Why is the media acting like that foul was a big deal?

[WorfHog]

It was a critical call. The media, "New York" or otherwise, is justified in making a "big deal" out of it.

It was not a "critical call." Arkansas was winning and would have likely continued to win regardless of the call.  It's heavily biased reporting all around.

[Cinco de Hogo]

Oh man, this is really starting to hurt my head.  The number of people that don't understand this is really starting to become painful.  There's no longer any such thing as an intentional foul and Barford was tripped by the Seton Hall player (intentional or not, he certainly wasn't embellishing anything, and he wasn't at fault for tripping or going down--the Seton Hall player was responsible--and intent is IRRELEVANT).

Intent is covered in the reason the rules exist.  There is a right way to commit an intentional foul(which is a common fouls that you commit on purpose and yes they do exist) and a wrong way.  Bruce Pearl covered this and he said clearly that he teaches his players how to commit such a foul and he also said this wasn't done correctly.

[jesterzzn]

It was not a "critical call." Arkansas was winning and would have likely continued to win regardless of the call.  It's heavily biased reporting all around.

Your first sentence is wrong.  Your second sentence is potentially true. Your third sentence is mostly true.

There's probably a Yogi quote to be had here, but I'm too tired to think of it.

[Science Fiction Greg]

Intent is covered in the reason the rules exist.  There is a right way to commit an intentional foul(which is a common fouls that you commit on purpose and yes they do exist) and a wrong way.  Bruce Pearl covered this and he said clearly that he teaches his players how to commit such a foul and he also said this wasn't done correctly.

Agreed.

[jesterzzn]

Oh man, this is really starting to hurt my head.  The number of people that don't understand this is really starting to become painful.  There's no longer any such thing as an intentional foul and Barford was tripped by the Seton Hall player (intentional or not, he certainly wasn't embellishing anything, and he wasn't at fault for tripping or going down--the Seton Hall player was responsible--and intent is IRRELEVANT).

I agree, it is painful to see people spouting BS, but dude, the trip was irrelevant.  The trip was incidental, and came after the flagrant foul.  The trip on its own would have been a foul, but in this case the trip does not matter.  The foul was the shove.

[Science Fiction Greg]

I agree, it is painful to see people spouting BS, but dude, the trip was irrelevant.  The trip was incidental, and came after the flagrant foul.  The trip on its own would have been a foul, but in this case the trip does not matter.  The foul was the shove.

Agreed.  Did not state otherwise.  The point was correcting the people that said Barford tripped instead of Barford was tripped.  Barford did nothing wrong, intentional or otherwise.

[Cracker Jack]

Barford. Was. Tripped. FFS.

You're right, BP.  He was definitely tripped.  As previously stated, the trip was inconsequential to the F1 call........the shove, with no attempt on the ball, ALONE justified the F1.  The call is totally correct per the definition of an F1 foul.  I still feel that had the play not been reviewed BECAUSE OF THE TRIP, the foul would not have been deemed flagrant.  Just my opinion.....

[ShadowHawg]

Barford hit both knowing he had two free.

It was a double bonus anyway. He was getting 2 no matter what. So you have conceded Barford those points.

It was the right call given the current rules per the national head of refs. So you have to overcome that.

Then they travelled and it had nothing to do with margin, just a bonehead move.

That's when the real blown call happened and even you haven't brought up that  Macon travelled but wasn't called.

Your other claims are moot.

[jesterzzn]

Agreed.  Did not state otherwise.  The point was correcting the people that said Barford tripped instead of Barford was tripped.  Barford did nothing wrong, intentional or otherwise.

I see.  Okay, yes.  Anyone saying he played it up (as they did on the broadcast) is an idiot.  I definitely agree there.

[WorfHog]

Your first sentence is wrong.  Your second sentence is potentially true. Your third sentence is mostly true.

There's probably a Yogi quote to be had here, but I'm too tired to think of it.

With almost 6 minutes left in the game SH had 68 points.  The made one shot and one free-throw in the final 6 minutes of the game. That was critical to their loss not the foul.

[jesterzzn]

With almost 6 minutes left in the game SH had 68 points.  The made one shot and one free-throw in the final 6 minutes of the game. That was critical to their loss not the foul.

Why can't both be critical?

[Cinco de Hogo]

Why can't both be critical?

Why?  Because it looks like your agreeing with that boneheaded commentator on the post game show and you don't want to be HIM.  LOL!

[Farmer Hogget]

There all kinds of media, mainstream, local, alternative, social...

We were winning before the foul. Barford made his shots and likely would have had the foul not been fragrant becasue he shoots 75% of his free throws. On Seton Hall's next position they jacked up garbage (which they did all game) and Macon got the rebound. 

They lost because they cannot hit their own free throws or many other shots. And US, what do you mean by US..you're just a ** troll who's mad that Mike won.

The head of officials said it was a flagrant, what is there to argue about? Bunch of CMA haters up in here tonight ripping legit fans mods need to roll out hard. At no time in history is it more clear which accounts need to be suspended.

You are exactly right!  Why are alleged Razorbacks fans taking the side of the media?  It WAS a flagrant foul and NO, Barford did NOT "sell" it.  Clearly his left foot got caught up behind his right calf because of the shove and he fell. . .and it was a hard fall.  It doesn't matter what time in the game was remaining.  IT was the right call.  Why are some of these people angry?  Why are some them convinced that Seton Hall was screwed because Macon might have walked?  It's clear that Mike exceeded their expectations, made it to the SEC Championship game AND made it to the NCAA tourney.  Then, he had the audacity to lead the team to a victory in the NCAA tourney which also exceeded their expectations and predictions.  They know Mike is NOT going to be fired (which he wasn't going to be, anyway) and they are mad.  It is like soothing hands to my brow knowing that the Razorbacks victory today vexes them so.  How marvelous!

[PORKULATOR]

Media is against Hogs after UK fiasco

Yes, but why. Why do they line up to suckle from that festering teet. WHY!

[jesterzzn]

Why?  Because it looks like your agreeing with that boneheaded commentator on the post game show and you don't want to be HIM.  LOL!

At least I'm not looking like I don't know what the word critical means.  I guess I'll take solace in that.

[niels_boar]

Media shockingly manufactures fake controversy.  News at 11.

[FineAsSwine]

Media shockingly manufactures fake controversy.  News at 11.

Nice post to read to end the night. Great win Hogs! Goodnight.

[niels_boar]

nm

[mhsbc59]

You are exactly right!  Why are alleged Razorbacks fans taking the side of the media?  It WAS a flagrant foul and NO, Barford did NOT "sell" it.  Clearly his left foot got caught up behind his right calf because of the shove and he fell. . .and it was a hard fall.  It doesn't matter what time in the game was remaining.  IT was the right call.  Why are some of these people angry?  Why are some them convinced that Seton Hall was screwed because Macon might have walked?  It's clear that Mike exceeded their expectations, made it to the SEC Championship game AND made it to the NCAA tourney.  Then, he had the audacity to lead the team to a victory in the NCAA tourney which also exceeded their expectations and predictions.  They know Mike is NOT going to be fired (which he wasn't going to be, anyway) and they are mad.  It is like soothing hands to my brow knowing that the Razorbacks victory today vexes them so.  How marvelous!

We should go drinking we would have a good time

[GoHogs1091]

Probably because the tourney has sucked so far in terms of drama and big upsets.

I had a feeling after the selection show on Sunday that this year's tournament could be a real dud.

The NCAA Tournament Committee did a terrible job in regards to seedings and the matching up of teams.

[synthartist69]

It was nice playing Seton Hall though... instead of those arrogant Kentucky players with their corrupt refs

[BrooklynRoss]

New York media needs something to talk about. The foul wasn't crucial Seton Hall was already losing and in desperation mode.

ESPN is based in LA and Connecticut. Please do not drag NYC into it.

[lynbug]

Post-game analysts need something controversial to argue about.

[PonderinHog]

Post-game analysts need something controversial to argue about.

Why don't they pick on all those smart players at Vanderbilt and leave us a loan

[k.c.hawg]

ESPN is based in LA and Connecticut. Please do not drag NYC into it.

Connecticut is a suburb of NYC. 

[zebradynasty]

It wasn't the tripping that made it an F1 it was the fact that he didn't make a play on the ball and pushed in the back. The tripping was just incidental.

[rljjr]

New York media needs something to talk about. The foul wasn't crucial Seton Hall was already losing and in desperation mode.

A Southern team beat a NY Media Market team. A Big East team was vanquished by an SEC team. They needed a good controversy to generate listeners/viewers -- it's a money game. Great drama. Means nothing in the end.

[hawgwash]

If "critical" means it happened late in the game, with the outcome of the game still in doubt, then yes it was a critical call.  But per the head of officials it was the correct call.  So to the question asked by the OP, why is the media making a big deal of it?  Would they be making a big deal if the call was an out of bounds call at a "critical" moment, if replays showed the call was correct?

[Cinco de Hogo]

It wasn't the tripping that made it an F1 it was the fact that he didn't make a play on the ball and pushed in the back. The tripping was just incidental.

I think most everyone knows this just some think the tripping "tripped" the scales in favor of a F1.  Yes they could have called a F1 anyway but would they have?  It's a question with no answer.  SEC refs probably wouldn't have even called a foul. 😉

[PossumFan]

At least I'm not looking like I don't know what the word critical means.  I guess I'll take solace in that.

I made my living with words for 40-plus years, so I think I understand "critical" about as well as anyone. And this call wasn't critical. The Hogs netted 3 points instead of the 2 they would have scored had it been called a common foul, putting them up by 4. SH then missed, and there's no reason to believe the outcome of that possession would have been different had they only been down 3. The foul itself was critical _ correctly calling it a flagrant 1 was not.

[Science Fiction Greg]

I think most everyone knows this just some think the tripping "tripped" the scales in favor of a F1.  Yes they could have called a F1 anyway but would they have?  It's a question with no answer.  SEC refs probably wouldn't have even called a foul. 😉

Considering even without the trip, it was a textbook case of flagrant one on multiple fronts, yes it would've been called anyway.

[bphi11ips]

The call was a big deal. It was also the correct call.

[joeyself]

Probably because the tourney has sucked so far in terms of drama and big upsets.

This. Other than Middle Tennessee beating Minnesota, an outcome that didn't really surprise anyone, the top 20 seeds all advanced this year. 

JcS

[lc480]

Doesn't matter what anyone thinks, the call was made and it over.

[WorfHog]

ESPN is based in LA and Connecticut. Please do not drag NYC into it.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=CBS+headquarters

[247Hog]

Nothing that happens in a game is irrelevant.  First, the call was technically right so any opinion you have about what happened is irrelevant.  Second, did I do a good job of separating those two facts?

Disagree. Once i ripped one right after shooting a free throw during a game. Didn't change the outcome one bit.

[PonderinHog]

Disagree. Once i ripped one right after shooting a free throw during a game. Didn't change the outcome one bit.

Nothing but air!  Not a foul!  Foul odor, probably...  Definitely not fragrant.

[theFlyingHog]

And no one is saying anything about the fact that the player who fouled did not have to foul so hard. He could have gotten his intentional foul call with a simple slap on the arm. He overdid it a little and put it in the refs hands.


SH shot 38% and 62% from the line. There's your ballgame

[247Hog]

Nothing but air!  Not a foul!  Foul odor, probably...  Definitely not fragrant.

[BirmingHam]

Why don't they pick on all those smart players at Vanderbilt and leave us a loan

It all depends on the interest on the loan.

[panhandlepig]

There is no longer such a thing as an intentional foul.  The flagrant 1 and 2 replaced the intentional foul.

  This. As soon as I saw that shove from the back I screamed "flagrant foul".  My puppies agreed.

   Intent doesn't matter,. Figuring out how to stop play with a foul within the rules at the end of a game does.

  We would have won anyway. 
 

[Cinco de Hogo]

Disagree. Once i ripped one right after shooting a free throw during a game. Didn't change the outcome one bit.

However it could mean you lost your intestinal fortitude and that might have been relevant.  Don't know I wasn't there.

[Hollywood870]

When a team is up 1 with less than 30 seconds to play, the refs should blow the whistle, and signal that the game is over.

You guys see, this is a real hater. Not people like me who criticize our play during the season and just want to see the hogs win. Barford was pushed down in the square of the back. Obvious flagrant foul.