(02-21-2022, 04:53 PM)pefloresjr Wrote: (02-21-2022, 04:25 PM)teejers1 Wrote: (02-20-2022, 04:22 PM)paloalto Wrote: I don't expect anyone to agree with this. I thought Stanford was the beneficiary of many questionable calls.
Both of Haley's "and ones" late were bad calls. The first was not a foul at all; the second was not a foul on the shot. Those were pretty critical calls that went Stanford's way.
I guess if you're going to be wrong, you might as well double down. The defender on the final play literally threw herself from the side into Haley's path and flopped on the ground trying to get a call even though she had been beaten to the path to the rim by Haley. Before the contact, the defenders entire right leg and hip were behind Haley. In no know part of the multi-verse had she established a defensive position to merit a charge. Also, she was going up for the shot but had to significantly alter when the defender threw herself into Haley's path. It ended up taking a long time because she fell backwards, but the offensive player gets to finish their shot even if it is altered. The one before that had much less obvious contact but the defender there ran her body into Haley's as she was going up for the layup. Those are both fouls. The way the team played for a lot of the game, I thought we didn't deserve to win. The way Haley played in the fourth quarter was spectacular and she and the team deserved it in every way. It was not dependent on the officiating.
Cheers,
Pete F.
Haley was in the midst of a spin move. Yeah, she shoots a lot when she makes that move, but she could just have easily have passed. And in the moment, she stopped, heard the whistle, and then threw up the shot (she is a smart player). But it's just as possible that she was going to pass there.
If you know the shot is going up and can tell that from the flow of the play - that's one thing. But don't reward people for throwing up stuff after a whistle when you can literally "see" their mind process ("Hey, there's a whistle, might as well throw it up there"). But hey, maybe you liked James Harden's patented move of getting fouled by defender who has arms forward and then jacking up three, which he never would have even tried to do, but for hearing the whistle. Me? I prefer the NBA crackdown on that move.
BTW, I never said the game result was "dependent on the officiating." Those are your words. The first "and one" was bad foul call was worth one point; the second and-one . . . we'll never know. Maybe it was worth 3 points, or maybe it was worth nothing because we don't know what Stanford would have done on the possession. Plus, I have no doubt that there were calls that went Oregon's way, too.