Q didn't give up the three at the end of the game, though.
Printable View
Q didn't give up the three at the end of the game, though.
well- yeah he did. When Peters fell- it was up to him to stop the ball. He didnt nor did he foul. We were still fine because SC only had 4 players on the offensive end because the guy that threw the ball in hadnt made it up the court. It's a simple rotation and he blew it.Quote:
Originally Posted by SailingDawg
He fouled him. The refs just blew the call, yet they called a touch fall on Carter and the guy shooting the 3Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach34
Y'all need to give Q a break. He is what he is- a solid player that makes us good.
Edit to add:
You can say he should have fouled him "harder," but then you risk an intentional foul and he did enough to get what was called a foul all day. Can't fault him for doing his job.
He didnt foul him- the ref didnt call it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Covercorner2
And I certainly agree with that part of your post
Read my edit. What else was he supposed to do? Intentionally foul him? Could you imagine the backlash on this board if that happened?Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach34
Not to mention, what if the guy threw up a shot? Then there's a risk of a 4 point play.
He did his job. Why are you hating? Not his fault the ref blew the call.
Unless you have a bone to pick.
That no call on the foul was on the referee. Q did more than enough to get a foul called, but SEC refs are what they are.
Exactly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarius
Yep.Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach34
Had he done the same thing from in FRONT of the offensive player, the call would have been made. He was lazy and it damn near cost us the game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarius
His 6 steals responsible for and 7-8 from the line were big. Pluses outweigh the minuses.Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach34
Q is what he is, a solid player. Not some super star. But the hate he gets on here is often unwarranted.
And I agree Wright needs more time.
It was a foul. The announcers said as much and so did the studio guys during the highlights.Quote:
Originally Posted by Covercorner2
No shit. That's why I said "exactly". But, hey, let's give Eli Wright the ball in crunch time so he can commit an intentional foul and hit clutch shots (cause, you know, he's done it before LOL).Quote:
Originally Posted by confucius say
With the way he did it, had it been called it would have HAD to have been called an intentional foul. Had it been called they beat us. All he had to do is get in front of him and bump him. He had position. What he did was either dumb or lazy, or both. We were lucky it DIDN'T get called.Quote:
Originally Posted by confucius say
Are you serious?Quote:
Originally Posted by Liverpooldawg
So, you have to get in position and take a charge to get someone to the line in the late minutes? Like, have you watched basketball?
Played basketball in HS, have watched all my life, but not a coach like some of you guys. Question, why do we put no rebounders on the O end when we are barely up with less than 6 or so seconds left and we have a 2 to 3 point lead (like against Vandy and today)? Looks like we might steal a rebound on a miss or at least slow them down a couple of seconds as they try to rush down the court for the last shot. Maybe we could at least find our man to matchup on D. We seem to have had a tough time getting into position on D in these situations as the other 4 players try to find their man and play D waiting at the other end. Your expertise and opinions appreciated.
He grabbed him as he was going by and made no effort to go for the ball. Had it been called the only call that could have been made was an intentional foul.Quote:
Originally Posted by Covercorner2
I think what Howland is thinking is have 5 guys down the court so there?s no way they out run us. I wouldn?t mind Lamar/ Nick guarding the ball handler to run time off, if that makes any sense.Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldendawg
ETA: The problem with this is- Q got beat in regulation on that last play, still
he only had 4 steals- which is still goodQuote:
Originally Posted by confucius say
NEWSFLASH: that's a foul that sends the other team to the line 90% of the time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Liverpooldawg
You literally just said "he grabbed him"
Like WTF?
He didn't have a great game, but he has experience and he fills the stat sheet. Def not the most talented, but gets the job done. Would do much better if he got his head out of his ass and played defense and stopped trying to do too much on offense.
How about my posts?Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach34
The guy blew by Q like he wasn’t even there. He could have done a much better job of making sure he got a foul call. What he did was awful and damn near cost us the game. Especially after his turnover up 4 with 25 seconds left
Exactly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach34
Not the first time he's given up a big 3 like that at the end of the game. If he switches to Vandy's guy at the buzzer he probably misses that game winner. Then we aren't forcing ourselves to win out like we are now.
You can't say with a straight face that you haven't seen that called a foul ALOT. Come on, man. Even your boy Liverpool said he grabbed him? What else did you want him to do? Give him a reach- around? aKA risk am intentional foul?Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach34
He did was he was supposed to do. And, guess what? We won. If he did more, we risk losing and this board imploding.
Put a body on him. Don't give him a free lane to the 3pt lane.Quote:
Originally Posted by Covercorner2
ThisQuote:
Originally Posted by stalkingpoon
So risk an intentional foul? Got it.Quote:
Originally Posted by stalkingpoon
Tell me the last time you saw a guy hockey check someone in that scenario. I'll wait...
Especially 30 feet from the basket. You think he got "blew by?" Trying to set your feet a take charge in that scenario would have been even worse.
Hockey check? No. Step in front of him, don't let him run past you and grab his hips. It's called a blocking foul. Not uncommon. I really don't see how anyone thinks that is good defense. The refs weren't gonna call that hand checking stuff at the end with us up by 3.
Ok, well the announcers and the guys on the sec network hat have forgotten more about basketball than you or I will ever know disagree.Quote:
Originally Posted by Liverpooldawg
Exactly.Quote:
Originally Posted by stalkingpoon
Lmao. A for effort. So, instead of getting "blown by," you wanted him to take a charge 30 feet out? You can't be serious.Quote:
Originally Posted by stalkingpoon
Yes, "hand checks" are called fouls when down under a minute the majority of the time. You have all night to watch other games and see.
Did it get called, and not called intentional? If so then it was a good play. If not he screwed up.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarius
In that situation that is eactly what you want him to do. If he had its game over we win. Jeez man, you can't be THAT...... well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Covercorner2
He wasn't blown by. He just failed to guard him. He reached for him when he went by. And no not a charge, just saying stepping in front of the ball handler isn't going to get you an intentional foul. Don't get so hurt. We aren't saying he's a terrible player. It is just that his defense almost lost us another critical game.
It was a mistake from the refs. It happens. And most of the time we understand. Unless you have other motives or are just clueless or both.Quote:
Originally Posted by Liverpooldawg
OK, man you're right. It's takes a charge to send a guy to the line. You're right.Quote:
Originally Posted by Liverpooldawg
If he stayed in front of him, it’s a common blocking foul- not intentional.
So you have to "stay in front of him" to send a guy to the line late? I must be watching a different game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bulldog1
Get in front of him and th ref doesn't matter as muchQuote:
Originally Posted by Covercorner2