tOSU -10.5 at NW'ern (ov/un 142.5) Sat 6 ET, ESPN2

[LitlBuck]

I agreed with the move, since the NW'ern guy was able to run the baseline. If he's stationary, it's effective to have a guy on his throwing side. But I liked having the extra defender in the middle of the floor in this situation - I think they had both Craft and Diebler watching Thompson, who was the main threat.

Right on the money

"We were trying to throw it into the middle of the court to Drew (Crawford) and me run long and he?d try to find me," Thompson said. "But Drew didn?t have the angle to throw it to me because I had Diebler in front of me and Craft behind me. So Drew had to shoot."

Crawford's attempt from half-court was wide of the rim and glanced off the backboard was the horn sounded.

more

http://blog.dispatch.com/hoopsscoops/2011/01/postgame_northwestern.shtml#more

 

[BengalsAndBucks]

that was the BEST kind of win that we could hope for.

This. I would so much rather we win one point nail-biters that we have to grind out than blow out Northwestern by 25. We've had a few close ones already, but this team needs experience winning tough, especially because, despite all our veteran experience, our crunch-time scorer is still only playing in his 22nd game. I want him put in a position where he has to make a basket to win or tie the game as much as possible during the regular season, because I can almost guarantee we will be put in that position in the Big10 or NCAA tourney.

 

[Tlangs]

about the intentinal foul....

there is a new rule this year that any contact to the head or neck is an automatic intentional foul...even if it is an accident.

 

[MaxBuck]

about the intentinal foul....

there is a new rule this year that any contact to the head or neck is an automatic intentional foul...even if it is an accident.

I think yesterday's game illustrates what a stupid new rule this is.

 

[Tlangs]

I think yesterday's game illustrates what a stupid new rule this is.

I was at a UD game earlier this year. It was a similiar situation. last 8 minutes of the game. UD had just stretched a 2 to 3 point game to about 9 points and looked like they were about to take control.

There is a loose ball whle UD is on defense. Chris Wright sprints to the ball pumping his arms like a sprinter coming out of the gates. The back of one of his hands kind of slaps the oposing player in the face (while the other player is grabbing his other arm to hold him back). The refs don't call a foul on either player. CW gets possesion goes down the court on a fast break dunk attempt and is fouled. There is a media timeout.

After the time out CW is shooting 2 foul shots with no one on the lane. Everyone in the building figures they called an intentional foul on CWs dunk attempt. He misses both foul shots. Then the opposing team shoots to shots and gets the ball back. They make them both and hit a 3 to cut it to a 3 or 4 point game. Apparently they went back to the video during the time out to determine if there was contact to the head of the oposing player.


Just think how pissed you would be if they didn't call a foul on Dallas during play, then went back and looked at the video during a time out.....after the opposing coach complained to the ref that his kid was hit in the head. Needless to say, I dropped a couple F bombs in the stands. If you don't call a foul during game action, how the hell can you go back and call a foul based on video. Apparently it is legit and the new rule allows this. What I find amusing is that Sullinger gets hit in the head about 5 times a game....with no flagrant foul call.

 

[jlb1705]

I was at a UD game earlier this year. It was a similiar situation. last 8 minutes of the game. UD had just stretched a 2 to 3 point game to about 9 points and looked like they were about to take control.

There is a loose ball whle UD is on defense. Chris Wright sprints to the ball pumping his arms like a sprinter coming out of the gates. The back of one of his hands kind of slaps the oposing player in the face (while the other player is grabbing his other arm to hold him back). The refs don't call a foul on either player. CW gets possesion goes down the court on a fast break dunk attempt and is fouled. There is a media timeout.

After the time out CW is shooting 2 foul shots with no one on the lane. Everyone in the building figures they called an intentional foul on CWs dunk attempt. He misses both foul shots. Then the opposing team shoots to shots and gets the ball back. They make them both and hit a 3 to cut it to a 3 or 4 point game. Apparently they went back to the video during the time out to determine if there was contact to the head of the oposing player.


Just think how pissed you would be if they didn't call a foul on Dallas during play, then went back and looked at the video during a time out.....after the opposing coach complained to the ref that his kid was hit in the head. Needless to say, I dropped a couple F bombs in the stands. If you don't call a foul during game action, how the hell can you go back and call a foul based on video. Apparently it is legit and the new rule allows this. What I find amusing is that Sullinger gets hit in the head about 5 times a game....with no flagrant foul call.

Diebler recently had a bloody nose in a game (vs. Purdue) that obviously came from contact to the head, yet no foul was called.

This rule is stupid because refs have a hard enough time determining whether illegal contact is taking place and calling consistently. Refs don't need more to think about.

 

[Oh8ch]

It's time for these guys to start knocking them down from the stripe otherwise it will bite them in the ass at the worst time....

Had the nacho bitch do that to me once, and it wasn't pretty.

 

[jlb1705]

It's time for these guys to start knocking them down from the stripe otherwise it will bite them in the ass at the worst time....

Had the nacho bitch do that to me once, and it wasn't pretty.

YESSSSS!

 

[Tlangs]

YESSSSS!

AND IT COUNTS!

 

[brodybuck21]

AND IT COUNTS!

YES! WITH THE FACIAL!

 

[Buckeye Nut]

about the intentinal foul....

there is a new rule this year that any contact to the head or neck is an automatic intentional foul...even if it is an accident.

Even without the rule, it sure looked intentional. There was no need for it and Dallas needs to be smarter than that.

 

[sparcboxbuck]

Even without the rule, it sure looked intentional. There was no need for it and Dallas needs to be smarter than that.

I've gone back to watch this from DVR and I'll admit that in slow motion with the benefit of going back to watch it a couple of times it looks like it could have been more than unintentional... but I swear in real time and 50 feet away from me it did not look intentional at all. Maybe that's the difference between me and some of you... I'm a casual (at best) basketball fan so I don't see some of the things you may, but it looked like he was taking a position to protect himself as opposed to laying someone out.

Foul is a foul... and a win is a win. Just like the number of licks it takes to get to the center of a tootsie-pop, if this foul was really intentional... the world may never know.

 

[Bill Lucas]

I understand your point but the fact in basketball today is that elbows up is a big no-no. You can still chin a rebound but your motions after you chin the ball are severely limited. Lauderdale didn't have a ball in his hands. It's an automatic call.