RSS
March 9, 2008
ESPN Highlights Controversy over UCLA-Cal Game
There were two major controversies surrounding yesterday's Bruin win over Cal.
1. With 7.1 seconds left to go, Cal's Ryan Anderson turned the ball over under full-court pressure from UCLA's Russell Westbrook and Josh Shipp. No foul call.
Cal fans claim that a foul should have been called because Westbrook apparently pushed Anderson to the floor, and on top of that he "hacked him in a downward motion" to get at the ball as ESPN's commentator Steve Lavin (oh Lavin) put it during the game. While Russel's hand was indeed on Anderson's back, (see video replay), it is not certain if Anderson was pushed to the floor. And second, Westbrook's downward swing appeared all ball -- you should probably take a look at this this LA Times photo so that you can see it for yourself -- Anderson's even holding Westbrook back in it. I think I would call it an excellent defensive play, not a foul. Lavin threw in his own expertise on Westbrook's play stating that "a downward hack like that across an opponent's arms is always a foul". Yes, a hack is a foul by definition, Steve. But if the player hits the ball and not the player's arms in a downward hand motion then it is not a hack at all but an attempt to steal, wouldn't you agree?
2. With 1.5 seconds remaining, Josh Shipp makes a H-O-R-S-E jumper over the side of the backboard to win the game. See video below:
Now this shot was controversial...even as a Bruin I can admit that. The rules state that a shot over the backboard is considered out-of-bounds. Many sportsfans contend that the shot was not literally from behind the board but from the side or over-the-corner, or just plain indeterminable from video and therefore a no-call. I myself interpret the rule as: if the shot is anywhere over the board where the board itself obstructs a defensive play then it shouldn't be allowed. But as the AP photo above shows, Shipp was being effectively guarded when he made the shot. Even though this rule is in the book, no one ever calls against it. Whether the shot was legal or not, you can pitch in your own two cents.
Either way, the refs didn't lose the game for Cal, they lost it for themselves when they failed to answer UCLA's late rally. You can't just drop a 16-point advantage in the end of a game and then expect the refs to protect your win over some close calls.
AP Photo by Chris Pizzello
|
it is SOOOOO nice to hear (for a change) someone stop with the conspiracy theories about PAC-10 officials wanting to insure UCLA a #1 seed and look at things objectively.
whether or not the calls were right, you can't tell me they weren't close or less-than-definitive. so the refs let them play and the outcome on Thursday night as well as yesterday proves that in the end, the Bruins toughed it out. they couldn't have done it any other way.
am i concerned about the way in which our team seems to play to the level of its competition headed into the tourney - absofrickinlutely. but it seems to be the way they roll, so whatever gets the W...
U-C-L-A fight FiGhT FIGHT!
As a Duck fan, I must admit to having no love for UCLA. I watched that game, and something has been bugging me about that play (Anderson losing the ball) ever since I watched it. Regardless of whether or not a foul should have been called, the ball CLEARLY goes off of UCLA out of bounds, but for some reason the ball was awarded to UCLA. After Anderson lost the ball, he was on the ground and the two UCLA players who double teamed him failed to corral the loose ball and it went out of bounds. Everyone, from the announcers to Cal's coach, was so focused on the foul call (or lack thereof) that I didn't hear anyone even mention the out of bounds off Cal call. You can't have it both ways; either the UCLA player fouled Anderson across the arm, or if it was all ball, then the UCLA player knocked it out of bounds. Somehow the refs ruled that UCLA simultaneously knocked the ball out cleanly without touching the ball? How else would it have been out of bounds off of Cal? Conspiracy theories aside, I guarantee that call would not have been made if UCLA was on the road, so the Bruins better watch out in the tourney.