Shockers at Redbirds Game Thread

[garylee]

i thought it was a difficult call for the refs to make on the spot since it was so unusal. GM did
the right thing by getting a review and i think the refs got it right, although, i don't understand
why it was not a dead ball at that point and the subsequent foul negated. there are always
going to be some sore losers in a close hard fought game that make the entire fan base look
bad but, like our base, there are always a few guys you wish would just sit down and stfu. we
should just remain above it all and focus on the next game.

[shoxlax]

i thought it was a difficult call for the refs to make on the spot since it was so unusal. GM did
the right thing by getting a review and i think the refs got it right, although, i don't understand
why it was not a dead ball at that point and the subsequent foul negated. there are always
going to be some sore losers in a close hard fought game that make the entire fan base look
bad but, like our base, there are always a few guys you wish would just sit down and stfu. we
should just remain above it all and focus on the next game.

Yep, the correct call should've been time added on the clock, foul negated, Hong Kong Phooey ejected, and two shots and the ball.

[shockmonster]

Reading the ISU board, apparently some of their fans threw objects onto the court. Here are some of their delusional thoughts on the last minute of play:

Cotton flopped

It was a foul on Cotton because he didn't give Carmichael room to come down

No flagrant on Carmichael because he withdrew his leg after contact

The play should not have been reviewed

Carmichael couldn't of done anything different then what he did

Carmichael was fouled on the last play

Objection to Carl's behavior after the game. On TV, he was raising both arms up and down when he went into the tunnel.

A humorous poster from ISUR on one of the boards made a comment that since it wasn't above the shoulders, it couldn't be a flagrant foul. I guess that also applies to a purposeful kick to the grapes. Hey wait a minute, last year in St. Louis, Wilkins kicked Garrett in the grapes during the game on purpose. That is a great way to apply the rules.

[shoxlax]

Just getting back to Chicago hotel and reading through this thread. I was fortunate enough to have seats behind the bench. That is the first time I've had seats that close and it is a different way to watch the game (or not watch if the coach or refs are in the way.)

I was surprised how much more contact that goes on that I don't catch on TV or when I am in the cheap seats.

Carmichaels's Hong Kong Fuey kick happened 20-30 feet in front of me and at that time I saw it, it was pretty obvious it was intentionall. When the foul wasn't called, I just figured that he simply got away with it.

I wasn't going to comment on the post-game stuff, but since Suelly already wrote about it, it is fair game. I just heard that assistant coache(s) from Ill State started yelling at WSU coaches in the hallway that leads to both locker rooms. I heard the yelling, but had no idea what was going on.

The coaches and players that I saw after the game were excited about the victory and were calm, cool and collected.

Redbird Arena is a nice, on-campus facility. It reminds me of the Kansas Coliseum, and the Topeka ExpoCenre. There were some very, very lame heckers behind the Shocker bench. I hope our hecklers have some originality and humor. I'm not sure how many times I heard, "Hey Marshall, do you need a neutral court?" Also on the drive back from Chicago I listened to the Ill State post-game call-in show. Those fans had the exact same complaints about "MVC" refs that we do. I probably listend to 20 callers and they all had the same thing to say.

The Hong Kong Phooey reference was priceless and revealed your age demographic. Scatman Crothers at his best.

[insaneykaney]

You see I believe, after graduation, Jackie plans on opening up his very own Ninja Training Center. We'll call it Jackie's Ninja Studio. It was advertising. That's all.

Sign up now and you'll get the first session free and learn his supposed "finishing" move, the "Intentional Jump Kick while Rebounding 180"

[jdmee]

Per the rule book. Section 13 Art. 2.

b. A coach may request a monitor review to determine if any of the fouls
in 2-13.2.d.1 occurred. When no such foul is assessed, a timeout shall
be charged to that team.
2. When officials err and fail to observe the fouls according to 2-13.2.d.1 or
a fight, they are permitted to correct and penalize these infraction(s), with
the use of a monitor review, when the act occurs:
a. When the game clock was stopped, it must be corrected:
1. During the first dead ball after the clock was properly started.
b. When the game clock was running, it must be corrected:
1. During the first dead ball after the clock was properly stopped; or
2. Before the second live ball when the ball became dead after a
successful goal but the clock continued to run.
3. When it is determined that a flagrant 1 or 2 personal foul, a flagrant 2
contact technical foul or a fight did occur within the prescribed time
Rule 2 / Officials and Their Duties 37 frame, the infraction(s) should be
penalized and play shall be resumed by awarding the ball to the offended
team where the stoppage of play occurred to review the flagrant act.
(Men) When a flagrant 2 contact technical foul or a contact dead ball
technical foul is assessed, play shall be resumed by awarding the ball
to the offended team at the division line on either side of the playing
court. Any previous activity before the monitor review shall not be
canceled or nullified. When it is determined that a flagrant 1 or 2
personal foul, a flagrant 2 contact technical foul or a fight did not
occur or did not occur within the prescribed time frame, play
shall be resumed where the stoppage of play occurred to review the act.

According to the rules they handled it correctly.
The coach can ask for a review.
The review happens at the first dead ball
The action that happened prior to the review still counts.

[Awesome Sauce Malone]

So I read quite a bit after the game but had to stop so I could study for a test...

But apparently we are supposed to be embarrassed by our coach and players. Apparently they are supposed to be the "bigger people" etc etc and we're al supposed to forget about the people who were apparently throwing things down on them. I get so sick and ****ing tired of people not owning up to their own actions. "Its okay that we did this but your coaches and players should have just let us".

I for one have ZERO problems with Carl Hall raising his hands up as he walked off the court. He was victorious and was celebrating. if they or anyone else has a problem with it then I implore you to STOP watching athletics at any level.

There is literally NO defense of the kick to Tekele Cotton. I understand sticking up for your players and what not but come on really? As we just witnessed at the Mizzou/Ole Miss game less has resulted in more.

So Redbird fans say they have lost respect for our coach and program? What if any did they have before? A cheapshot by their players results in you losing respect for us? Seems Legit! My only rebuttal is to ask you to ask me about my 7"

[Cdizzle]

Per the rule book. Section 13 Art. 2.



According to the rules they handled it correctly.
The coach can ask for a review.
The review happens at the first dead ball
The action that happened prior to the review still counts.

They did not handle the situation correctly. It should have been called when it happened. Inexcusable, IMO, given the replays of the official staring straight at the play with no obstruction. I can understand not calling a flagrant foul in real time, but not even calling a common foul is terrible. Also, according to the descriptions of Flagrant 1 and Flagrant 2, a Flagrant 2 should have been assessed. I find it comical that so many are saying WSU received help or got lucky on this play. If called correctly with play stopping on the kick, a lot of things should have happened in WSU's favor.

1. About 11 seconds would not have run off the clock before Williams fouled.
2. Williams would not have been assessed a personal foul.
3. ISU would not have received 2 FTs.
4. ISU's best player would have been ejected from the game.

I do have two questions for those with additional rules experience. Are flagrant fouls like technical fouls in that the shooting team can choose the FT shooter? I had it in my mind that a flagrant foul was still fouling a specific player, just with more severity. Perhaps I am wrong. If not, we did catch a small break in that Tekele, not Cle should have shot the FTs.

Second. Given that play transpired that could not be undone, a foul was called and ISU shot FTs, should we not have had to inbound the ball from the other end of the floor?

Regarding the fans, I think it's acceptable that fans in the arena were upset after the game. They didn't have the benefit of replay. Throwing things onto the court is always inexcusable. Anyone who has seen a replay and thinks WSU "caught a break" just doesn't have a clue.

Jenn Bates is so comically anti-WSU that it is sad she has a job in Wichita.

[pinstripers]

We did inbounds from the other end.

[mjbaker84]

They did not handle the situation correctly. It should have been called when it happened. Inexcusable, IMO, given the replays of the official staring straight at the play with no obstruction. I can understand not calling a flagrant foul in real time, but not even calling a common foul is terrible. Also, according to the descriptions of Flagrant 1 and Flagrant 2, a Flagrant 2 should have been assessed. I find it comical that so many are saying WSU received help or got lucky on this play. If called correctly with play stopping on the kick, a lot of things should have happened in WSU's favor.

1. About 8 seconds would not have run off the clock before Armstead fouled.
2. Armstead would not have been assessed a personal foul.
3. ISU would not have received 2 FTs.
4. ISU's best player would have been ejected from the game.

I do have two questions for those with additional rules experience. Are flagrant fouls like technical fouls in that the shooting team can choose the FT shooter? I had it in my mind that a flagrant foul was still fouling a specific player, just with more severity. Perhaps I am wrong. If not, we did catch a small break in that Tekele, not Cle should have shot the FTs.

Second. Given that play transpired that could not be undone, a foul was called and ISU shot FTs, should we not have had to inbound the ball from the other end of the floor?

Regarding the fans, I think it's acceptable that fans in the arena were upset after the game. They didn't have the benefit of replay. Throwing things onto the court is always inexcusable. Anyone who has seen a replay and thinks WSU "caught a break" just doesn't have a clue.

Jenn Bates is so comically anti-WSU that it is sad she has a job in Wichita.

what did she do/say? I didn't see the late news

[pinstripers]

The officials did not have the balls for the ejection. On the road he gets tossed, no doubt.

[Cdizzle]

We did inbounds from the other end.

WSU inbounded under our own basket.

[rrshock]

Quite frankly, I'm afraid if these two teams meet in Arch Madness. There are going to be some hot tempers. These two teams are starting to hate each other, as well as us fan bases. And I don't even have to mention the Dana Ford situation.

If Creighton does leave this league in the next few years, Ill State could be a great candidate for the next team to hate on.

No reason that we can't be hatin' on two teams instead of just one.

[tw805]

This post from the ISU board is just filled with awesomeness:

"If anything it was a flagrant 2, but by definition it absolutely was not a flagrant 1."

http://www.redbirdfan.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=4568

[1972Shocker]

Last 5 seconds of the game isn't getting much talk or coverage. Not sure the Shocks did a great job there. ILS got an absolutely great look that could have won the game for them. One thing ILS fans can not argue is that the flagrant foul on Carmichael cost them any chance to win the game. I need to maybe look at the replays again, but in thinking about that play seems to me Carmichael, one of the better mid-range shooters in the Valley could have pulled up for pretty much uncontested 14-15 jumper on that play but instead made the decision to plow right into Carl who had clearly established position in the lane. Of course, ILS had been getting every bull their way to the rim call in the game so it could be Carmichael thought he could just draw another foul in doing the same thing and win the game at the line. Perhaps his second bad decision in the final minute of play.