This says conference can experiment with the rule for women. I thought it had been finalizedJust for clarity, the change to the rules for flopping was only for the men (at this time) I believe? It certainly opens the door for the Women' side to adopt soon.
100%
Of course we do, and it should be called. In general, however, the less talented you are, the more physical you need to be. It is this way in most sports.LMAO........... cause our team doesn't do any of this!
I'm totally with you on this one, and I too played for decades on the outdoor courts in my neighborhood and it would never have occurred to anyone to dive after a layup. Talk about road rash. Also not a lot of taking charges, fake or otherwise on those courts.Here‘s another one: the incessant horizontal dive under the basket after a layup attempt. There are players that do that every time. It’s BS. Not necessary. I played 4 years 24/7/365, can’t remember ever diving after a layup.
I hate mudwrestling games. I believe you do too. For me, I want to see scoring. But for this game didn't UCONN score? And there wasn't that many stoppages, was there?I may be in the minority here, but I would have liked the game to have been called more tightly. One of the best things about WCBB to me is the freedom of movement and passing and running. I am not a fan of a "physical" game. I dont enjoy a game dominated by pushing and bumping in the post. Likely why I like WCBB over the WNBA.
I thought the refs did a good job calling the game evenly. For the most part they were consistent and that is what you need. A few years ago hand checks were a point of emphasis and it drove me crazy that there was mayhem in the post as players ran into each other with no calls, but the whistle blew when a guard put a hand on another guard! Glad that seems to have stopped.
I also dont like when people say the refs should "let them play!". Ummm, it is basketball, not rugby! I much prefer a game that restricts the contact. Again, as long as the refs are consistent, the coaches and players can adjust.
Or “concrete“ indoor gyms. Some small catholic schools around D.C. OuchI'm totally with you on this one, and I too played for decades on the outdoor courts in my neighborhood and it would never have occurred to anyone to dive after a layup. Talk about road rash. Also not a lot of taking charges, fake or otherwise on those courts.
I think that the women can only experiment with the 2nd of the 3 rule changes listed for the men in this article, the Technology Rule. Unless the women's committee addressed it elsewhere.This says conference can experiment with the rule for women. I thought it had been finalized
Panel approves awarding a technical foul for flopping in men’s basketball - NCAA.org
The NCAA Playing Rules Oversight Panel approved allowing men's basketball officials to assess Class B technical fouls to players who fake being fouled, beginningwww.ncaa.org
That's funny however Geno himself said that the DePaul game was correctly officiated because they called the game like a mens' basketball game not a girls basketball game. Not women, "girls". What do you think he meant other than the fact that there are two methodologies or standards? If the methodologies or standards are not exactly equal, then one is higher or better than the other which means there is an inherent inequity between the sexes. Guess which one is higher or better according to Geno? Then guess what the reason is. My theory is based on conversations with referees in youth and high school when I was coaching who officiated both sexes. It may not be completely accurate as many other theories but the disparity between the refereeing is glaring in my view and apparently to Geno too. Not every attempt to highlight unfairness or unequal treatment is simply some crazy lunatic finding a hidden conspiracy."I have been posting here for years that there is an embedded sexism in the officiating in womens' basketball that stems from a philosophy that goes something like this "They are only girls. Let them play. They can't hurt each other.""
In a world where it seems like everyone is accused of being something offensive to someone, now we learn that the refs are sexist.
I have been posting here for years that there is an embedded sexism in the officiating in womens' basketball
What do you think the reasons are? I'm curious. This is a very important topic.You are right. But not for the reasons you stated
I’m with you on almost everything in your fine post — oh, heck, pretty much everything. But I have a tiny caveat. What you describe as “getting to the space first” is the essence of good D, the gold standard. But bumping cutters is more analogous to a moving screen than to taking a charge. It’s a subtle hip-check or a little shove in passing. The point of it isn’t to hold a position but merely to wear down an opponent.IMO it is fair and part of the game to inhibit cutters as a defender by “striking“ them with your arm tucked assuming you get to the space first. The defender has a right to take up that space.
I’m with you on almost everything in your fine post — oh, heck, pretty much everything. But I have a tiny caveat. What you describe as “getting to the space first” is the essence of good D, the gold standard. But bumping cutters is more analogous to a moving screen than to taking a charge. It’s a subtle hip-check or a little shove in passing. The point of it isn’t to hold a position but merely to wear down an opponent.
Thanks for the response. You're right, very nuanced. I'm thinking back to my playing days. I think contact between players, cutter and defender trying to take it away, is unavoidable. Maybe this, in my analysis, would just be contact within the rules. Either player attempts to secure an unfair advantage in the situation is called for a foul. Offensive player just blasts through the contact, after defensive player has established position. Defensive player hits offensive player, rather than just impeding, or obviously grabs or reaches in order to divert offensive player.I’m with you on almost everything in your fine post — oh, heck, pretty much everything. But I have a tiny caveat. What you describe as “getting to the space first” is the essence of good D, the gold standard. But bumping cutters is more analogous to a moving screen than to taking a charge. It’s a subtle hip-check or a little shove in passing. The point of it isn’t to hold a position but merely to wear down an opponent.
It manifests in how coaches are treated more than how players are treated.What do you think the reasons are? I'm curious. This is a very important topic.
Correct. And when this is done, on ball, it throws a player off balance and often results in a turnover. But, even off ball, it makes it impossible for a player to get open and get to open space.I’m with you on almost everything in your fine post — oh, heck, pretty much everything. But I have a tiny caveat. What you describe as “getting to the space first” is the essence of good D, the gold standard. But bumping cutters is more analogous to a moving screen than to taking a charge. It’s a subtle hip-check or a little shove in passing. The point of it isn’t to hold a position but merely to wear down an opponent.