? you've lost it. I didn't say sentences, I said space. sorry, forgot you were using dial-up still.
Quote from: Nuts Kicked on December 03, 2010, 10:19:38 AMI don't have a problem with the refs calling a foul at the end of the game, but the foul had better be obvious. The problem here is that the ball was loose when the foul was called and the contact was just incidental. I would imagine that if the replay were shown from the other side of the players it would look like Little actually committed the foul.I agree but what really happened, that you couldn't see on the replay, was that little caught the ball and Lee hit him across the chest with his right arm and bumped him with his body as he started to go up for the shot causing him to lose control of the ball momentarily. He then regained possession of the ball and put up the shot. Probably better off a no-call but the refs missed a bunch of calls down the stretch so it's hard to say that it was a bad call considering it was a foul and they didn't call fouls on two previous shot attempts by the jayhawks that were obvious:right after the foul from lee:no calls on made baskets down the stretch:
I don't have a problem with the refs calling a foul at the end of the game, but the foul had better be obvious. The problem here is that the ball was loose when the foul was called and the contact was just incidental. I would imagine that if the replay were shown from the other side of the players it would look like Little actually committed the foul.
Yeah I did not see one reach and grab by Morningwood at all . You can't tell me that there was no contact of at least one of the reach n slaps that happened in the second half. It was like 3 possessions in a row that the off gaurd reached in and slaped the ball away about half way through the 2nd half. They didn't seem all that clean to me.
It would explain a lot if ku fans think those pictures show fouls.
God, i'm almost over waiting for your meltdown this year!
In the closing seconds of Thursday's thriller, KU's Mario Little (middle) was mugged by UCLA's Malcolm Lee (left) and then Tyler Honeycutt (right) who just seconds earlier had tied the game with a three-point bomb from the left wing. Little calmly sank the first free throw to ice the gameRead more: http://www.kansascity.com/2010/12/02/2493808/ku-fights-off-tough-ucla-squad.html#ixzz175E62DS4
Quote from: Limestone on December 03, 2010, 02:28:02 PMIt would explain a lot if ku fans think those pictures show fouls.uhhh, you mean like the assault captured here??Quote from: Squawk StarIn the closing seconds of Thursday's thriller, KU's Mario Little (middle) was mugged by UCLA's Malcolm Lee (left) and then Tyler Honeycutt (right) who just seconds earlier had tied the game with a three-point bomb from the left wing. Little calmly sank the first free throw to ice the gameRead more: http://www.kansascity.com/2010/12/02/2493808/ku-fights-off-tough-ucla-squad.html#ixzz175E62DS4
This is what a real UCLA no-call looks like:
