maybe- this was a crucial factor also ****

[ukfit]

I deleted the game so I cant go back and check- so check for me please.

When we took the ball down and passed to Townes; IIRC, we needed 3 points to win.
Kiminski did something I have never, ever seen him do-
He slapped around Townes at the ball and fouled. A Senior and POY like him knows for sure this is usually a foul. I think
He knew it and it was intentional. because if he fouled Karl before he went up for the shot, it prevents the bucket and free throws- 3 points.
Is that correct or not?

You could say Aaron or someone else should have taken the three and I agree. But even if KAT hit the shot and got the FTs, would it only have been tied or would we have been up?

Of course, there was a small chance a foul would not have been called and UW gets the loose ball. But I dont think he thought a foul would not be called. he wanted the foul.

If Kiminski saw this, and fouled intentionally it was a pretty heady move.

This post was edited on 4/5 11:35 AM by ukfit

This post was edited on 4/5 11:45 AM by ukfit

 

[ukfit]

Does anyone think Kiminski's foul was a very calculated action designed to deny us a chance to win, or - deny us a chance to at least tie- or not?

This post was edited on 4/5 8:02 PM by ukfit

 

[ukchamps_98]

I thought the exact same thing at the time. It was pretty smart actually. Even if we make both foul shots, they are still ahead, now with the ball and control of their own destiny.

 

[anon_013cn8yrfncx2]

Didn't appear intentional to me. Karl just has to make that second FT so we can foul and still be only down 3. Once it was a 2 possession game we were beaten as they don't miss FTs very often.

 

[VillaCat]

Would have loved an offensive board off that second free throw. I winced when coach took out Trey and put in Ulis. Was that for 3pt shooting ability on the other end I guess?