Why are they not calling intentional fouls ?!

[CatFanInTheBathtub]

the refs simply handed the game to ohio st. earlier by not calling an obvious and in my opinion malicious intentional on oden with a few seconds left.

now they should have seriously called one on maryland when they grabbed the butler guys jersey with a few seconds left.

are they trying to protect lower seeds or just letting tourn. games be decided by the players ?

[CurlyCat]

I couldn't agree more. There is no good excuse NOT to call these intentional fouls! It is unnecessarily dangerous to the players and unfair to the underdogs!

[catmandoo25]

I have always hated the "You can't call that in this situation " argument, which is what Seth davis and Clark Kellogg were discussing earlier.

[tauzreborn]

Oden obviously lost his temper and threw that Xavier player. T him up ref.

[dbe]

BUT if the Xavier player hits both free throws it becomes immaterial.

I was for Xavier...but the refs made the right call on that last foul.

[Radiated]

It was a blatant push in the chest.

[Wildcat Larry]

dbe wrote: BUT if the Xavier player hits both free throws it becomes immaterial.

I was for Xavier...but the refs made the right call on that last foul.

Refereeing by the rules is NEVER inmaterial. If it's a rule, call it, whether there be 18:50 left in the game or 5 seconds. Poor, poor refereeing in both situations in my opinion.

[Littlemeyer]

Wildcat Larry wrote: dbe wrote: BUT if the Xavier player hits both free throws it becomes immaterial.

I was for Xavier...but the refs made the right call on that last foul.

Refereeing by the rules is NEVER inmaterial. If it's a rule, call it, whether there be 18:50 left in the game or 5 seconds. Poor, poor refereeing in both situations in my opinion.
:thumbup

"Points of empasis" are strange too. If its a rule, call it. Whether its a "point of emphasis" or not.

As to the calls in question, both were IMO obvious intentional fouls. The grabbing of the jersey by the Maryland player, though, was even more obvious. No more intentional, mind you, but clearly obvious.

[BigblueDrew]

The rule should be rescinded IT IS A JOKE. if they aren't gonna enforce it they shouldn't have it.

[UKSam]

I am ok with the call in the Maryland game. Yes that was intentional but it was to stop the clock and put the shooter on the line. Yes he grabbed the shirt but really isn't much difference than Dwight Perry's foul.

Oden should have been called intentional.

Personally I think that they should change ther wording. "Intentional happens at the end of most close games.

Malicious or Flagerant fouls should be the wording. Which is what Oden did.

[keesee12]

i think the maryland game they were calling the foul before he grabbed the jersey

[Littlemeyer]

UKSam wrote: I am ok with the call in the Maryland game. Yes that was intentional but it was to stop the clock and put the shooter on the line. Yes he grabbed the shirt but really isn't much difference than Dwight Perry's foul.

Oden should have been called intentional.

Personally I think that they should change ther wording. "Intentional happens at the end of most close games.

Malicious or Flagerant fouls should be the wording. Which is what Oden did.

Oh, come on! Dwight Perry was definitely going for the ball in that case. :lol:

I agree with you. It is the wording that needs to be worked on. (Grrr. Grammar.) But I still have yet to see (other than today) an intentional foul NOT called when a jersey was grabbed as obviously as one was grabbed in that game.

I wish I had DVRed the game. keesee12 may be right. It could have been called before the grab.

[Mr. T]

keesee12 wrote: i think the maryland game they were calling the foul before he grabbed the jersey
Yep, he actually hacked him on the arm before grabbing the jersey. The Oden one was a blown call. It actually should have just been a tech. He threwa forearm shiver to that guy!!

[Littlemeyer]

I've checked YouTube for the Oden foul, but it doesn't look like its on there yet. (Unless my YouTube surfing skill are lacking.)

Has anybody been able to find a replay of that yet?

[lighthouse]

UKSam wrote: I am ok with the call in the Maryland game. Yes that was intentional but it was to stop the clock and put the shooter on the line. Yes he grabbed the shirt but really isn't much difference than Dwight Perry's foul.

Oden should have been called intentional.

Personally I think that they should change ther wording. "Intentional happens at the end of most close games.

Malicious or Flagerant fouls should be the wording. Which is what Oden did.


I agree Odenshould have beencalled for an intentional foul, but I respectfully disagree with it being flagrant. There is a world of difference between the two.

In the Maryland game I think the foul that was called happened before the grab, but it shouldn't make any difference as to why the player fouled. The confrontation in the BC-Gtown game was real close to being flagrant. If the Gtown player hadn't stepped in before the officials got there, it could've been nasty.

[wanderingcat]

Maybe intentional. Anyway, the game should be won or lost on the floor. The Xavier player had his shot and missed.

[Lloyd Christmas]

wanderingcat wrote: Maybe intentional. Anyway, the game should be won or lost on the floor. The Xavier player had his shot and missed.

I, at times, go either way on this issue. A part of me wants it "to be decided on the floor" and the other part says that the rule is the rule and clearly Oden chucked the Xavier player out of pure frustration, and that clearly violates a rule.

I guess my view on that would be if you would call it an intentional foul in the first half and Xavier hit both foul shots and went on to win by 1, you could say that is the difference in the game: a subjective intentional foul call on Oden. So if its 2 points for Xavier in the first half or the final 10 seconds, a rule is a rule and he violated it and its a Freshman mistake that it, hypothetically, cost them the game.

Since it fouled Oden out and Xavier still couldn't capitalize on it in Overtime AND had they hit both foul shots with 3 seconds left it then would not have been an issue means I don't have much sympathy. I still think calls should be consistent no matter what the circumstances.

/Sorry if I am not making sense, I am on beer #: :beer::beer::beer::beer::beer::beer:

//Anyone questioning my basketball credibility should note that I am tied for 1st in the bracket challenge on Yahoo! and tied for 3rd on the bracket challenge on CBS

///I am sure its all luck, and now my brackets will instantly implode because of those statments

[Brian McCat]

http://www.youtube.com/v/dn6CyCuFkgw

[gerntz]

As much as I wanted X to win, it's not clear to me that Oden wasn't just grabbing for the ball and hard contact made, i.e., can't say it was intentional vs. going for ball. And also can't say Oden wasn't fouled just prior to that.

If X had positioned their players outside 3-pt line and/or fouled before the final shot, they may have changed the outcome that way too.

[Wildcat Larry]

He didn't have his hands out reaching for the ball, he had them in on his stomach and hit the guy with his forearms and body. How in the world is that going for the ball?

Just curious.