[martyup]

Ducks and Utes are beating each other up. Sabally went to the locker room with an ankle issue.

[martyup]

Ducks and Utes are beating each other up. Sabally went to the locker room with an ankle issue.

[qwerty49]

Apologies if someone already mentioned this.  I just saw that this was TVD's 1000th win as Stanford coach.  Thank you, Tara, may you rock forever!

[qwerty49]

Apologies if someone already mentioned this.  I just saw that this was TVD's 1000th win as Stanford coach.  Thank you, Tara, may you rock forever!

[DC 86]

Hollingshed lost her composure for a few seconds which I understand and can forgive.  I can not understand the refs not calling more than a regular foul.

it was called more than a common foul. it was called an intentional, which is the women's NCAA bb term for a flagrant 1.

so was cam's.

the call was "offsetting intentional fouls."

Which is a bs call. Hollingshead was clearly the instigator. She should have been tossed. But she did light a spark under the team. Thank you, Ms. Hollingshead.

---

Payne is a pain, and that's how I'm spelling her name from now on. I m in the Hollinshed should have been ejected camp. Not only was she showing Cam in the face, and not gently, she also had a hand on Cam's throat in the midst of it, all from the slow-video I saw of the events. But yes, Cam should not have thrown the ball, even if it's understandable.

Agree with everything except the part about Cam. When you’re being mugged, self-defense is always warranted.

---

We win 71-46.  We ended up shooting 48.2/53.8/90.9.  CO has one of the toughest defenses in the Pac-12, so I'm not worried about our ability to score in the post season.

Brink ended up 1 rebound away from a double-double.

Tough defense is easy when your team is a bunch of thugs.

---

There goes Hollingshed.  I called it!

---

Brink is gone after that

No way.  Hollingshed was the aggressor.  Brink has the right to defend herself when being assaulted with a hand pushing her face.

---

I can't believe that Hollingshed didn't get a technical foul for that.  Total BS.  She kept pushing Cam's face long after the whistle blew.

I can't believe they both didn't get tossed. Cam shouldn't have thrown the ball at her. And besides grabbing her face and not letting go, she shoved Lexie a few times in there.

I agree with Tara's halftime take that the refs handled it well. Hollingshed could easily have been ejected. Cam had to get called for retaliation, but what she did there was much less. However, I was totally fine with calling the same thing on both and letting the teams play on.

Disagree vehemently. Hollingshed was the instigator.

In society at large there are laws about self defense, "stand your ground", etc.

But in athletic competition the retaliator is subject to being penalized as much as (or more than) the instigator.

[DC 86]

Hollingshed lost her composure for a few seconds which I understand and can forgive.  I can not understand the refs not calling more than a regular foul.

it was called more than a common foul. it was called an intentional, which is the women's NCAA bb term for a flagrant 1.

so was cam's.

the call was "offsetting intentional fouls."

Which is a bs call. Hollingshead was clearly the instigator. She should have been tossed. But she did light a spark under the team. Thank you, Ms. Hollingshead.

---

Payne is a pain, and that's how I'm spelling her name from now on. I m in the Hollinshed should have been ejected camp. Not only was she showing Cam in the face, and not gently, she also had a hand on Cam's throat in the midst of it, all from the slow-video I saw of the events. But yes, Cam should not have thrown the ball, even if it's understandable.

Agree with everything except the part about Cam. When you’re being mugged, self-defense is always warranted.

---

We win 71-46.  We ended up shooting 48.2/53.8/90.9.  CO has one of the toughest defenses in the Pac-12, so I'm not worried about our ability to score in the post season.

Brink ended up 1 rebound away from a double-double.

Tough defense is easy when your team is a bunch of thugs.

---

There goes Hollingshed.  I called it!

---

Brink is gone after that

No way.  Hollingshed was the aggressor.  Brink has the right to defend herself when being assaulted with a hand pushing her face.

---

I can't believe that Hollingshed didn't get a technical foul for that.  Total BS.  She kept pushing Cam's face long after the whistle blew.

I can't believe they both didn't get tossed. Cam shouldn't have thrown the ball at her. And besides grabbing her face and not letting go, she shoved Lexie a few times in there.

I agree with Tara's halftime take that the refs handled it well. Hollingshed could easily have been ejected. Cam had to get called for retaliation, but what she did there was much less. However, I was totally fine with calling the same thing on both and letting the teams play on.

Disagree vehemently. Hollingshed was the instigator.

In society at large there are laws about self defense, "stand your ground", etc.

But in athletic competition the retaliator is subject to being penalized as much as (or more than) the instigator.

[martyup]

Utes are up 10 on the Ducks after 3 quarters.  Sabally fiinally got called for sticking her butt out on a screen, picking up her 4th foul.

[martyup]

Utes are up 10 on the Ducks after 3 quarters.  Sabally fiinally got called for sticking her butt out on a screen, picking up her 4th foul.

[qwerty49]

Ducks and Utes are beating each other up.  Sabally went to the locker room with an ankle issue.

Wow Utes must have gotten bit by radioactive spiders at halftime -- they look so quick and strong out there.  They a 10-pt lead after 3.

[qwerty49]

Ducks and Utes are beating each other up.  Sabally went to the locker room with an ankle issue.

Wow Utes must have gotten bit by radioactive spiders at halftime -- they look so quick and strong out there.  They a 10-pt lead after 3.

[CompSci87]

I agree with Tara's halftime take that the refs handled it well. Hollingshed could easily have been ejected. Cam had to get called for retaliation, but what she did there was much less. However, I was totally fine with calling the same thing on both and letting the teams play on.

Disagree vehemently. Hollingshed was the instigator.

As I said, Hollingshed could have been ejected. She certainly was the instigator. But Cam was not justified under the rules in throwing the ball, so something had to be called on her too, though maybe only a T. But I was okay with the refs using their judgment to even up the calls, even if only for the sake of the fans getting to see a competitive tournament game continue.

[CompSci87]

I agree with Tara's halftime take that the refs handled it well. Hollingshed could easily have been ejected. Cam had to get called for retaliation, but what she did there was much less. However, I was totally fine with calling the same thing on both and letting the teams play on.

Disagree vehemently. Hollingshed was the instigator.

As I said, Hollingshed could have been ejected. She certainly was the instigator. But Cam was not justified under the rules in throwing the ball, so something had to be called on her too, though maybe only a T. But I was okay with the refs using their judgment to even up the calls, even if only for the sake of the fans getting to see a competitive tournament game continue.

[WBB fan]

Stanford team up in the stands, watching the game, still in their game clothes. Kate is behind Utah bench, scouting.

[WBB fan]

Stanford team up in the stands, watching the game, still in their game clothes. Kate is behind Utah bench, scouting.

[Spiny_Norman]

Postgame interview with Cam and Anna

[twitter]https://twitter.com/Pac12Network/status/1499970390721916931[/twitter]

[Spiny_Norman]

Postgame interview with Cam and Anna

[twitter]https://twitter.com/Pac12Network/status/1499970390721916931[/twitter]

[martyup]

Go home Ducks, you're tourney is done.

---

Okay it's Utah on Sunday in the Pac-12 finals.

[martyup]

Go home Ducks, you're tourney is done.

---

Okay it's Utah on Sunday in the Pac-12 finals.

[qwerty49]

So stupid for Graves to lose his cool and get T'd up on that foul by Sabally....Ducks had just stormed back to take a 1-pt lead with 3:40 left, the T meant the Utes got FIVE FTs and the ball.  Ball game.

[qwerty49]

So stupid for Graves to lose his cool and get T'd up on that foul by Sabally....Ducks had just stormed back to take a 1-pt lead with 3:40 left, the T meant the Utes got FIVE FTs and the ball.  Ball game.

[M T]

I can't believe they both didn't get tossed. Cam shouldn't have thrown the ball at her. And besides grabbing her face and not letting go, she shoved Lexie a few times in there.

Years ago, I saw Missy not call a foul when a certain aggressive Cal player threw the ball into someone's face intentionally right in front of Missy.  So I looked up the rule (then).  At least then, hitting another player with some other object (chair, for instance) or a fist (or an intentional elbow), is fighting and a disqualification.  But they did not include hitting a player with the ball in that rule.  [Personally, I think throwing the ball intentionally to hit another player (even to make it go out of bounds) should be a foul.)

The only thing to be said for Cam is that she didn't throw the ball into the opponent's face.  It was a bad reaction that she needs to learn to control.  She's got a weakness there that might be exploited.

As for Holingshead, she had her hand flat, not in a fist.  If she'd made a fist, she'd have been out of the game.  It was clearly a frustration foul.

If I recall correctly, in the 2nd half, Cam helped Holingshead up off the ground at one point.

Here's the current rule (with my emphasis).  The wording about chair has been removed.  I think we should be grateful to Missy for avoiding calling this a fight (See Art 10).

Section 15. Suspensions for Fighting
Art. 1. A fight is a disqualifying foul.
Art. 2. A fight is a confrontation involving one or more players, coaches or
other team personnel wherein (but not limited to) a fist, hand, arm, foot, knee, or leg is used to combatively strike the other individual.
Art. 3. When, during a confrontation, an individual attempts to strike another individual with any of the actions defined in Art. 2, whether there is contact is irrelevant. The perpetrator shall be deemed to have been involved in a fight.
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. 5. When a physical confrontation has occurred, the officials shall determine the individuals who were involved in the fight or left the bench area to participate.
Art. 6. When, during the course of play (live ball), an individual strikes an opponent with the hand, elbow, arm, foot, knee or leg in a nonconfrontational manner and the act is not only excessive, but also severe or extreme, it shall be ruled as a disqualifying foul and not a fighting action. When a defined body part is used to strike an opponent, but the contact is not severe or extreme, a judgment shall be made by the official as to whether the contact is an intentional foul.
Art. 7. Anytime an individual uses a closed fist in an unsporting manner, it shall be deemed that the individual has initiated a fighting act and shall be penalized accordingly.
...
Art. 10. The first time an individual participates in a fight during the season (including exhibition games), the individual shall be suspended from participating in the team’s next regular-season game (not an exhibition contest), including tournament competition.
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.

Another official could have ruled that Cam combatively struck Holingshead (but with the ball, not a body part).  If so, then both would have been disqualified for fighting AND the player of the winning team would be disqualified from the championship game.  The other player would be disqualified from their first tournament game (if any).

Yet another official could have ruled that Holingshead's action was indeed disqualifying.  Then I'm sure if Cam wasn't also disqualified, there would have been a protest.  Missy was part of the crew that Adia Barnes complained about, and I'm sure she didn't want a second question mark on her record.

The rule goes on to say that IF A FIGHT WAS RULED, the conference can make the penalties more severe.  However, it seems the conference doesn't get to declare it a fight if the refs didn't.

I, for one, am glad Missy was officiating.  I trust her to know the rules.

-----
On the negative side, it appeared to me what the refs did after this was to start calling phantom fouls, at least against Stanford.  The phantom fouls increase the number of fouls on players and therefore make them more hesitant to do more physical play.  I don't think the game was called tighter.  I just think more fouls were handed out (for non-fouls).

Did you notice the other female ref called a 5-second call in less than 3 seconds (per the clock on the screen)?  I think she realized it, as about 10 seconds later she called a travel I couldn't see on the other team.  (I believe this is the same ref I commented on her fast 5-second call in another game).

Later in the game, I noticed a CU player pull down an offensive rebound and stay in the lane for about 8 seconds (after she passed the ball off, and without any shots).

[M T]

I can't believe they both didn't get tossed. Cam shouldn't have thrown the ball at her. And besides grabbing her face and not letting go, she shoved Lexie a few times in there.

Years ago, I saw Missy not call a foul when a certain aggressive Cal player threw the ball into someone's face intentionally right in front of Missy.  So I looked up the rule (then).  At least then, hitting another player with some other object (chair, for instance) or a fist (or an intentional elbow), is fighting and a disqualification.  But they did not include hitting a player with the ball in that rule.  [Personally, I think throwing the ball intentionally to hit another player (even to make it go out of bounds) should be a foul.)

The only thing to be said for Cam is that she didn't throw the ball into the opponent's face.  It was a bad reaction that she needs to learn to control.  She's got a weakness there that might be exploited.

As for Holingshead, she had her hand flat, not in a fist.  If she'd made a fist, she'd have been out of the game.  It was clearly a frustration foul.

If I recall correctly, in the 2nd half, Cam helped Holingshead up off the ground at one point.

Here's the current rule (with my emphasis).  The wording about chair has been removed.  I think we should be grateful to Missy for avoiding calling this a fight (See Art 10).

Section 15. Suspensions for Fighting
Art. 1. A fight is a disqualifying foul.
Art. 2. A fight is a confrontation involving one or more players, coaches or
other team personnel wherein (but not limited to) a fist, hand, arm, foot, knee, or leg is used to combatively strike the other individual.
Art. 3. When, during a confrontation, an individual attempts to strike another individual with any of the actions defined in Art. 2, whether there is contact is irrelevant. The perpetrator shall be deemed to have been involved in a fight.
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. 5. When a physical confrontation has occurred, the officials shall determine the individuals who were involved in the fight or left the bench area to participate.
Art. 6. When, during the course of play (live ball), an individual strikes an opponent with the hand, elbow, arm, foot, knee or leg in a nonconfrontational manner and the act is not only excessive, but also severe or extreme, it shall be ruled as a disqualifying foul and not a fighting action. When a defined body part is used to strike an opponent, but the contact is not severe or extreme, a judgment shall be made by the official as to whether the contact is an intentional foul.
Art. 7. Anytime an individual uses a closed fist in an unsporting manner, it shall be deemed that the individual has initiated a fighting act and shall be penalized accordingly.
...
Art. 10. The first time an individual participates in a fight during the season (including exhibition games), the individual shall be suspended from participating in the team’s next regular-season game (not an exhibition contest), including tournament competition.
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.

Another official could have ruled that Cam combatively struck Holingshead (but with the ball, not a body part).  If so, then both would have been disqualified for fighting AND the player of the winning team would be disqualified from the championship game.  The other player would be disqualified from their first tournament game (if any).

Yet another official could have ruled that Holingshead's action was indeed disqualifying.  Then I'm sure if Cam wasn't also disqualified, there would have been a protest.  Missy was part of the crew that Adia Barnes complained about, and I'm sure she didn't want a second question mark on her record.

The rule goes on to say that IF A FIGHT WAS RULED, the conference can make the penalties more severe.  However, it seems the conference doesn't get to declare it a fight if the refs didn't.

I, for one, am glad Missy was officiating.  I trust her to know the rules.

-----
On the negative side, it appeared to me what the refs did after this was to start calling phantom fouls, at least against Stanford.  The phantom fouls increase the number of fouls on players and therefore make them more hesitant to do more physical play.  I don't think the game was called tighter.  I just think more fouls were handed out (for non-fouls).

Did you notice the other female ref called a 5-second call in less than 3 seconds (per the clock on the screen)?  I think she realized it, as about 10 seconds later she called a travel I couldn't see on the other team.  (I believe this is the same ref I commented on her fast 5-second call in another game).

Later in the game, I noticed a CU player pull down an offensive rebound and stay in the lane for about 8 seconds (after she passed the ball off, and without any shots).

[81alum]

more hesitant to do more physical play.  I don't think the game was called tighter.  I just think more fouls were handed out (for non-fouls).
Did you notice the other female ref called a 5-second call in less than 3 seconds (per the clock on the screen)?  I think she realized it, as about 10 seconds later she called a travel I couldn't see on the other team.  (I believe this is the same ref I commented on her fast 5-second call in another game).

I did notice this at the time.  I figured it was a make-up call.

As for whether the Brink/Hollingshed moment was "fighting" or not, it could have been called as such according to the rules you cite, since there is that phrase "but is not limited too."  Can you imagine a player hauling off and slapping someone in the face and it not being called fighting?

Ejecting Brink and Hollingshed from the next game would have had very very high consequences, so perhaps that is why Tara said she though the refs handled the situation well.

I do think what Hollingshed did was significantly worse.  It was one thing for her to shove Brink in the face, but as you watch the replay you can see her do it twice.  The hand stayed connected but there were two deliberate shoves.

[81alum]

more hesitant to do more physical play.  I don't think the game was called tighter.  I just think more fouls were handed out (for non-fouls).
Did you notice the other female ref called a 5-second call in less than 3 seconds (per the clock on the screen)?  I think she realized it, as about 10 seconds later she called a travel I couldn't see on the other team.  (I believe this is the same ref I commented on her fast 5-second call in another game).

I did notice this at the time.  I figured it was a make-up call.

As for whether the Brink/Hollingshed moment was "fighting" or not, it could have been called as such according to the rules you cite, since there is that phrase "but is not limited too."  Can you imagine a player hauling off and slapping someone in the face and it not being called fighting?

Ejecting Brink and Hollingshed from the next game would have had very very high consequences, so perhaps that is why Tara said she though the refs handled the situation well.

I do think what Hollingshed did was significantly worse.  It was one thing for her to shove Brink in the face, but as you watch the replay you can see her do it twice.  The hand stayed connected but there were two deliberate shoves.

[81alum]

Preview: Stanford vs Utah for Pac 12 Tournament Championship 3:00 Sunday

Utah unexpectedly knocked off Oregon for the right to face us in the championship.  Their three point shooting was 9/31, not the precision that they are famous for, but it was good enough.  The real margin was that Utah was 23/28 on free throws, Oregon 11/16, spotting Utah 12 points.  Utah is the best free throw shooting team in the league.

Utah was without their star forward Peyton McFarland--I did not hear if it was a season-ending injury or not--and they also received some dings in the Oregon game--whether this knocks out another player or not I don't know.  But they are bruised and at less than full strength.  None of that stopped them from beating Oregon.

We have played Utah twice before.  Last time we beat them handily:

https://thecardboard.org/board/showthrea...light=Utah

The first time in Utah they led us for much of the game:

https://thecardboard.org/board/showthrea...hlight=wbb

Utah's offense is a penetrate-and-dish offense.  They drive on the basket and then frequently pass it back out to an open three point shooter.  The majority of their points do not actually come from three point shots, but they get a lot of fouls while driving and they get a sprinkling of layups too.   This has led to the highest-scoring offense in the league.

Utah has 8 players hitting more than 30% from three, but Kennedy McQueen at 43%, Brynna Maxwell at 39%, and freshman sensation Gianna  Kneepkins at 38% have each shot them in volume--each making more than 50.  By comparison, only Hannah Jump on our team has more than 50, although Lexie is getting close.

With the loss of McFarland, Utah may be more vulnerable in the paint.  When we played them at home we had 6 players score in double digits with 52 points in the paint.  I imagine that they will try some entirely different defense to avoid being outscored 91-64 again.  Notice that even though we won that game comfortably, they still scored 64, so there is a limit to how much they can be contained.

The first time we played Utah we had only 28 points in the paint.  Brink and Lexie had great games in the 20s, but Utah led with 6:25 in the game before Wilson, Jones, and Brink heated up.

This game reminds me of the Washington game.  Utah has nothing to lose and everything to gain, plus a certain degree of confidence.  We ought to win, but that does not mean we necessarily will.

[81alum]

Preview: Stanford vs Utah for Pac 12 Tournament Championship 3:00 Sunday

Utah unexpectedly knocked off Oregon for the right to face us in the championship.  Their three point shooting was 9/31, not the precision that they are famous for, but it was good enough.  The real margin was that Utah was 23/28 on free throws, Oregon 11/16, spotting Utah 12 points.  Utah is the best free throw shooting team in the league.

Utah was without their star forward Peyton McFarland--I did not hear if it was a season-ending injury or not--and they also received some dings in the Oregon game--whether this knocks out another player or not I don't know.  But they are bruised and at less than full strength.  None of that stopped them from beating Oregon.

We have played Utah twice before.  Last time we beat them handily:

https://thecardboard.org/board/showthrea...light=Utah

The first time in Utah they led us for much of the game:

https://thecardboard.org/board/showthrea...hlight=wbb

Utah's offense is a penetrate-and-dish offense.  They drive on the basket and then frequently pass it back out to an open three point shooter.  The majority of their points do not actually come from three point shots, but they get a lot of fouls while driving and they get a sprinkling of layups too.   This has led to the highest-scoring offense in the league.

Utah has 8 players hitting more than 30% from three, but Kennedy McQueen at 43%, Brynna Maxwell at 39%, and freshman sensation Gianna  Kneepkins at 38% have each shot them in volume--each making more than 50.  By comparison, only Hannah Jump on our team has more than 50, although Lexie is getting close.

With the loss of McFarland, Utah may be more vulnerable in the paint.  When we played them at home we had 6 players score in double digits with 52 points in the paint.  I imagine that they will try some entirely different defense to avoid being outscored 91-64 again.  Notice that even though we won that game comfortably, they still scored 64, so there is a limit to how much they can be contained.

The first time we played Utah we had only 28 points in the paint.  Brink and Lexie had great games in the 20s, but Utah led with 6:25 in the game before Wilson, Jones, and Brink heated up.

This game reminds me of the Washington game.  Utah has nothing to lose and everything to gain, plus a certain degree of confidence.  We ought to win, but that does not mean we necessarily will.

[Phogge]

Watched Utah a bit. Love Kneepkins game. Aggressive.

[Phogge]

Watched Utah a bit. Love Kneepkins game. Aggressive.

[Grad Fan]

Stanford post game press conference after Colorado: https://youtu.be/wfDWHX3MUeU

[Grad Fan]

Stanford post game press conference after Colorado: https://youtu.be/wfDWHX3MUeU

[81alum]

Here is the full version, but the clip above is the most touching part.  Watch the full clip if you want to hear Tara and Brink talk about the possibility of ejection following the altercation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VO_ZJC22wr4

[81alum]

Here is the full version, but the clip above is the most touching part.  Watch the full clip if you want to hear Tara and Brink talk about the possibility of ejection following the altercation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VO_ZJC22wr4

[BobK]

What really amazed me watching the Utah Oregon game in person was how really quick Utah is. Offense abd Defense both
MCFarland is out but Rees did a great job in the post
Hate this day off lol need more basketball

[BobK]

What really amazed me watching the Utah Oregon game in person was how really quick Utah is. Offense abd Defense both
MCFarland is out but Rees did a great job in the post
Hate this day off lol need more basketball

[81alum]

What really amazed me watching the Utah Oregon game in person was how really quick Utah is.  Offense abd Defense both
MCFarland is out but Rees did a great job in the post
Hate this day off lol need more basketball

Bob, do you think Tara will need to go small to keep up with the quickness of Utah?

[81alum]

What really amazed me watching the Utah Oregon game in person was how really quick Utah is.  Offense abd Defense both
MCFarland is out but Rees did a great job in the post
Hate this day off lol need more basketball

Bob, do you think Tara will need to go small to keep up with the quickness of Utah?

[jonnyss]

I don't think Cam violated rule 10-15.2, which defines fighting as striking with a "fist, hand, arm, foot, knee, or leg."  However, she surely could have been called for T foul for throwing the ball in retaliation.  OTOH, Hollingshed clearly violated the rule.

yes, i was hopeful about that language until i noticed the "but not limited to" before "fist, hand...to combatively strike..."

the rules leave room for missy et. al. to determine what was fighting as hollingshed didn't "strike" and cam struck with a "but-not-limited-to."

i am surprised that the rules don't appear to mention specifically how to penalize throwing the ball at an opponent as you'd think it's pretty common.

edit: thanks for posting the interview. around 9'30" cam and tara are asked if they were worried about ejection. cam offers a clipped, "no," and tara says, "i've never had anyone ejected, so i wasn't thinking it would happen." earlier tara says "no one likes a hand in their face" and i don't like non-basketball action.

[jonnyss]

I don't think Cam violated rule 10-15.2, which defines fighting as striking with a "fist, hand, arm, foot, knee, or leg."  However, she surely could have been called for T foul for throwing the ball in retaliation.  OTOH, Hollingshed clearly violated the rule.

yes, i was hopeful about that language until i noticed the "but not limited to" before "fist, hand...to combatively strike..."

the rules leave room for missy et. al. to determine what was fighting as hollingshed didn't "strike" and cam struck with a "but-not-limited-to."

i am surprised that the rules don't appear to mention specifically how to penalize throwing the ball at an opponent as you'd think it's pretty common.

edit: thanks for posting the interview. around 9'30" cam and tara are asked if they were worried about ejection. cam offers a clipped, "no," and tara says, "i've never had anyone ejected, so i wasn't thinking it would happen." earlier tara says "no one likes a hand in their face" and i don't like non-basketball action.

[BobK]

Stanford go small? No Utah shot just under 50% from 2 and outreboubded Iregon by 1
Just play our game. Go inside over and over
But please not too many fouls Utah has shooters

[BobK]

Stanford go small? No Utah shot just under 50% from 2 and outreboubded Iregon by 1
Just play our game. Go inside over and over
But please not too many fouls Utah has shooters