[BillBradley]

The referees in the USC-UCLA game (Bob Scofield, Teresa Turner, In'Fini Robinson) called 55 fouls, 32 on UCLA and 23 on USC. I don't know how many UCLA fouls were committed on Watkins, but it must have been a lot of them. She shot 16 FTs and made them all.

Wasn’t it about 15 years ago when widespread disgust and derision was directed at the Pac refs because of the touch foul calls? Teams had to play soft inside and the result was disaster at tournament time when the “let them play” officiating style meant early exits for Pac teams that couldn’t adjust. Coaches complained, as I recall, and it seemed like there was some level of ‘adjustment’ that led to significantly more physicality inside for in-conference play.

We’re at another crossroads moment with officiating just as the conference is ending. Now, the problem areas seem to be: (1) inconsistency in how offensive fouls get called, particularly moving screens/picks; (2) defending players who have been coached to sell offensive fouls; (3) a return of the old ASU style face guarding defense that essentially dares the refs to call the reach-ins, the holds and grabs.

It’s pretty interesting to watch the association, where moving screens get called every other weekend or so. Moving screens for the men’s pro game are like palming the ball. Once in the 50’s you called that. Not anymore, because teams use screens all the time, setting up the pick and roll, and the offensive sets that use a high ball screen to get the ‘right’ defender on your primary scorer. 

So, one problem with trying to run a good offense in the Pac-12 that relies on repeated screening: you’re giving Infini Robinson or Chuck, or Missy way too much control over whether your team wins. If you’re coaching, can you risk Brink picking up a moving screen call in the first half if it means she heads to the bench for 10 minutes? Some teams have big wide-body players who are in just to set screens and rebound. We unfortunately have two bigs who also are primary scoring options.

Great post. Sprinting to the screen spot can create advantage, because you can get the helper out of position. But Cam/Kiki never do that. Instead, they slowly move to their spot. You'll see our guards wait, then begin their move only after Cam/Kiki have been standing there for a bit. It makes the screening way less effective.

The pro game, and even the college men's game, are officiated in a way that's way better for both the fans and the teams themselves. The old axiom that "a foul is a foul, regardless of what type of foul, who committed it or when it was committed" has been put out to pasture. The goal in those leagues isn't to maximize rule enforcement. It's to administer a fair game, which can be accomplished without blowing your whistle every 15 seconds. The P12 womens refs can't wait to blow their whistle, just itching, looking for every opportunity. No consideration paid to number of fouls called, game flow, or top players. But for some reason they refuse to issue any flop warnings!

[BillBradley]

The referees in the USC-UCLA game (Bob Scofield, Teresa Turner, In'Fini Robinson) called 55 fouls, 32 on UCLA and 23 on USC. I don't know how many UCLA fouls were committed on Watkins, but it must have been a lot of them. She shot 16 FTs and made them all.

Wasn’t it about 15 years ago when widespread disgust and derision was directed at the Pac refs because of the touch foul calls? Teams had to play soft inside and the result was disaster at tournament time when the “let them play” officiating style meant early exits for Pac teams that couldn’t adjust. Coaches complained, as I recall, and it seemed like there was some level of ‘adjustment’ that led to significantly more physicality inside for in-conference play.

We’re at another crossroads moment with officiating just as the conference is ending. Now, the problem areas seem to be: (1) inconsistency in how offensive fouls get called, particularly moving screens/picks; (2) defending players who have been coached to sell offensive fouls; (3) a return of the old ASU style face guarding defense that essentially dares the refs to call the reach-ins, the holds and grabs.

It’s pretty interesting to watch the association, where moving screens get called every other weekend or so. Moving screens for the men’s pro game are like palming the ball. Once in the 50’s you called that. Not anymore, because teams use screens all the time, setting up the pick and roll, and the offensive sets that use a high ball screen to get the ‘right’ defender on your primary scorer. 

So, one problem with trying to run a good offense in the Pac-12 that relies on repeated screening: you’re giving Infini Robinson or Chuck, or Missy way too much control over whether your team wins. If you’re coaching, can you risk Brink picking up a moving screen call in the first half if it means she heads to the bench for 10 minutes? Some teams have big wide-body players who are in just to set screens and rebound. We unfortunately have two bigs who also are primary scoring options.

Great post. Sprinting to the screen spot can create advantage, because you can get the helper out of position. But Cam/Kiki never do that. Instead, they slowly move to their spot. You'll see our guards wait, then begin their move only after Cam/Kiki have been standing there for a bit. It makes the screening way less effective.

The pro game, and even the college men's game, are officiated in a way that's way better for both the fans and the teams themselves. The old axiom that "a foul is a foul, regardless of what type of foul, who committed it or when it was committed" has been put out to pasture. The goal in those leagues isn't to maximize rule enforcement. It's to administer a fair game, which can be accomplished without blowing your whistle every 15 seconds. The P12 womens refs can't wait to blow their whistle, just itching, looking for every opportunity. No consideration paid to number of fouls called, game flow, or top players. But for some reason they refuse to issue any flop warnings!