[M T]

The box score indicates a technical foul on the bench at Q3 4:43.  PAC-12 video & audio indicate it was on the head coach.  At the time of the foul (against Stanford) through just after, Rueck was sitting calmly on the bench.  From then until the ads started, the video shows neither him nor where he was sitting.  So no video clues.  After the video comes back, he seems completely calm.

I've seen him clearly intentionally get technical fouls before.  Announcers like to say it gives extra emotion to the players.  I suspect this was a cold blooded intent to get a technical to get increased benefit from the refs.  (The players would know the technical wasn't because of an immediately preceding bad call.  Why should they get extra emotion out of it when it is so cold blooded?)

Don't believe the announcer's claims later about Rueck sitting for a long time after the T.  He is standing the next time his team comes down the court, and moments later standing on the playing surface, talking to an official, while one of his players is taking a foul shot after (SURPRISE!) a foul is called on Stanford.

Did it work for Rueck?  His team was down 8 at the time and wound up down 3.  Stanford's lead was expanding at the time of the technical and contracted thereafter.  The biggest lead for Stanford was at the score on the possession awarded as the result of the technical.

[M T]

The box score indicates a technical foul on the bench at Q3 4:43.  PAC-12 video & audio indicate it was on the head coach.  At the time of the foul (against Stanford) through just after, Rueck was sitting calmly on the bench.  From then until the ads started, the video shows neither him nor where he was sitting.  So no video clues.  After the video comes back, he seems completely calm.

I've seen him clearly intentionally get technical fouls before.  Announcers like to say it gives extra emotion to the players.  I suspect this was a cold blooded intent to get a technical to get increased benefit from the refs.  (The players would know the technical wasn't because of an immediately preceding bad call.  Why should they get extra emotion out of it when it is so cold blooded?)

Don't believe the announcer's claims later about Rueck sitting for a long time after the T.  He is standing the next time his team comes down the court, and moments later standing on the playing surface, talking to an official, while one of his players is taking a foul shot after (SURPRISE!) a foul is called on Stanford.

Did it work for Rueck?  His team was down 8 at the time and wound up down 3.  Stanford's lead was expanding at the time of the technical and contracted thereafter.  The biggest lead for Stanford was at the score on the possession awarded as the result of the technical.