Utoff Screen on last play

[DavenportHawk8]

Holy crap the guy hit him in the head? How is that not a foul?

I didn't watch it until the sports show. My god the guy's hand smoked him in the face. If Iowa gets called for going through a screen the rest of the year, Fran will come unglued and probably get tossed.


Now Iowa shouldn't of been in that situation anyways, but WOW. That was a flat out miss by the zebras. Hopefully Iowa can rebound and win the last 2. It won't mean anything, but oh well.

 

[kzoohawk80]

Not sure it would have mattered but I don't know why that wasn't reviewed. Fran or someone on his staff should've noticed this and asked for a review.

 

[DavenportHawk8]

During the last Time-out one of the coaches is talking to the ref, I don't know what he was saying. If I was Fran I would of come unglued and demanded they look at it. I realize it was incidental and he didn't mean to, but any contact above the shoulder is a Flagarant 1 or at least a foul.

Now please understand I realize that Iowa should have never been in that situation, but good lord that is a play that needs to be called. Regardless if its a 1pt ball game or a 40pt ball game.

 

[SoCalFan]

I don't think referees can call fouls other than flagrant when reviewing the play.

 

[St_Henry_Buckeye]

I don't think referees can call fouls other than flagrant when reviewing the play.

Yep.

 

[noStemsnoSTICKS]

To me, the bigger question is why have your best player setting picks at the end of the game? Why wasn't he coming off of a pick to get open? Why not put the ball in his hands?

 

[FranklinHawk]

To me, the bigger question is why have your best player setting picks at the end of the game? Why wasn't he coming off of a pick to get open? Why not put the ball in his hands?

One would assume his intent was to set the screen and then roll to the 3 point line, right up until he got knocked on his backside.

 

[OC_Hawk]

You guys are making an awful big deal out of a play that began with 7.5 seconds left and Iowa down by 4. Doesn't matter what sort of look they get there, there are zero plays that result in a 4-point play. That Gesell layup, Uthoff screen no-call play was not the play that sunk the ship yesterday.

 

[SotaHawk87]

You guys are making an awful big deal out of a play that began with 7.5 seconds left and Iowa down by 4. Doesn't matter what sort of look they get there, there are zero plays that result in a 4-point play. That Gesell layup, Uthoff screen no-call play was not the play that sunk the ship yesterday.

Um... Iowa was down 2

 

[OC_Hawk]

Um... Iowa was down 2

<Slowly backs out of thread> My rage yesterday clouded my memory of the final minutes I think...

 

[*hawksrock*]

You guys are making an awful big deal out of a play that began with 7.5 seconds left and Iowa down by 4. Doesn't matter what sort of look they get there, there are zero plays that result in a 4-point play. That Gesell layup, Uthoff screen no-call play was not the play that sunk the ship yesterday.

"Comedy gold right here Jerry"

 

[Im4Iowa]

You guys are making an awful big deal out of a play that began with 7.5 seconds left and Iowa down by 4. Doesn't matter what sort of look they get there, there are zero plays that result in a 4-point play. That Gesell layup, Uthoff screen no-call play was not the play that sunk the ship yesterday.

Yes, it is a big deal. Iowa was down by 2 and in the double bonus. I'm not saying the refs blew the game, but I just get mad that each game is so inconsistent from start to finish. You go 6 minutes where hand checks and touch fouls are called, then 4-5 minute stretches where you can run someone over and shove them in the face and it's not a foul. Inconsistent.

 

[chaoshawk]

You guys are making an awful big deal out of a play that began with 7.5 seconds left and Iowa down by 4. Doesn't matter what sort of look they get there, there are zero plays that result in a 4-point play. That Gesell layup, Uthoff screen no-call play was not the play that sunk the ship yesterday.

You are a total moron. We were down by 2. Also a 3 pt shot plus a foul equals 4 pts. Not that it would happen but I believe it did happen to who other than Iowa in a Drake game a number of yrs. ago. If I recall it right it was end of game shot Iowa a head by 4 pts.. Tied the game and Iowa went on to lose in ot.

 

[Franisdaman]

A “Flagrant 1” foul should have been called. Iowa should have been awarded 2 FTs and the ball.

An example of a Flagrant 1 foul would be when a player swings an elbow and makes illegal, non-excessive contact with an opponent above the shoulders. The team whose player was struck would receive two free throws and possession of the ball. Previously, this type of foul was called an intentional foul. The committee wanted to move away from the word “intentional,” because a player’s intent was never the point to the rule.

An example of a Flagrant 2 foul would be when a player swings an elbow excessively and makes contact with an opponent above the shoulders. In this case, the player who threw the elbow would be ejected from the game, and the other team would receive two free throws and the ball.

Source: http://www.ncaa.com/news/ncaa/2011-05-26/prop-approves-rules-changes

 

[bravehawks1]

That was a terrible no call. Of course, there was no guarantee that Uthoff would have made one let alone two free throws and the best play that Fran has in the book would be for Mike to dribble towards the basket. So maybe the ref was saving Fran from his own failure of not being able to coach the final play.

 

[Clifford C. Clavin]

That was a terrible no call. Of course, there was no guarantee that Uthoff would have made one let alone two free throws and the best play that Fran has in the book would be for Mike to dribble towards the basket. So maybe the ref was saving Fran from his own failure of not being able to coach the final play.

Agree that it was an awful no call. I disagree that it was a bad final play - hear me out. I believe the play was for Mike to go hard off the ball screen toward the hoop with a couple of very good options. Jok was trying to spot up opposite, but Ohio State did a good job not helping off of him. If Uthoff doesn't get completed blasted, he is either rolling or popping for a game winning 3. That was taken away with what easily should have been called a foul. If those are both covered, then you have Mike taking it to the cup, which he had a good deal of success doing in the game. With 7.5 left, I think that play call was fine.

Now the offense for the remainder of the last 4 minutes...that's another story.

 

[DavenportHawk8]

Agree that it was an awful no call. I disagree that it was a bad final play - hear me out. I believe the play was for Mike to go hard off the ball screen toward the hoop with a couple of very good options. Jok was trying to spot up opposite, but Ohio State did a good job not helping off of him. If Uthoff doesn't get completed blasted, he is either rolling or popping for a game winning 3. That was taken away with what easily should have been called a foul. If those are both covered, then you have Mike taking it to the cup, which he had a good deal of success doing in the game. With 7.5 left, I think that play call was fine.

Now the offense for the remainder of the last 4 minutes...that's another story.

That is the major key in this game. I was just shocked that the running over a player who was setting a screen was not called. Iowa did themselves no favors and this one call did not cost Iowa the game (well kind of) but we would of had to make the FT's. As we all know that is no guarantee.

I am with the other people in the thread, the inconsistency of officiating down the stretch is getting bad. I don't know why they are getting worse, but they are. I mean how can you not call that a 3pt shot by OSU? It is still mind boggling to me that they ruled that a 2pt shot. Also how can you call a double foul? The guy had woody hooked and then he gets called for retaliating back? Then of course the missed run over screener. These officials get paid something 1,000-1500 dollars a game and they come put that type of product out there. If I am some of the Big Ten Coaches I am calling the supervisor of officials and complaint to get some better officials in there.

 

[Hawk_4shur]

I remember a similar situation during the Alford years (against St Louis?) when the opponent had the ball going for a last second shot and a guy completely totaled a Hawk away from the ball. Of course, they made the shot.

 

[bravehawks1]

Agree that it was an awful no call. I disagree that it was a bad final play - hear me out. I believe the play was for Mike to go hard off the ball screen toward the hoop with a couple of very good options. Jok was trying to spot up opposite, but Ohio State did a good job not helping off of him. If Uthoff doesn't get completed blasted, he is either rolling or popping for a game winning 3. That was taken away with what easily should have been called a foul. If those are both covered, then you have Mike taking it to the cup, which he had a good deal of success doing in the game. With 7.5 left, I think that play call was fine.

Now the offense for the remainder of the last 4 minutes...that's another story.

While I don't know if he could have done it differently, Mike did not do a very good job of protecting the ball on that layup and that may have been due to his steps off slightly and being at full speed. If he would have been able to put the ball up on the square or done a reverse layup, he may have had the basket and been fouled too.
Hindsight is always 20/20, but one thing I have noticed about MG when he does go to the hole is how low he releases the ball. If you watch a lot of other point guards, it seems like you see a lot of shots high off the glass but are shot with just the right spin to come off the glass softly. I know, that is really a technical point and not bashing of Mike, just an observation.

 

[ThrowBones92]

Yep.

That's not the rule. During review for illegal contact above the shoulders, your options are no foul, common foul, F1, F2, contact technicals. All of those are on the table if the official decides to review the contact. When the review shows indisputable evidence that no foul occurred, the foul call can be reversed.

 

[MTHawkeyes43]

To me, the bigger question is why have your best player setting picks at the end of the game? Why wasn't he coming off of a pick to get open? Why not put the ball in his hands?

Another great coaching decision question. Reading through many of the threads on this forum leads me to believe the biggest (not the only) problem Iowa is having centers around Fran's coaching or lack of coaching during games (In game decision that help create mismatches in certain situations).

 

[ROCKY MOUNTAIN HAWK]

That is the major key in this game. I was just shocked that the running over a player who was setting a screen was not called. Iowa did themselves no favors and this one call did not cost Iowa the game (well kind of) but we would of had to make the FT's. As we all know that is no guarantee.

I am with the other people in the thread, the inconsistency of officiating down the stretch is getting bad. I don't know why they are getting worse, but they are. I mean how can you not call that a 3pt shot by OSU? It is still mind boggling to me that they ruled that a 2pt shot. Also how can you call a double foul? The guy had woody hooked and then he gets called for retaliating back? Then of course the missed run over screener. These officials get paid something 1,000-1500 dollars a game and they come put that type of product out there. If I am some of the Big Ten Coaches I am calling the supervisor of officials and complaint to get some better officials in there.

They get paid way more than that. Around $3300 for a B1G game.

 

[BDinIC]

One would assume his intent was to set the screen and then roll to the 3 point line, right up until he got knocked on his backside.

Correct.

 

[El Simbolo]

The screener is left open quite often because both defenders follow the ball. Shooters setting screens is a commonly successful play. You don't expect your screener to get knocked down though. I wonder if Mike saw him get knocked down or if he would have gone to the rim anyway?