[M T]

I'd rather she be DQed for the rest of the year.  DQ Angel Reese too, while they are at it, for repeatedly pulling Cardoso's hair.  

No one is getting DQed for pulling hair as I've seen in a replay, but I hope the refs are aware now that she’s doing that. It should be called as an ordinary contact foul.

In all the talk about the fight, I missed hearing that Reese had been called for an intentional foul (elbow, reportedly) in Q2. (Remember, 2 intentional fouls, or an intentional and a technical, disqualifies the player for the game.) At the time of the fight, Reese was limping down the sideline while in the game. She did not participate in the confrontation in any way.

The 2nd DQ for fighting in a season will DQ the player for the season.

If I had been an official, I might have gone easier on the bench players. Except for one, I don't think any went outside the "bench area" (28' line) toward the fight. They generally did step onto the court, which is outside the bench area during play (but is allowed for spontaneous reaction) and inside the bench area during a timeout. It was unclear to me when the officials called a time out.

Yes, Mulkey is seen angrily going toward the fight, not attempting to stop the confrontation. Mulkey's post-game comments were in poor taste, and contribute to a confrontational atmosphere. There was a LSU player that I might have called for fighting because of a confrontational act. So. Car. #2 did 3 acts that could have (perhaps should have) earned her a fighting penalty. Staley herself didn't do anything to get her players out of there, but one of her assistants did a good job to get in there to stop it.

One of the officials, Angelica Suffren, is the first to confront the player who knocked the opponent down, but then when the confrontation escalates, she bails and is seen walking away while the players are still confronting each other. She should be censured for not helping to keep the players separate.

An intentional foul was called for the initial grab during play, resulting in 2 foul shots by So.Carolina. Then the disqualifying foul was called on So. Carolina, resulting in 2 foul shots by LSU. Then both teams were given a technical foul, so neither got a foul shot.


These are the rules to be aware of:

Rule 10-15 Art. 4. When, during a confrontation, an individual uses unsporting acts or
comments that, in the opinion of the official, provoke the other individual to
retaliate by fighting, it shall be ruled that both individuals have been involved
in the fight.

Art. 11. When an individual participates in a second fight during the same
season, that individual shall be suspended for the remainder of the season,
including tournament competition.
Art. 13. When an individual with eligibility for the next season participates in
a fight during their final game of the season and that fight is the individual’s
second fight of the season, that individual shall be suspended for the first three
regular-season games (not exhibitions) of the next season.

Art. 16. After a game, conference offices or the assigning authority may correct
an error about who was involved in a fight, but cannot change an official’s ruling
that a fight took place or lessen the severity of the penalty. The conference office
or assigning authority may make those penalties more severe.

10-11.2 h. Team followers (fans, bands, cheerleaders and mascots associated with
either team) shall not commit misconduct, including, but not limited to,
the following:
4. Delaying the game by preventing the ball from being promptly made
live or by preventing continuous play, such as, but not limited to,
followers entering the playing court before the player activity has been
terminated. When the delay does not interfere with play, it shall be
ignored.

Note 1: Before penalizing a follower(s) of a team for violating Rule
10-12.2.h, the officials shall have knowledge as to which team’s follower(s)
committed the act.
Note 2: When the misconduct of the follower(s) for violating Rule 10-12.2.h
is extreme or excessive, such behavior may be penalized by the official
requesting home/contest management to eject from the premises the team
follower(s) involved in the misbehavior. In such a case, a technical foul shall
not be assessed.

I only know of one fan who went onto the court, Since he was arrested and removed, there was no technical foul for the act. Two others (one sitting with the man who was arrested) made it to the scorer's table which probably wouldn't rise to the level of a technical. Security stopped those two quickly. (Note that the officials don't need to have knowledge of the follower(s) who delay the game. If 100 items are thrown onto the court but no one is identified as someone who threw something, the officials can still assess a technical.)

[M T]

I'd rather she be DQed for the rest of the year.  DQ Angel Reese too, while they are at it, for repeatedly pulling Cardoso's hair.  

No one is getting DQed for pulling hair as I've seen in a replay, but I hope the refs are aware now that she’s doing that. It should be called as an ordinary contact foul.

In all the talk about the fight, I missed hearing that Reese had been called for an intentional foul (elbow, reportedly) in Q2. (Remember, 2 intentional fouls, or an intentional and a technical, disqualifies the player for the game.) At the time of the fight, Reese was limping down the sideline while in the game. She did not participate in the confrontation in any way.

The 2nd DQ for fighting in a season will DQ the player for the season.

If I had been an official, I might have gone easier on the bench players. Except for one, I don't think any went outside the "bench area" (28' line) toward the fight. They generally did step onto the court, which is outside the bench area during play (but is allowed for spontaneous reaction) and inside the bench area during a timeout. It was unclear to me when the officials called a time out.

Yes, Mulkey is seen angrily going toward the fight, not attempting to stop the confrontation. Mulkey's post-game comments were in poor taste, and contribute to a confrontational atmosphere. There was a LSU player that I might have called for fighting because of a confrontational act. So. Car. #2 did 3 acts that could have (perhaps should have) earned her a fighting penalty. Staley herself didn't do anything to get her players out of there, but one of her assistants did a good job to get in there to stop it.

One of the officials, Angelica Suffren, is the first to confront the player who knocked the opponent down, but then when the confrontation escalates, she bails and is seen walking away while the players are still confronting each other. She should be censured for not helping to keep the players separate.

An intentional foul was called for the initial grab during play, resulting in 2 foul shots by So.Carolina. Then the disqualifying foul was called on So. Carolina, resulting in 2 foul shots by LSU. Then both teams were given a technical foul, so neither got a foul shot.


These are the rules to be aware of:

Rule 10-15 Art. 4. When, during a confrontation, an individual uses unsporting acts or
comments that, in the opinion of the official, provoke the other individual to
retaliate by fighting, it shall be ruled that both individuals have been involved
in the fight.

Art. 11. When an individual participates in a second fight during the same
season, that individual shall be suspended for the remainder of the season,
including tournament competition.
Art. 13. When an individual with eligibility for the next season participates in
a fight during their final game of the season and that fight is the individual’s
second fight of the season, that individual shall be suspended for the first three
regular-season games (not exhibitions) of the next season.

Art. 16. After a game, conference offices or the assigning authority may correct
an error about who was involved in a fight, but cannot change an official’s ruling
that a fight took place or lessen the severity of the penalty. The conference office
or assigning authority may make those penalties more severe.

10-11.2 h. Team followers (fans, bands, cheerleaders and mascots associated with
either team) shall not commit misconduct, including, but not limited to,
the following:
4. Delaying the game by preventing the ball from being promptly made
live or by preventing continuous play, such as, but not limited to,
followers entering the playing court before the player activity has been
terminated. When the delay does not interfere with play, it shall be
ignored.

Note 1: Before penalizing a follower(s) of a team for violating Rule
10-12.2.h, the officials shall have knowledge as to which team’s follower(s)
committed the act.
Note 2: When the misconduct of the follower(s) for violating Rule 10-12.2.h
is extreme or excessive, such behavior may be penalized by the official
requesting home/contest management to eject from the premises the team
follower(s) involved in the misbehavior. In such a case, a technical foul shall
not be assessed.

I only know of one fan who went onto the court, Since he was arrested and removed, there was no technical foul for the act. Two others (one sitting with the man who was arrested) made it to the scorer's table which probably wouldn't rise to the level of a technical. Security stopped those two quickly. (Note that the officials don't need to have knowledge of the follower(s) who delay the game. If 100 items are thrown onto the court but no one is identified as someone who threw something, the officials can still assess a technical.)