ADVERTISEMENT

Frans Technical cost us game again?

Hawkfan76

Team MVP
Apr 12, 2010
173
11
18
Pretty stupid to get a T in a close game like that. Also players played like sh.t outside of white.
 
The Technical was a 6-point swing but shouldn't have mattered if Iowa's big men could make layups. At least 6 missed layups and many missed easy opportunities for And 1s
 
Did Fran's reaction even warrant a technical? It was a pretty quick call by the official. Honest question as I didn't get to see what Fran did.

6 point swing there.
 
What cost Iowa the game was the 40 minutes of miserable basketball they played.

And as for the T, hell, a blind man could have called the goal tending. Blatant example, and THREE freaking officials miss it? And then Fran is teed up in a matter of two seconds just like the other night while Izzo, Bo, Groce and company roam the court all night long screaming and yelling and stomping and get NOTHING. Bullshit.

Barta oughta be all over the Big Ten office about this garbage. No way in hell is there anything remotely resembling fairness in the way officials deal with Fran vs. the big boys of the league. That's gotta stop.
 
Officials were garbage and needed to be told that. No problem with the T. Didn't matter that early in the game.
 
Originally posted by Hawkfan76:
Pretty stupid to get a T in a close game like that. Also players played like sh.t outside of white.
Got to be kidding. Two FT vs. 40 missed shots - you ability to discern what's important does not exist.
 
I thought it was a great T by Fran. You let the officials know they made a ridiculously bad call and you try to fire up your team at the same time. It certainly had no relevance on the outcome of the game. Iowa simply could not make shots and looked sluggish all day on offense.
 
T did not cost us the game. The way we played after being up by 11 cost us the game.
 
roll.r191677.gif
what a bunch of know nothing bellyachers that only show up after a LOSS.
 
Originally posted by GatoradeBrain:
Did Fran's reaction even warrant a technical? It was a pretty quick call by the official. Honest question as I didn't get to see what Fran did.

6 point swing there.

Quick call? Are you kidding?
Ref ran by him and looked back two or three times. Ref was all the way to other end of the court before the "T" was called. Heck four or five seconds passed.
 
Your sense of time is off. And you might want to compare the wild rantings and ravings that go on for 40 minutes from Izzo, Bo, Groce and company and then compare what happened with Fran.

The T was bogus in every respect, underlined by the fact that Fran was right, of course. How could three monkeys in striped shirts ALL miss seeing the PSU guy TAKE the BALL OFF THE FREAKING RIM?!
 
Originally posted by Hawkfan76:
Pretty stupid to get a T in a close game like that. Also players played like sh.t outside of white.
No, the fact that he kept Woodbury in there too long cost us more than the T did.

Only 7-1 guy in NCAA basketball that can't finish around the rim. Sad.
 
Ref was looking for the technical. As the ref ran down court he kept glancing over at Fran; I had a pretty good sense that it was coming. I also thought that it was an absolutely lousy time to get a T. Offense was struggling; defense was struggling; PSU had momentum . . . oh well. Have to erase it and move on.
Originally posted by GatoradeBrain:
Did Fran's reaction even warrant a technical? It was a pretty quick call by the official. Honest question as I didn't get to see what Fran did.

6 point swing there.
 
I'm not as certain as y'all seem to be that it was such a bad call. Haven't, and won't, take the time to review footage frame by frame, but on first view I don't think the shot still had a chance to go in.

In order to be goaltending, the ball must be above the rim. What may have happened is that the ball was already missed and coming off below the rim. The PSU guy's momentum grabbing it took it back up onto the rim. Obviously if he had originally touched the ball in the spot he took it too, goaltend, but when he first contacted the ball it might have already been a missed shot.

Still hate that Fran thinks when he is mad a tantrum is the way to go; that T was costly. Some seem calculated, but that was just a tantrum.
 
Originally posted by LinusPF:
Originally posted by GatoradeBrain:

Did Fran's reaction even warrant a technical? It was a pretty quick call by the official. Honest question as I didn't get to see what Fran did.



6 point swing there.



Quick call? Are you kidding?
Ref ran by him and looked back two or three times. Ref was all the way to other end of the court before the "T" was called. Heck four or five seconds passed.

I get what you are saying but 4 seconds isn't a lot of time. Especially when you consider how long it takes other coaches to get T'd up.

Also, as mentioned, I didn't see it all go down.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
 
Originally posted by Fatsohawk:
Originally posted by Hawkfan76:
Pretty stupid to get a T in a close game like that. Also players played like sh.t outside of white.
No, the fact that he kept Woodbury in there too long cost us more than the T did.

Only 7-1 guy in NCAA basketball that can't finish around the rim. Sad.
So is Olaseni the only 6'10" guy that can't finish around the rim?

Because he likes to struggle at times as well. I think there was about a 2-3 minute stretch early in the 2nd half where it was like miss-miss-turnover-miss-maybe another turnover in there as well.

He's just like most of the other guys on this team. When they're off, their basically broken and mostly unfixable for that particular game. At least Gabe can dunk and block shots on occasion. But layups can be just as tricky for him as they are for Woodbury.

Just sayin.
 
Originally posted by LifelongHawk:


I'm not as certain as y'all seem to be that it was such a bad call. Haven't, and won't, take the time to review footage frame by frame, but on first view I don't think the shot still had a chance to go in.

In order to be goaltending, the ball must be above the rim. What may have happened is that the ball was already missed and coming off below the rim. The PSU guy's momentum grabbing it took it back up onto the rim. Obviously if he had originally touched the ball in the spot he took it too, goaltend, but when he first contacted the ball it might have already been a missed shot.

Still hate that Fran thinks when he is mad a tantrum is the way to go; that T was costly. Some seem calculated, but that was just a tantrum.
That shot had absolutely no chance of going it - buuuuut, the ball was still contacting the rim when the PSU guy palmed it. Blatant goal tending that 99.99999% of the time would be and should be called.
 
Fran needed to take a deep breath today and coach with some confidence. No need for that deer in the headlights look of exasperation when playing PSU. Call a timeout and calm yourself and the team down. Act like you belong.
 
Originally posted by stillh8unlv:

Originally posted by LifelongHawk:



I'm not as certain as y'all seem to be that it was such a bad call. Haven't, and won't, take the time to review footage frame by frame, but on first view I don't think the shot still had a chance to go in.

In order to be goaltending, the ball must be above the rim. What may have happened is that the ball was already missed and coming off below the rim. The PSU guy's momentum grabbing it took it back up onto the rim. Obviously if he had originally touched the ball in the spot he took it too, goaltend, but when he first contacted the ball it might have already been a missed shot.

Still hate that Fran thinks when he is mad a tantrum is the way to go; that T was costly. Some seem calculated, but that was just a tantrum.
That shot had absolutely no chance of going it - buuuuut, the ball was still contacting the rim when the PSU guy palmed it. Blatant goal tending that 99.99999% of the time would be and should be called.
Here's the applicable part of the rule:

Section I-A Player Shall Not:
a. Touch the ball or the basket ring when the ball is using the basket ring as its lower base.
EXCEPTION: If a player near his own basket has his hand legally in contact with the ball, it is not a violation if his contact with the ball continues after the ball enters the cylinder, or if, in such action, he touches the basket.
b. Touch the ball when it is above the basket ring and within the imaginary cylinder.
c. For goaltending to occur, the ball, in the judgment of the official, must have a chance to score.

I saw a missed shot with no chance of going in and probably also below the rim. Under c, not a goaltend when he contacted the ball. The exception then applies to him carrying/pushing the ball back up on the rim. So, no goaltend.
 
I like that you're arguing this call after saying you're not going to watch any replays.

The ball was easily above the cylinder. And probably using part of the rim as its base.

Even PSU fans would say its a bad call. Quit being a dick for the sake of being a dick.
 
Originally posted by LifelongHawk:

I'm not as certain as y'all seem to be that it was such a bad call. Haven't, and won't, take the time to review footage frame by frame, but on first view I don't think the shot still had a chance to go in.

In order to be goaltending, the ball must be above the rim. What may have happened is that the ball was already missed and coming off below the rim. The PSU guy's momentum grabbing it took it back up onto the rim. Obviously if he had originally touched the ball in the spot he took it too, goaltend, but when he first contacted the ball it might have already been a missed shot.

Still hate that Fran thinks when he is mad a tantrum is the way to go; that T was costly. Some seem calculated, but that was just a tantrum.
I not certain it was a goal tend either. Even if it was,Fran getting a technical was stupid and costly.
 
Originally posted by LifelongHawk:
Originally posted by stillh8unlv:

Originally posted by LifelongHawk:



I'm not as certain as y'all seem to be that it was such a bad call. Haven't, and won't, take the time to review footage frame by frame, but on first view I don't think the shot still had a chance to go in.

In order to be goaltending, the ball must be above the rim. What may have happened is that the ball was already missed and coming off below the rim. The PSU guy's momentum grabbing it took it back up onto the rim. Obviously if he had originally touched the ball in the spot he took it too, goaltend, but when he first contacted the ball it might have already been a missed shot.

Still hate that Fran thinks when he is mad a tantrum is the way to go; that T was costly. Some seem calculated, but that was just a tantrum.
That shot had absolutely no chance of going it - buuuuut, the ball was still contacting the rim when the PSU guy palmed it. Blatant goal tending that 99.99999% of the time would be and should be called.
Here's the applicable part of the rule:

Section I-A Player Shall Not:
a. Touch the ball or the basket ring when the ball is using the basket ring as its lower base.
EXCEPTION: If a player near his own basket has his hand legally in contact with the ball, it is not a violation if his contact with the ball continues after the ball enters the cylinder, or if, in such action, he touches the basket.
b. Touch the ball when it is above the basket ring and within the imaginary cylinder.
c. For goaltending to occur, the ball, in the judgment of the official, must have a chance to score.

I saw a missed shot with no chance of going in and probably also below the rim. Under c, not a goaltend when he contacted the ball. The exception then applies to him carrying/pushing the ball back up on the rim. So, no goaltend.
Yeah well I'm gonna say it was a goaltend because it makes me feel better.
tongue.r191677.gif
 
swing and miss. I will go with our missed shots.

Iowa may be the worst team in Big for finishing a play on the "and one". Its like the players think you're not supposed to make it if you get fouled from 2 feet away.
 
This. Thank you for peeling back all the prorefial bs on here and call a spade a spade. Fran has wore me out.
 
26.3 pct fg% lost us the game. Pathetic, but its standard fran bball... choking in the postseason
 
Oh BS! The officials, sloppy play, poor 2nd half defense, and bad shooting cost us the game!!
 
This was a replay of the UNI game. Iowa lost to a team the were better than because they couldn't hit shots in the second half.
 
Newbill was not playing well, but he went on a tear after seeing his two free throws go down. It was like the T woke him up. I thought it cost us the game.
 
Originally posted by rillo 62:

Originally posted by LifelongHawk:

I'm not as certain as y'all seem to be that it was such a bad call. Haven't, and won't, take the time to review footage frame by frame, but on first view I don't think the shot still had a chance to go in.

In order to be goaltending, the ball must be above the rim. What may have happened is that the ball was already missed and coming off below the rim. The PSU guy's momentum grabbing it took it back up onto the rim. Obviously if he had originally touched the ball in the spot he took it too, goaltend, but when he first contacted the ball it might have already been a missed shot.

Still hate that Fran thinks when he is mad a tantrum is the way to go; that T was costly. Some seem calculated, but that was just a tantrum.
I not certain it was a goal tend either. Even if it was,Fran getting a technical was stupid and costly.
It was neither goaltending nor should the technical have been called. T was a bad call by the zebra.
 
It certainly didn't help. Awful time to get a technical foul. Fran said his peace and should have walked away but he keep going. He has to learn to say his peace and then walk away. I didn't like the official looking back over his shoulder to T him up but any official on the court could have T'd him up because Fran was asking to get T'd up. Not sure why you would want to get T'd up in that situation as a coach.
 
I don't think the ball was going in, but it was still clearly on the rim and there was no way to be sure it would not have gone in. 9 times out of 10 that is called goaltending. Unless Fran said certain magic words, I think the T was pretty quick. There definitely seems to be a double standard on what coaches get away with. I think those calls or non-calls by the officials did put Iowa in a hole that they just couldn't get of.
 
Originally posted by Roy Ellefson:

Originally posted by rillo 62:

Originally posted by LifelongHawk:

I'm not as certain as y'all seem to be that it was such a bad call. Haven't, and won't, take the time to review footage frame by frame, but on first view I don't think the shot still had a chance to go in.

In order to be goaltending, the ball must be above the rim. What may have happened is that the ball was already missed and coming off below the rim. The PSU guy's momentum grabbing it took it back up onto the rim. Obviously if he had originally touched the ball in the spot he took it too, goaltend, but when he first contacted the ball it might have already been a missed shot.

Still hate that Fran thinks when he is mad a tantrum is the way to go; that T was costly. Some seem calculated, but that was just a tantrum.
I not certain it was a goal tend either. Even if it was,Fran getting a technical was stupid and costly.
It was neither goaltending nor should the technical have been called. T was a bad call by the zebra.
After watching it again,i agree it wasn't goaltending. As far as the T, Fran shook his fist stalked the official down the sideline well outside the coaches box,all the while screaming something at him for a call he got right? Seems to me the Technical was more then justified.
 
It was stupid for Fran to get the T there and I do think it cost Iowa the game. As someone mentioned earlier, it got Newbill going and be was the difference down the stretch. Fran has to be smarter than that, especially after the ref looks back at him a couple of times he should have just shut up. He absolutely deserved the T. A coach can't do that to his team in a two point game.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT