Foul?
Plunk has more of a post game break down coming
(probably when he gets over his hangov.....errr out of his Easter service)
but in the meantime, the in between time, this is killing me: 
This is a little interesting isn't it?
From the LA Times:
"I went up to take the shot," Sloan said, "and I felt maybe a couple of arms pulling me down. I just knew for sure I was going to get a foul call because, hey, everybody could see what it was. And to my surprise they didn't make the call. That kind of shocked me."
Shipp said he made a clean play and Love, who was originally given credit for the block, said he was not surprised there was no whistle.
"It was a tough call and at the end of games sometimes, and this sounds hypocritical after the Stanford game, but you can't call stuff at the end if there's not a lot of contact."
Love was referencing UCLA's Pacific 10 Conference regular-season clinching win over Stanford that was sent to overtime when Lawrence Hill was called for a foul while blocking a last-second shot by Collison.
I hate to spoil a great game with this cheap "what if" talk, but as an Aggie fan, that is a lot of contact Kevin.
Not that it matters, Sloan only hits 67% from the line, plus we would have had to survive overtime, and our offense was starting to sputter, and Love and Collison were taking over.
But still interesting. Thoughts?
0 recs |
15
comments
Comments
like they say
Like any basketball call(or really any sport) it's much easier to tell in slow mo or in a pic. At full speed when it happened, did most of us really KNOW it was a foul. It sure looked like it but no one I was with really knew for sure.
I thought a lot of the blocks that K love had in the last 10 minutes or so were NOT clean. At all. He seemed to get a lot of good graces. But at the same time, in the first half, it seemed like they got a lot of travels and other stuff on them that was probably questionable.
Like I said, you can't blame it on the fouls and if we did, we should watch the entire game, review every single shot, reach in, etc, and see who got the edge. But that's impossible. We shouldn't have gone 6+ minutes without a FG. That's what f'ed us.
Sucks though. That win would've been a bigger win that Gillespie ever had (IMO). Oh well, I feel like we got a lot of respect out of it. A lot of other teams were rooting for us.(a rarity)
I think Turgeon might have shown what he's going to be capable of with his own guys....
by carsondude on Mar 23, 2008 4:21 PM CDT 0 recs
That's class
by UCLA81 on
Mar 24, 2008 1:30 PM CDT
up
0 recs
The Last Play
by CoachDale on Mar 23, 2008 5:21 PM CDT 0 recs
last play
by J Lou on
Mar 24, 2008 12:15 AM CDT
up
0 recs
from ESPN.com
"I was going to run out of here with a one-point win," Turgeon said. "Sloan just went a little too quick, but he was feeling good about himself and thought he could get to the basket."
by J Lou on
Mar 24, 2008 12:20 AM CDT
up
0 recs
Drive and Dish
With that being said, if Turgeon is going for the win, Kirk and Carter have to be outside. Our only other option is Sloan to the goal looking for the dish.
Both shooters were open and the posts had position for rebounds if the ball had only gotten to the rim.
by CoachDale on
Mar 26, 2008 8:24 PM CDT
up
0 recs
As an outsider...
Y'all got f***.
The whole "don't call it late unless it's blatant" stuff is crap. If it's a foul one minute in, it's a foul with one minute (or less) to go. I'm not saying call every little touch, but if you've been consistently calling a certain amount of contact, you have to call it no matter how little time is left. And that amount of contact is always a foul.
by TB on Mar 23, 2008 9:57 PM CDT 0 recs
Kevin Love = pulling guard
by Plunk on Mar 24, 2008 9:20 AM CDT 0 recs
Reason why Collison Got to the Goal
However, that had nothing to do with how Collison got to the goal on the last two plays. A&M changed the way they were defending the pick and roll, and Turgeon did the right thing by changing. On the previous two plays Love set the screen for Collison and the A&M post defending Love "showed hard". This keeps Collison from the basket while giving the A&M guard defending Collison a chance to get through the screen. The downside is Collison quickly reverses the ball while Love rolls to the weakside block. The wing then dumps the ball to Love in the post before the A&M defender who "showed hard" on the screen can get back to front Love. At this point A&M is dead because Love is too good with the ball in his hands.
After the timeout, A&M changed the way it defended the pick and roll in order to stop Love in the post. Love sets the pick and roll and his defender "squeezes" the screen. This means he gets as close to Love as possible in order to give room to the A&M player defending Collison to go underneath the screen. Doing this allows A&M to front Love and deny him the ball throughout the play. However, Collison is so fast it is difficult to defend him once he turns the corner. UCLA keeps two good shooters on the wing so you can't help off with your wings. The only player that can help is the person defending the weakside post that stands in the short corner. If that player is a half step slow (and he was both times) Collison has an easy layup.
Turgeon was just trying to mix it up and force UCLA to make a play. They did. There are only three teams in the country that have good enough guards and posts to run this play so well: UCLA, Carolina, and Kansas. Notice all three are number one seeds and Kansas killed us on the pick and roll both times they played us. Just my thoughts on the defense in the last few minutes of the ball game.
by CoachDale on
Mar 26, 2008 8:35 PM CDT
up
0 recs
J Lou
See you in the dance next year (same bracket or not.) Hats off to the Aggies.
Regards,
Rich, UCLA '96
by Rich1996UCLA on Mar 24, 2008 12:14 PM CDT 0 recs
Seriously...
by Benz18 on Mar 24, 2008 4:15 PM CDT 0 recs
PTI Yesterday
by FutuePants on Mar 25, 2008 12:39 PM CDT 0 recs
The "foul"
It should prove once and for all that no foul should have been called.
by BobTheBruin on Mar 25, 2008 12:43 PM CDT 0 recs
call it like it is...
Unfortunately, Sloan should have never got that deep in the lane. The Aggies needed to shoot for the win there as UCLA clearly had the momentum and overtime wasn't where the Aggies needed to be. Why Turgeon wanted Kirk to shoot the 3 though I have no clue, Kirk was 0-4 from behind the arc for the game. In that spot I want my best player taking the shot, even if the D knows he's going to take the shot... and that should definitely have been Carter taking the three.
by tamu1991 on Mar 26, 2008 3:22 PM CDT 0 recs
Primary Option
by CoachDale on
Mar 26, 2008 8:38 PM CDT
up
0 recs




