[Blue Hawk (Mizzou) Card]

6. OFFICIATING: If our friend Teejers is keeping track (and he probably isn't, because I don't get to post that often anymore), he would classify me as a constant whiner about officiating. After that day in Strawberry Canyon when the official didn't admit blowing the play dead, followed a few days later by the accidental photo showing that he almost certainly did, I have never fully trusted officials. That goes in pretty much all sports. [I even yell at the screen about officiating in water polo, a sport I really enjoy, even though I don't know the rules of that game.] But basketball officiating is particularly aggravating. In part, it is because almost everything is subjective in basketball. By strict application of the rules, they are fouling, traveling, and in the lane for more than three seconds constantly (and double dribbling often). So the officials need to decide which fouls, traveling, and three seconds they are going to call. As a result, almost every call is somewhat debatable. So, as Teejers points out, all we can realistically ask for is consistency. On that scale, I would invite anyone to re-watch the first half, watching Texas no. 1. She shoves, with two hands, often, especially (though not exclusively) when she is boxed out on rebounds. If she gets away with that, a lot, as she did, how can you call that second foul on Cam? Don't get me wrong, there is a basis for that foul, as it was a foul, but if you call that, you have to call the two hand shoves by Texas no. 1, to be consistent. Also, compare the last foul on Anna (a mild touch, possibly, though the replay is not as clear as you would like) to that foul all the way up Cam's arm a minute into the game, which should have put a Texas big into immediate foul trouble. And the offensive foul on Lacie on the arm guard is inexcusable, when the freshman Texas superstar (and she is) initiated contact with a reach in before that was not called. That has to be either a foul on Texas or, more legitimately, probably, a non-call. If we are gong to say Cam should stop reaching in, though, we have a right to expect a foul on Texas on that reach in. Btw, what is it about Cam that makes officials hate her so? Is it that she is thin? Seriously: Large body post players get away with a lot more than she does. [Just watch Boston, with her hip check moving screens.] And Lexie seems to bother them, though less so, also, probably because she is a hustle machine and those types of players put a lot of pressure on officials. She gets at least on undeserved foul a game. When she also gets fouls she deserves, that is problematic. My bottom line on basketball officiating: It is a difficult job that is often done very badly.

7. YOU CAN'T GUARD THAT: A minor point, but I disagree with the poster who said Anna had an off night guarding the jump shot. The Texas frosh point guard is a really special player. As soon as you commit to stopping her from driving, as Anna did very well last night, you are vulnerable to having her stop on a dime, rise up, and hit a jumper. Ever since Kenny Sailors invented that move, there is no defense for it, if you decide to defend the drive. [Btw, speaking of Kenny Sailers, watch "The Jump Shot," a pay-per-view movie financed, if I understand correctly, by Cam's godmother's son. It is a fun watch for any basketball fan, even--make that especially--if you have never heard of Kenny Sailors.]

8. GREAT REPRESENTATIVE OF THE UNIVERSITY: In other discussions on this board, we note that coaches who vastly underperform are good representatives of Stanford and its values. FWIW, I do value that. But is there any better representative than Tara? My point: Being a great coach and being a great representative of Stanford are not mutually exclusive.

9. ARE YOU TRADING? NOT ME: One of my tests as a sports fan is to ask myself: Would I trade my team for their team? For these purposes, I am ignoring good character. [That matters a lot to me. I just don't consider it when asking myself this question.] Instead, I am focusing on talent, performance under pressure, teamwork, etc. The things that make a difference in Ws and Ls.

So here is the key question: Would you trade our team for anyone else's, under that test? To be honest, in most years, as good as Stanford is, someone--sometimes multiple someones--has a better team. For many years, we had one or two great players and solid role players, but UConn, Tennessee, or others had a significant talent advantage over us.

Last year, I said, before the tournament began, that I wouldn't trade with anyone. For once, we had the talent.

How about this year? South Carolina is mighty good. Everybody says they have the best player in the country. And their second best player is also one of the top players. UConn at full strength is mighty good, too. And both NC State and Louisville are impressive.

But I'm not trading. Even if we don't have the top two players, our top two (right now its Haley and Lacey) are darn good. And nobody can match us three through eight (or three through whatever number you want to choose, be it eight or ten or twelve). Like Fran did last night, someone steps up from the bench to do something special.

I am not saying we are going to win it. Who knows? Luck factors in and I don't expect the officiating or the crowd to favor Stanford. But I am not trading, even before one considers the incredible character of this team. We are so fortunate to be rooting for them.

See you in Minny!

[Blue Hawk (Mizzou) Card]

6. OFFICIATING: If our friend Teejers is keeping track (and he probably isn't, because I don't get to post that often anymore), he would classify me as a constant whiner about officiating. After that day in Strawberry Canyon when the official didn't admit blowing the play dead, followed a few days later by the accidental photo showing that he almost certainly did, I have never fully trusted officials. That goes in pretty much all sports. [I even yell at the screen about officiating in water polo, a sport I really enjoy, even though I don't know the rules of that game.] But basketball officiating is particularly aggravating. In part, it is because almost everything is subjective in basketball. By strict application of the rules, they are fouling, traveling, and in the lane for more than three seconds constantly (and double dribbling often). So the officials need to decide which fouls, traveling, and three seconds they are going to call. As a result, almost every call is somewhat debatable. So, as Teejers points out, all we can realistically ask for is consistency. On that scale, I would invite anyone to re-watch the first half, watching Texas no. 1. She shoves, with two hands, often, especially (though not exclusively) when she is boxed out on rebounds. If she gets away with that, a lot, as she did, how can you call that second foul on Cam? Don't get me wrong, there is a basis for that foul, as it was a foul, but if you call that, you have to call the two hand shoves by Texas no. 1, to be consistent. Also, compare the last foul on Anna (a mild touch, possibly, though the replay is not as clear as you would like) to that foul all the way up Cam's arm a minute into the game, which should have put a Texas big into immediate foul trouble. And the offensive foul on Lacie on the arm guard is inexcusable, when the freshman Texas superstar (and she is) initiated contact with a reach in before that was not called. That has to be either a foul on Texas or, more legitimately, probably, a non-call. If we are gong to say Cam should stop reaching in, though, we have a right to expect a foul on Texas on that reach in. Btw, what is it about Cam that makes officials hate her so? Is it that she is thin? Seriously: Large body post players get away with a lot more than she does. [Just watch Boston, with her hip check moving screens.] And Lexie seems to bother them, though less so, also, probably because she is a hustle machine and those types of players put a lot of pressure on officials. She gets at least on undeserved foul a game. When she also gets fouls she deserves, that is problematic. My bottom line on basketball officiating: It is a difficult job that is often done very badly.

7. YOU CAN'T GUARD THAT: A minor point, but I disagree with the poster who said Anna had an off night guarding the jump shot. The Texas frosh point guard is a really special player. As soon as you commit to stopping her from driving, as Anna did very well last night, you are vulnerable to having her stop on a dime, rise up, and hit a jumper. Ever since Kenny Sailors invented that move, there is no defense for it, if you decide to defend the drive. [Btw, speaking of Kenny Sailers, watch "The Jump Shot," a pay-per-view movie financed, if I understand correctly, by Cam's godmother's son. It is a fun watch for any basketball fan, even--make that especially--if you have never heard of Kenny Sailors.]

8. GREAT REPRESENTATIVE OF THE UNIVERSITY: In other discussions on this board, we note that coaches who vastly underperform are good representatives of Stanford and its values. FWIW, I do value that. But is there any better representative than Tara? My point: Being a great coach and being a great representative of Stanford are not mutually exclusive.

9. ARE YOU TRADING? NOT ME: One of my tests as a sports fan is to ask myself: Would I trade my team for their team? For these purposes, I am ignoring good character. [That matters a lot to me. I just don't consider it when asking myself this question.] Instead, I am focusing on talent, performance under pressure, teamwork, etc. The things that make a difference in Ws and Ls.

So here is the key question: Would you trade our team for anyone else's, under that test? To be honest, in most years, as good as Stanford is, someone--sometimes multiple someones--has a better team. For many years, we had one or two great players and solid role players, but UConn, Tennessee, or others had a significant talent advantage over us.

Last year, I said, before the tournament began, that I wouldn't trade with anyone. For once, we had the talent.

How about this year? South Carolina is mighty good. Everybody says they have the best player in the country. And their second best player is also one of the top players. UConn at full strength is mighty good, too. And both NC State and Louisville are impressive.

But I'm not trading. Even if we don't have the top two players, our top two (right now its Haley and Lacey) are darn good. And nobody can match us three through eight (or three through whatever number you want to choose, be it eight or ten or twelve). Like Fran did last night, someone steps up from the bench to do something special.

I am not saying we are going to win it. Who knows? Luck factors in and I don't expect the officiating or the crowd to favor Stanford. But I am not trading, even before one considers the incredible character of this team. We are so fortunate to be rooting for them.

See you in Minny!