- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 4/6/24 at 7:35 am to baldona
quote:
It’s not always called in that situation, but you can’t be upset it was called
It is never called in that situation and yes you can be upset it was called.
Put it this way if Bueckers hits a shot to win the game there absolutely NO ONE is raising hell saying UCONN only won because the refs swallowed their whistle on the moving screen.
Posted on 4/6/24 at 8:09 am to urinetrouble
All the screens they ran against lsu not one illegal screen. You call that with 3 seconds? No way.
Posted on 4/6/24 at 8:22 am to ChiGator
It was a very obvious foul from multiple angles that ESPN chose not to show.
They didn’t get fricked at all.
They didn’t get fricked at all.
This post was edited on 4/6/24 at 8:22 am
Posted on 4/6/24 at 9:06 am to Fun Bunch
Since when is a moving screen not a foul? Do you have CC Derangement Syndrome?
Posted on 4/6/24 at 9:29 am to ChiGator
Posted on 4/6/24 at 9:37 am to bobbydigital
quote:
Since when is a moving screen not a foul? Do you have CC Derangement Syndrome?
What. Read my post again idiot.
Posted on 4/6/24 at 9:53 am to Fun Bunch
Title of this thread.
You follow it up with:
You sir are showing signs and symptoms of CC Derangement Syndrome.
quote:
UCONN got fricked
You follow it up with:
quote:
That illegal screen was a travesty. Total Caitlin Clark ratings call.
You sir are showing signs and symptoms of CC Derangement Syndrome.
Posted on 4/6/24 at 9:56 am to bobbydigital
In the moment I thought it was a bad call. After seeing different angles it was 100% the right call. Have to be better than that there if you’re the UConn player.
Posted on 4/6/24 at 9:56 am to bobbydigital
quote:
You follow it up with:
I did? Look again moron
Do you understand that:
I didn’t create this thread.
My only post in it prior to your idiocy was saying it was a clear foul?
This post was edited on 4/6/24 at 10:00 am
Posted on 4/6/24 at 9:58 am to GeauxtigersMs36
quote:you have to. It clearly affected the Iowa players ability to defend the play.
All the screens they ran against lsu not one illegal screen. You call that with 3 seconds? No way.
Posted on 4/6/24 at 10:29 am to FreeState
quote:
Add all the offensive push offs by Clark
Really? Thats what you got? Never mind Paige Bueckers was doing that the whole game.
Doesn't fit your narrative...
Posted on 4/6/24 at 10:31 am to Pedro
Marshall was really smart creating contact on the screen. A lot of players will go around a moving screen, which in turn, makes it legal.
If you run into the moving screen, it needs to be called, especially one that obvious.
If you run into the moving screen, it needs to be called, especially one that obvious.
Posted on 4/6/24 at 10:34 am to FrankandBeans
quote:
Is it though? There are probably at least a dozen screens a game similar to that one that don’t get called. Yet, there are probably a couple that do get called. The issue with that call was the timing of it. There was not enough there to call that with the game on the line
You're upsetting the bots who's only argument is that "A foul is a foul".
Posted on 4/6/24 at 10:48 am to tketaco
There 100% was enough to call that. It was textbook moving screen and she cut off the defenders ability to defend the play. It was the right call.
Posted on 4/6/24 at 10:51 am to ChiGator
quote:
That illegal screen was a travesty
So you wanted UCONN to be able to cheat to get that shot off?
Let me guess, you don't like Iowa or Clark?
Posted on 4/6/24 at 10:59 am to PhiTiger1764
quote:
It was an atrocious call. Iowa may have won anyway but you have to let them play that out. Anyone who thinks it should have been called has some sort of Iowa bias or has just never played basketball.
Women’s basketball sucks, but with that mentality just let the shooter have a wide open shot. Your solution is to just let them take the defender out with an illegal play and give the offensive player an uncontested shot? That is dumb.
Posted on 4/6/24 at 11:10 am to ChiGator
I wanna see this energy
Suddenly it's "A foul is a foul!".
Suddenly it's "A foul is a foul!".
quote:
It was too bad. Not biased: “They were calling it tight both ways,” Clark said. Not unfair: “We let it get to us a little bit,“ Jensen said. The better team won a game that should have been called differently. Iowa was not robbed. But we were.
This post was edited on 4/6/24 at 11:15 am
Posted on 4/6/24 at 11:29 am to Colonel Flagg
I really don’t understand the frustration. It was a textbook moving screen. Her feet are extremely wide and there was elbow contact outside of the body. The UConn player did everything possible to screen illegally.
If that’s not called, and there an open shot due to the screen that’s a bigger argument for a poor ref decision. A hard foul is a hard foul no matter the circumstances
If that’s not called, and there an open shot due to the screen that’s a bigger argument for a poor ref decision. A hard foul is a hard foul no matter the circumstances
Posted on 4/6/24 at 12:18 pm to baldona
100% an illegal screen that should of and was called correctly. That one play isn't what beat them though.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News