Ah, so now it was rigged as well. And the moral of the story is that a controversial non-call is the preferred way to call a game. That’s a wrap.
Huh? Rigged? When did I say it was rigged? I was just linking the highlight from Twitter to show an example of screen “technique” in the modern era. And example in the NBA…
https://x.com/brontoad/status/1776454099174559873?s=46&t=LFKEGZaCKPSswf-uVGH04A
Nobody rigged a Women’s Final Four game. I’m not even saying that Iowa didn’t deserve the win.
What I’m saying is that the referee needs to understand time, place, context, etc and swallow the whistle.
Nope. Not at all. The player still has to knock down a helluva shot.
I don’t think the call was made simply for her feet not being set…
but the fact that she made significant contact with her elbow…
.
this first image shows where Edwards initially stood…
.
and this image shows her foot has moved at least 2 feet to initiate contact.
.
If the contact had only been with the frame of her body…
I could understand a “no call”……
but she clearly extended her arm as well to initiate forceful contact.
She also even drove her knee out… showing how much force she put into that contact.
That is a foul…. all 40 minutes of a game.
.
Disclaimer…. I am not a Clark fan, or Iowa fan, or NCAA basketball fan.
2 Likes
That is true. It could be the chicken wing. But if you watch it up close I think the Iowa defender really sold the egregiousness of the chicken wing.
She doesn’t seem to extend it out too far from her chest but the defender does a nice job of acting like Mike Tyson just hit her with an uppercut. And it’s not out of line with the degree of physicality that had preceded that play.
For instance…
https://x.com/gibss_28/status/1776579053069181157?s=46&t=LFKEGZaCKPSswf-uVGH04A
Except historically it’s not.
Can you think of another moving screen that’s ever been called within that context?
I certainly can’t. Are we really of the opinion that bc one has never been set in that situation. Of course not.
The reason is bc whether or not some posters want to admit it there are mores to how officiating is administered.
And like it or not the final four seconds are not treated the same as minute 18. And they never will be. One can argue that it should not be that way, but to acknowledge that late game officiating decisions are treated differently is IMO disingenuous.
And I showed you the Clark push off from a few possessions later. That’s a blatant offensive foul but I like the no call.
Why? It’s crunch time for all the marbles. Let the players make plays and let those plays decide the game.
It is against the rules to extend your off arm into the defender and push off in order to create seperation for your jump shot.
I agree they could have easily called that on Clark.
.
I just don’t buy into the premise that previous missed calls should dictate how the next call is made.
Also… UConn had a 2nd chance if they get the rebound with 3 seconds left. They didn’t box out.
But it’s not about prior miscalls effecting future calls. It’s about officials establishing a game flow and then being consistent about the fashion in which the game is called.
Officiating is very difficult. If a crew is consistent with their interpretation all game with both teams then I’m okay with it. Many people do not feel like that happened last night. I am one of those people.
I guess some are just of the “foul is a foul call”. I very strongly feel that is incongruent with how high leverage situations in championship settings have been officiated throughout my lifetime.
From a win probability standpoint that isn’t even close to the same chance.
Just let Paige rip one for all at marbles. Give the people what they came to see.
And the coverage was completely unbiased.
Rebecca Lobo
Connecticut 91-95
Sue Bird
Connecticut 98-02
Dianna Taurasi
Connecticut 2000-2004
Those were the ESPN and ESPN 2 commentators
And VanPelt lived in Connecticut and ESPN located in Connecticut
I’ve admired Gabby’s defensive play all tournament. Every game she has made clutch defensive plays.
Now on to South Carolina. South Carolina should be heavy favorites. I don’t know how Iowa can handle their bigs. Hannah has been awesome but she is not a true center.
Iowa is going to have to play very uptempo and make South Carolina’s bigs run the floor all game. Should be another great game.
It might be biased. As might your perspective. Anyone’s for that matter.
I think what the disconnect boils down to is there are some that feel like there should be no differentiation in how high leverage moments are officiated and others who feel like they’ve spent their whole lives watching crunch time officiated differently.
I thought there were some weak calls going against Iowa.
UConn didn’t lose because of bad calls, they lost because Iowa stopped turning the ball over and climbed back into the lead.
She did do a fabulous job selling the call. Like she was a catcher framing a pitch on the black.
They mentioned that Uconn would have been able to take a T.O. and advance the ball… so they would have had another opportunity to inbound to Bueckers for a reasonable shot. Heck… they could have even inbounded to a different player and hit Bueckers with a pass coming off a stationary screen. 
I was not meaning to suggest that Iowa was undeserving of the win. I do think it was evident that they were the better basketball team.
It just pains me to be that close to one of the biggest moments in the history of the sport and then get blue-balled.
At least she wasn’t like Lebron when he threw himself into a camera. Or like Lebron when he spends ten minutes rolling around on the ground. Ha Ha
The women are way tougher than Lebron.
1 Like
After the foul call UConn had a 1.5% chance of winning the game. I believe it was at around 20 fold higher prior to the call.
That factored in a 86% shooter on the FT line…
which makes a 3-point game with 2 made.
That meant O.T. was a “best case” scenario.
The odds after the miss by Clark… and with a rebound they should have been able to grab…. wouldn’t have been nearly as long.
In fact… the odds are decent that UConn would have had nearly the same 3-point attempt that it appeared they were going get before the foul was called.