UCONN had Iowa on the run early, but they rallied back. Huskies fans are left wondering "what might have been" had there not been a questionable end of the game offensive call against UCONN.
Cawks vs Hocks in Champi🏀nship
- Thread starter OldiesAtTheGaff
- Start date
The call was spot on. You can’t screen like a pulling guard in football
Agreed. I like the game to be called consistently. You can’t cash the game differently at the end because players will cheat the rules. Moving pick with her leg and shoulder out. Easy call.
Here is the replay. Funny what happens when you get the sports network located in Bristol CT and three former CT players to comment on sportscenter.
Last edited:
10 years ago, that’s a moving screen 100% of the time…they don’t call them nearly as tight these days, but it’s still the right call. But regardless of the call, nothing irks me more than the argument that you “can’t call it in that spot”, or you “ need to let the players decide the game”. If it’s a foul in the first minute of the game, it’s also a foul with 10 seconds left. The ref gets an assignment like that because they aren’t afraid of making that call.
Didn’t watch it live but saw the replays. Looks like an obvious foul to me. Interesting play call for the end of the game down one. Deserve to lose unless you thought no foul would be called on Iowa no matter what transpired. Question for those who watched. Was UConn in the bonus or did Iowa have fouls to give?
Then why didn’t Iowa burn the clock with fouls? How many did they have left to give?
Exactly. I wonder where these folks draw the line…can you clothesline a person in the last 10 seconds? How about punching someone in the face? I mean they need to let the players decide the game, so let the last three minutes be a street fight and see who’s left standing.
UConn commentary (coach, players) seems to be that they didn't think it should have been called, but also of the opinion that it didn't cost them the game.
Came here for opinions from those who watched it. Much appreciated.
Came here for opinions from those who watched it. Much appreciated.
Also, note that three of ESPN's commentators played for UConn and ESPN itself is located in Bristol CT.
I thought UConn players and coach took the high road. I've got no problem questioning the call as they are so invested in the game. But ESPN was over the top in their post-game SVP show, IMHO>
I judge Dawn Staley by the content of her character which is low.
I've viewed the play from several angles. Edwards was moving; I counted two steps; she also gave a forearm shiver with her left arm.
Referees call them like they see them. Some like the call others don't.
I watched the last few mins. Pretty sure UConn had only committed 2 fouls at that point. The screen was #3 and then they immediately fouled Iowa on the inbound for #4 so that the next would be shooting
Marshall did a great job selling that it was a moving screen. She was very upfront with the fact she thought she could get one called. It was the right call whether people like the timing or not. Geno's comments even made it clear he knew it was illegal but he didn't like it being called there.
Kudos to UConn though. They are correct. A call never decides a game. 40 (or 60) minutes has never in the history of the game been determined by 1 call. People just remember certain things and ignore the countless other opportunities that we missed. Hopefully Paige gets her title next year.
Kudos to UConn though. They are correct. A call never decides a game. 40 (or 60) minutes has never in the history of the game been determined by 1 call. People just remember certain things and ignore the countless other opportunities that we missed. Hopefully Paige gets her title next year.
I didn't watch the game but read about the controversy surrounding the call this morning, and having watched the tape, I totally agree with others here that the foul was pretty obvious.
UConn coach said you could make the same call 10 times a game and also said it was made against UConn a few times but not against Iowa.
He may or may not have a point, but the fact remains that it was a blatantly moving screen on the part of the UConn player at the end.
I judge the entire temple cult by the content of their character which is low. Everyone at temple knew about Cosby. Every coach, every faculty and every student knew. Andrea constand was the temple women's hoops manager. She went public with the Cosby assault in 2004. 9 years later Cosby was still a trustee and giving commencement every year.
Dozens of Cosby victims came forward and we're willing to testify. While the temple cult was crying about Paterno they had a serial rapist giving commencement.
I’m asking how many fouls did Iowa have. With 10 seconds left, Iowa allowed them to run their set without fouling. If Iowa had fouls to give, why didn’t they use them to allow less time for an organized shot. If Iowa did not have fouls to give, then why didn’t UConn attack the basket and possible get fouled?
This was always true of the hose jobs in the Big Ten.
A few holding calls early in the game matter more than one at the end.
Nothing questionable about the call, and I was rooting for UConn for the first time ever.
That's just you making excuses for our losses. Stop. No matter the call we had all game to make that irrelevant.
I watched the whole game and don’t think it could have been called 10 times in that game….and I only remember it being called once against UConn during the game, not a few times.
Here's what Geno said: >>I mean, there's probably an illegal screen call that you could make on every single possession. I just know there were three or four of them called on us and I don't think there were any called on them. So I guess we just gotta get better on not setting illegal screens.<<
Sarcasm at the end there.
No doubt, but I still don’t recall three or four moving screen fouls called on UConn in the game. There were a lot that could have been called, but I only recall one being called.
At one point weren't there back to back illegal screens- one at each end?
As for tomorrow- Philly folks appreciate Dawn Staley as a local. She is now in rare air in her profession and is breaking down traditional barriers every time that she appears in commercials with the likes of Coach K. People like him have always been there...her?....not really.
I've watched Clark a few times and find myself rooting against her- just like I did with Larry Bird. I like the Iowa supporting cast- and am rooting for a good game. I've had enough of Geno- but last night I ended up rooting for the Huskies. They did what they had to in order to have a chance. I think the better team won- but tough call.
As for Cosby- we should know better than to throw stones. The level of their public shaming vs ours are not comparable, but neither situation is one that either alumni base can celebrate.
Go Lady Cocks! (I've wanted to say that all week : )
Staley would be wise to leave the politics out of the sport. She even acknowledged she would hear a lot about multiple comments she made. Both great teams and both deserving of the title. South Carolina couldn't stop Clark last year so we'll see how they adjust this year.
No. The Temple cult threw the stones at psu while they had a serial rapist giving commencement every year.
Did Staley stand up for the victims? Did she do any of the things temple fans said Paterno should have done?
Yeah. I was at the Sackenberg game. It sucks being called a pedophile for something I had nothing to do with, as most Temple Alums had nothing to do with America's Dad Spanish Flying 45+ victims.
We bore the cross- but so many others have followed- including my personal favorites: Ed Ray and Lou Anna Simon. Bad stuff happens- having the grace to move forward with genuine concern for those who were taken advantage of is the only way anybody wins.
If Staley’s team was playing the Taliban, I’d cheer for the Taliban. I think SC will win, but I hope Iowa wins.
I’ve often said that Germany had to apologize less for WW II than PSU did for the actions of a single alleged pedophile who was a former employee and only tangentially involved PSU.
I was there too. I took the bsl from fernrock. At the temple stop, some punk sat in front of me and brings up Sandusky as soon as he sat down. I threw Cosby right back at him. Temple had a serial rapist giving commencement. He had nothing after that.
I got Penn and nova covered too. Nova knew about John Dupont. Dupont gave nova so much money they let him coach wrestling even though he did not wrestle. He groped a few dudes and eventually murdered Shultz.
Penn actually had a guy who was worse than Sandusky. L. Scott ward was abusing kids for years. Penn had complaints and actually notified the professor. The prof then changed his MO and started going on sex tourism trips to southeast Asia. Eventually he was busted at Philly airport with a suitcase full of child porn tapes. The tapes were the Penn prof and preschool kids. Really sick stuff.
Probably true. Pisses me off. I looked up the UPenn prof and the first thing that comes up is Sandusky and psu.
You are correct on all fronts- just like in the Epstein-Freeh thread- wealthy people with too much time on their hands often get weird. Power and money often blind people to difficult realities.
The combination of Sandusky, Temple having a chance, and major little, little brother syndrome (behind Pitt), made for a tough day.
One wasted Sorority girl was screaming about how awful Penn State is, how classless and perverted our program and supporters are, and how Temple is the real deal.
"Where did your Coach play college football and learn the game?"
Yap shut. Matt Rhule wouldn't support her crap talk. We moved seats and left by the end of the 3rd qtr.
Still a low light of the Franklin era- but the good news is that our backs were so ineffective that the next week Saquon got a shot and never looked back.
FWIW I just bought my Barkley 26 Iggles jersey. Even my wife is pumped!
Last edited:
Similar threads
