Musketeer Madness

Here is an interesting paragraph in the Phoenix paper today.

Miller marveled after the game at how aggressive the Bruins can play without fouling. He joked that Love could have played 200 minutes without getting his second foul. Indeed the first-half box score reflected an ODD statistic. Despite, nine offensive rebounds, Xaiver had only three free throw attempts in the first half, missing all, and two of the three came off an intentional foul.

Without the aid of TIVO, being at the game it looked like in the first half the Refs refused to call fouls on UCLA, with I think lead to a lot of frustration and awkard shots.

When I get home I look and see if that bad. From most all of you in other post thought the game was refed ok.

So for today I will mourn our loss, celebrate a glorious season, and be proud of our team not only as basketball players, but students, and good citizens. Next year's team has a lot to live up to.

Until Next season.... as for now.....PLAY BALL

I honestly thought they were getting away with some physical play, but that's sometimes what you have to battle. Ask people from Georgia and they'll tell you we got away with a little more than what's allowed. I couldn't argue with it either.

The refs had several opportunities to give Love his 4th foul in the second half, but didn't blow the whistle. Some goes to UCLA being the #1 and probably getting a little more respect, some goes to Love being a "superstar" and getting star treatment. Unfortunately it's the way things are and refs are allowed to call games that way.

Ultimately, however, that's not what cost us the game. It seemed the legs weren't there after the battle with WVU two days earlier, we couldn't hit shots, looked slow, etc. Even if the refs called the game in our favor, we're losing that game. It would have been closer and more interesting for the viewer, but I still think we lose.

I would hate to think the refs would not call a foul on UCLA because they were a #1 and X was a #3. That being said I will never forget when UMASS came into the gardena dn JC said to a refs, "don't you know we(umass) are the #1 team in the nation" and after that UMass got the calls their way.

Like I have said in a number of threads, Why do the refs think the game is all about them?

Do you think Miller meant anything by his comments? He would not come out and say it of course.
Agreed we did not shoot well enough to win.

Hats off to the selection committee. they got it all pretty close

Personally, I think it was a little jab at the lack of calls but mostly respect for the UCLA defense. While watching the game, I noticed it was more physical, but that is always the way I played and the way I like the game played. I do not think the refs were that bad, they just let them play.

As for the UCLA defense, it was amazing. They move their feet so well, use their bodies smartly and do not make stupid fouls, and help out so well. So often, they would make the block and I would start to scream thinking "there has to be a foul" but when watching the replay was completely clean.

My hats off to UCLA, and here's to hoping XU lost to the National Champions.

Now on to 2009 recruiting...COME TO XU ARI!

I think UCLA played fabulous defense. With only a couple of exceptions where I thought we should have had a foul called our way, uncluding that ridiculous blocking-not-charging call and the out-of-bounds-no-wait-it's-a-foul call and the break-duncan's-arm-off-backwards-like-you-are-steven-segall-and-still-get-the-foul-called-against-him, I thought the refs called a decent game. Rough? Yes. But pretty consistent throughout. Did that benefit the Big Ox? You bet. But maybe that will help us decide to recruit some guys with some size.

UCLA is a defensive-minded team and, honestly, I think that's great. It's the one area where teams really shouldn't slump. Yes, it happens, but not as often as teams have poor shooting nights. Therefore, as UCLA, you know the strength of your team should be there every game. And they have enough talent on offense that they can still outscore teams when necessary.

All that being said, I have been saying since the game ended that part of why UCLA looked SO quick is that I believe our guys were worn out from the WVU game. Are the Bruins quicker than us? Maybe, but not THAT much. Our guys didn't have their usual hop and bounce. But that's part of playing in the tourney and things teams have to deal with and fight through. It's just tougher to do it when you're battling a #1 seed and a team like UCLA.

at press conference Miller commented on ucla defense and lack of fouls....before the end of interview he made a point to say his comments were not intended to mean he got a bad whistle by refs....if he said it, i buy it....

FACT: UCLA is better than X
FACT: I expected they would beat us
FACT: The refs screwed X in the paint with no calls on the O end, and a foulnearly every time on D
FACT: we still woulda lost....but it looked bad

Brian Fantana wrote:FACT: UCLA is better than X
FACT: I expected they would beat us
FACT: The refs screwed X in the paint with no calls on the O end, and a foulnearly every time on D
FACT: we still woulda lost....but it looked bad

i wonder if we play 'clean' bball compared to watching other teams beasts PUSHING OUR PLAYERS OFF THE FLOOR WITH TWO HANDS!!!