Teams
Forum List
Toggle sidebar

That's Why You Foul

tigershoops31 said:
I hope you're kidding. We fouled with 7 seconds left, which allowed them to have a 2nd possession only after we made a couple pressure filled 1-1 FTs. Texas didn't foul us up 3 at the end of the game and they won. If anything this game strengthens the case to not foul.
Click to expand...

I hope YOU'RE kidding. You saw how Texas got the game to OT, right? The trading of fouls with less than 20 seconds left did nothing, what mattered is that we did not foul on their in-bounds play with whatever it was, 4.something seconds left, and allowed them a clean shot from three.
 
jberryma said:
Not correct. You foul the guy that caught the ball that was not facing the basket. 0% chance of anything bad happening.
Click to expand...

No opportunity to foul Holmes before he kicked out, unless of course you wanted to have a decent shot at an intentional.
 
ISUAlum2002 said:
I hope YOU'RE kidding. You saw how Texas got the game to OT, right? The trading of fouls with less than 20 seconds left did nothing, what mattered is that we did not foul on their in-bounds play with whatever it was, 4.something seconds left, and allowed them a clean shot from three.
Click to expand...

No, we lost because we didn't play proper D and he got a clean look. Also Will could at least try and play D on that play and get thru the screen.
 
ISUAlum2002 said:
I hope YOU'RE kidding. You saw how Texas got the game to OT, right? The trading of fouls with less than 20 seconds left did nothing, what mattered is that we did not foul on their in-bounds play with whatever it was, 4.something seconds left, and allowed them a clean shot from three.
Click to expand...

No opportunity to foul Holmes before he kicked out, unless of course you wanted to have a decent shot at an intentional.
 
BigBake said:
No, we lost because we didn't play proper D and he got a clean look. Also Will could at least try and play D on that play and get thru the screen.
Click to expand...
Thats what makes it worse, he wasn't screened. He jumped away from the inbounds man to "help" on another player.
 
jdoggivjc said:
Love all the hindsight 20/20 coaches that think they're smarter than Hoiberg in this thread...
Click to expand...
Love all the sensitive guys who can't discuss a very important topic for us this year without accusing people of thinking they are smarter than Hoiberg.
 
Can we seriously stop with this ****? Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. I'm sick of this ******* thread coming up every time. Pardon my language.
 
I would choose to foul about 75% of the time. Tonight was not one of those times. We really need to work on our defense in those late game situations though. Wow.
 
Pitt_Clone said:
Can we seriously stop with this ****? Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. I'm sick of this ******* thread coming up every time. Pardon my language.
Click to expand...

I will not pardon your language. It needed to be stronger. Barnes didn't foul. How'd it work out for him. Statistically, it works out better to not foul. It seems like fouling is the better option because you see not fouling fail more often...because it is employed much more often.
 
Clone5 said:
Love all the sensitive guys who can't discuss a very important topic for us this year without accusing people of thinking they are smarter than Hoiberg.
Click to expand...

I think I mentioned earlier in this thread that Texas DIDN'T foul at the end of 2OT and it won them the game, counter to everyone saying that "This is why you foul".

But hey, if you feel you are a better coach than Hoiberg, e-mail JP. Just make sure you attach your undoubtedly sparkling resume to it and make sure you reference this thread as to why you think you would make a better coach.
 
I already posted this in the game thread, but it belongs here:
How is it possible that Texas won that game, when Barnes elected not to foul at the end?!?

Can people just shut the **** up about the fouling? It totally depends on the situation and in most situations, it is a total judgement call. I could easily make an argument that we lost this game when we had Bubu intentionally foul with 7.1 seconds left in regulation to allow Texas to drag out the final seconds and eventually tie it. But I won't, because I'm not so stupid as to think that there is only one way to coach.
 
tigershoops31 said:
No opportunity to foul Holmes before he kicked out, unless of course you wanted to have a decent shot at an intentional.
Click to expand...

Absolutely not true. Not even close. He caught the ball took a half step at least and had time to pass. You could have fouled on the catch or his pass. Either way it's not a shooting foul and it's a very easy foul to commit as to not make it intentional. You obviously don't know much about basketball so I won't argue. This is a way easier foul/play to make than one where a guy catches on a curl towards the basket where he can pull up for the shot. Anyone that's played 2 minutes of basketball in their life could make that foul. 0% chance of anything going wrong on that foul.

I like Fred but this is his third time blowing this. Had he not fouled at 11 seconds I would have second guessed it but would have let it slide, when he decided to foul at 11 seconds he HAS to foul with under 5 seconds, especially when the player is going away from the bakset. I repeat, HAS to foul in that situation. No excuse. None.
 
cyguytillidie said:
Intentional foul.
Click to expand...

I'm guessing you don't have a ton of basketball experience? Anyone that has played more than 2 minutes worth of basketball could make that foul and NOT make it look intentional. You could foul on the pass to him or the his pass away and it's an easy nonintentional foul. Had Fred not fouled with 11 seconds I would have second guessed it but let it slide. Under 5 seconds a player catches the ball going away from the hoop, there is 0 excuses for not fouling. No excuse, the foul HAS to occur. HAS to. If the player was curling to the basket, that's a tough foul to make as the guy could pull up for a shot very quick. Going away from the hoop, it's an easy, VERY EASY, foul to make.
 
jberryma said:
Absolutely not true. Not even close. He caught the ball took a half step at least and had time to pass. You could have fouled on the catch or his pass. Either way it's not a shooting foul and it's a very easy foul to commit as to not make it intentional. You obviously don't know much about basketball so I won't argue. This is a way easier foul/play to make than one where a guy catches on a curl towards the basket where he can pull up for the shot. Anyone that's played 2 minutes of basketball in their life could make that foul. 0% chance of anything going wrong on that foul.

I like Fred but this is his third time blowing this. Had he not fouled at 11 seconds I would have second guessed it but would have let it slide, when he decided to foul at 11 seconds he HAS to foul with under 5 seconds, especially when the player is going away from the bakset. I repeat, HAS to foul in that situation. No excuse. None.
Click to expand...

Completely agree. You don't do it with 11 secs left, and then not do it with under 5 secs left. If so, why didn't we just play good D when there was 11 secs left and just see what happened? That is just complete inconsistency.

If we had just played them straight up with 11 secs left and Texas hits a 3 to tie it, that would be easier to defend if you are Fred Hoiberg than what he did tonight. Tonight, he chooses to foul with 11 secs left, but not with under 5 secs left? Makes no sense whatsoever.

Fred is the right guy for this job, don't get me wrong, but he is still learning and has a ways to go yet. That is obvious. Rick Barnes, a seasoned veteran, took him to school tonight in the closing secs.
 
clonedude said:
Completely agree. You don't do it with 11 secs left, and then not do it with under 5 secs left. If so, why didn't we just play good D when there was 11 secs left and just see what happened? That is just complete inconsistency.

If we had just played them straight up with 11 secs left and Texas hits a 3 to tie it, that would be easier to defend if you are Fred Hoiberg than what he did tonight. Tonight, he chooses to foul with 11 secs left, but not with under 5 secs left? Makes no sense whatsoever.

Fred is the right guy for this job, don't get me wrong, but he is still learning and has a ways to go yet. That is obvious. Rick Barnes, a seasoned veteran, took him to school tonight in the closing secs.
Click to expand...

Absolutely! Thank you, someone else that knows the sport and the situational aspects to the game. Very good post!
 
jdoggivjc said:
I think I mentioned earlier in this thread that Texas DIDN'T foul at the end of 2OT and it won them the game, counter to everyone saying that "This is why you foul".

But hey, if you feel you are a better coach than Hoiberg, e-mail JP. Just make sure you attach your undoubtedly sparkling resume to it and make sure you reference this thread as to why you think you would make a better coach.
Click to expand...
Horrible post. Try reading what I said in the post you quoted. I am not smarter than Hoiberg. I never said I was. I am just willing to talk about reasons to foul or not to foul in this situation without getting all sensitive and defensive about it unlike you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Help Support Us

Become a patron
Top Bottom
Back