She should have rolled it (relatively quickly) at her feet. Would have wasted the entire clock while bouncing around.
2023-2024 Women’s College Basketball
- Thread starter Ale Xander
- Start date
Geno doesn't have a bench because 3 top players on the team are all out with season-ending injuries. The rest of the bench are freshmen and walk-on's. They've had to play basically 6-7 deep since the first of the year.
Double the fouls is misleading. UConn took at least 3 fouls on purpose in the last minute of the game alone.
As I’ve pointed out to the annoyance of some here, UConn has SIX players out with season ending injuries. One of the healthy bodies is literally the last player on the bench (Bettencourt), who should never see the floor in case of emergency. They really only had 7 actual players available for the last month or so.
As to the foul point tims4wins made, there were 2-3 “intentional” fouls that I can think of. So ok, 16-9 or 15-9 disparity, with three offensive fouls on illegal screens on UConn and zero of those calls on Iowa. When I rewatched the game I saw a bunch of screens by Iowa where players were moving and/or had very wide feet but zero calls against them.
It is what it is.
Yeah, even in terms of moving screens having a lot of leeway, I think it's a super obvious foul. It's one that is so bad it stands out live even if you're not looking for it, and it totally took the defender out of the play and made it 5 on 4. The setter had a completely free lane to the hoop because of it.
I completely understand being upset you're not seeing a dramatic final shot and also having some leeway to let fouls go, but the number of people looking at that and saying "it's a bad call," I mean there has to be some level of bias (either for the team or for the drama) there.
Last edited:
They took two fouls with a minute left. Then another on Clark with 10 seconds.
Yep I looked it up and saw there were three. So a 15-9 disparity then.
On another note, UConn just picked up the best recruit in this class, Sarah Strong, which is huge because she was considering South Carolina, and they sure don’t need any more studs.
Very obvious. A lot of the commentary/complaining today is along the lines of "they should the players decide it on the floor." Well...that's exactly what happened: it was a dumb, unnecessary basketball move to take out an opponent. It's not "letting the players decide" to let players do basketball things in the last seconds of a game that they couldn't get away with previously. The ref was right there staring at it -- and for some reason it's supposed to be ignored?
The refs were all staring at Caitlin Clark lower her shoulder and knock Arnold back several feet which gave her the space to make a little jumper in the lane in the fourth quarter. Were the refs supposed to ignore that one too? Because they let that clear offensive foul go.
That to me is what’s frustrating. Edwards did commit a foul. But Iowa…..
…..eh forget it. It’s over and done with. As Paige said after the game, they should have done more so that it didn’t come down to that. She was spot on.
Most frustrating part if I were a UConn fan is that the screener had good position and is a big body so didn’t need to do what she did to accomplish the objective. It also would have been a tough shot but we will obviously never know. And that is the worst part of sports, IMO. The “what if” aspect is often worse than the tough losses that finish without controversy.
Players should really never commit an illegal screen. Get to your spot, and stand there. It’s your teammate’s job to use the screen correctly. If they go too wide allowing the defender to slip through, that’s your teammate’s fault. Most, if not all, illegal screens come when trying to “help” your teammate shed their defender, and they move or lean or chuck or whatever.
It’s so annoying.
Yup. At that level, no excuse. Failure in that situation is generally fatigue, laziness, or intentionally trying to push the envelope.
Aaaaaaaaand guess what, reinforcements are on the way. #1 ranked 2024 recruit Sarah Strong, a 6'2" power forward, commits to UConn (which already had the #4 and #18 ranked players coming in). She was apparently also considering Duke and UNC, since she's from North Carolina.
https://www.espn.com/womens-college-basketball/story/_/id/39886931/top-2024-recruit-sarah-strong-commits-uconn
They'll need to replace Muhl, who has been an absolute horse for them all season (anyone still think, after last night's game absolutely hounding Clark, that the mock drafts that have her going at the end of the first round are way overstating her WNBA appeal?). Maybe Allie Ziebell can become that. Or maybe Griffin is still eligible to come back and play another year? I can't find anything on that.
edit: I see BaseballJones was ahead of me on this, as usual. I'll leave it to add the article.
Last edited:
Griffin is coming back. She already announced it. If healthy (a BIG if), this team should be absolutely loaded next year.
I assume you’re talking about this:
View: https://twitter.com/crimeandcask/status/1776699658942709947?s=46&t=4DK5sD-8gsSKFExcsnEJqg
Both players are moving when the contact occurs and the defender pretty clearly exaggerates the contact with her arms going in circles.
I’m not saying I haven’t seen that called on the offensive player before—I def. see it called a lot—but there’s a pretty good case that Clark’s initiation is not a particularly big deal here and that the defender weaken her case by acting as if she had been shot by a sniper.
I think two things saved Clark here:
1) Name on the back of her jersey, which is the primary factor. But also
2) She didn’t extend her right arm. When you extend the arm it gets called 100% of the time
You see offensive fouls called all the time when players drive their shoulders into defenders, knocking them back and clearing space for a shot. Of course it’s a no brainer when the arm is extended but even when it’s not it can be a foul. The defender doesn’t have to have feet “set” for it to be an offensive foul.
I’ll just ask this again: if Clark set that exact same screen, does anyone in America think that she’s getting called for it in that situation?
Absolutely no chance she does. None. And we all know it.
I’ll just ask this again: if Clark set that exact same screen, does anyone in America think that she’s getting called for it in that situation?
Absolutely no chance she does. None. And we all know it.
Did the UConn player move her arm toward the defender when setting the screen? Yes. But was it egregious? I don't really think so but technically yes that is a foul.
My question is over 40 minutes of Iowa setting screens are we to believe that they set every screen legally? The amount of times Clark had to run around bodies to shake free of Muhl and.not once did an Iowa screener extend an arm or a hip?
If Iowa was perfect on 100+ screens set during the game, then absolutely call it on Edwards. But if not? And in that situation?
Then I think you swallow the whistle and let the play to finish however dramatically it would have.
My question is over 40 minutes of Iowa setting screens are we to believe that they set every screen legally? The amount of times Clark had to run around bodies to shake free of Muhl and.not once did an Iowa screener extend an arm or a hip?
If Iowa was perfect on 100+ screens set during the game, then absolutely call it on Edwards. But if not? And in that situation?
Then I think you swallow the whistle and let the play to finish however dramatically it would have.
It had nothing to do with her arm. Her entire body is shuffling. Please watch this. She’s moving the entire time. Is not set in the least bit.
View: https://twitter.com/iowasportsguy1/status/1776467266797785500?s=46
No. I've rewatched the game and Iowa set numerous illegal screens, as did UConn. Geno is kind of right when he says those things happen virtually every trip down the floor. UConn got called for three (one of which was a total phantom call, but whatever) and Iowa got called for zero.
But that one angle that @tims4wins just posted - it's really clear that Edwards moved quite a bit on that screen. It was illegal. You can argue (a) it shouldn't have been called in that situation, or (b) given that they let so much of it go (letting every single Iowa illegal screen go), they shouldn't have called that one, but... it was illegal. In the heat of the moment last night I was like, that's a total BS call, but the fact is, she moved considerably. I think the defender definitely embellished it, but it was still a moving screen.
And keep in mind that I literally work at UConn with these athletes so I've got a lot personally invested in them and hate, hate, hate that that call went against them. But it was a moving screen.
The way I am thinking about this is, imagine the Iowa player has the ball and the ref needs to make a block/charge call. It’s 100% a block.
Yup. But it was an offensive foul. The off arm push gave Clark an advantage that gave her more room to get the shot off.
Game should be a bit later though. I get that ESPN has Sunday night baseball but it should at least be at 5.
Agreed.
But we all know with zero doubt that if Clark set that screen in that situation, she's not getting called for the foul.
When o' when will people stop talking about it? It falls under the category of 'lol boo hoo'.
Part of it also has to do with it being a C v G impact. There’s like 8 inches and 50? 80? pounds of difference. So it looks really bad. Clark isn’t sending anyone to the floor with a
screen. It would be like Embiid vs Pritchard or something
It's on ABC. Nothing is the NFL but that time slot is the most viewed NFL game each season.
I just don’t get the response. It was a blatant illegal screen. Of course the players should decide the outcome, but I don’t know at what point in the game you stop enforcing the rules. Maybe some let it slide because there’s X amount of time left or something… It was an obvious foul.
And the “Clark wouldn’t have been called for that”. Okay- so what? Neither would Paige. When stars get star treatment the response is “yeah that’s how it’s always been, adjust accordingly.” Let’s not pretend this is surprising or new
Too many years of watching Belichick maybe? It is what it is. Shrug
Paige herself had the only appropriate response- it’s never one play. Helluva run with their injury luck, get em next time- which they most likely will.
It’ll be interesting to see what kind of officiating we get tomorrow. Officiating in last years final was pretty interesting.
And the “Clark wouldn’t have been called for that”. Okay- so what? Neither would Paige. When stars get star treatment the response is “yeah that’s how it’s always been, adjust accordingly.” Let’s not pretend this is surprising or new
Too many years of watching Belichick maybe? It is what it is. Shrug
Paige herself had the only appropriate response- it’s never one play. Helluva run with their injury luck, get em next time- which they most likely will.
It’ll be interesting to see what kind of officiating we get tomorrow. Officiating in last years final was pretty interesting.
Last edited:
Probably right. Which is another problem with this, right? If it’s a foul, it’s a foul, regardless of who does it.
Ok wow I'm convinced. Look at how wide the legs are, to say nothing of not being set when I thought she was set. That gets called in the NBA, maybe not 100% of the time, but if it's called, nobody complains.
Fair enough!
If her legs were that wide the entire time - fine. But she clearly moves them while Marshall is moving. It’s as obvious a foul as there is in existence IMO based on this replay. Literally zero controversy. It’s a body check.
Seems to me like Iowa should win easily given that they appear to be the only team left in the tournament. If you go by the coverage anyway.
https://www.espn.com/womens-college-basketball/story/_/id/39889095/iowa-again-draws-record-ratings-final-four-win-uconn
Wow. Guess it's gotta be good for the women's game, shitty ending or not.
I agree, but younger coaches than me are teaching players to lean, push the envelope on the screen. My son plays forward for a college team, (full disclosure FIBA is more physical than NCAA) and his coach wants them to lean as the ballhandler goes by, try to get shoulder in front. I don't like that idea though.
But, I agree with you most of the ballscreen actions are to force a switch or in combination with something else, so a few inches of space gained by moving is not worth it.
I wonder how a 3pm start compares with prime time? My gut says worse, but ESPN has more people devoted to figuring that out than they do for editorial content and talent scouting, so whaddoIknow?
Can someone tell me what this is even about:
View: https://twitter.com/ryenarussillo/status/1777038189628432553?s=46&t=WNUE08imv33kOt1BO6WMzQ
View: https://twitter.com/ryenarussillo/status/1777038189628432553?s=46&t=WNUE08imv33kOt1BO6WMzQ
He is either being sarcastic about the pearl-clutching coverage of current WNBA players not publicly adorning Clark or he is saying it's wild that they aren't in awe of the record-breaking attention she is giving their sport.
This is not the week to critique ESPN's coverage of the women's basketball tournament.
Is Clark kind of getting the Barkley treatment from older WNBA ladies?? That’s great, who is the biggest shit talker?