Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2006 16:48:33 GMT -5
Call could be an illegal attack if she's playing the ball on Purdue's side of the plane, whether she's front row or back row.
|
|
|
Post by The Bofa on the Sofa on Oct 2, 2006 16:52:16 GMT -5
Call could be an illegal attack if she's playing the ball on Purdue's side of the plane, whether she's front row or back row. Not close. She caught the ball behind her ear and threw it over. I'm not saying it was a clean hit, in principle, but given what players get away with (see: middles), it was not aggregious. By that time, though, Joan had lost control of the match and all I could do was laugh in disgust.
|
|
|
Post by edburby on Oct 2, 2006 17:51:44 GMT -5
Tough weekend ahead if Rachel is not up to par... hopefully it's a quick heal this week!
|
|
|
Post by stberry50 on Oct 2, 2006 18:36:20 GMT -5
You folks complaining about the refs didn't have to deal with Joan Powell. ESPN edited out most of the bad calls, which were in game 3 and then at the beginning of game 4. You did see the one where Main reached over the net and caught the ball and threw it back, but didn't get called for the carry. OTOH, you did see the second of the two carry calls that Powell DID make against her (Beth Mullins called it a back row attack, but it wasn't - it was a lift - at least I think; if Powell did call it a back row attack, she was wrong because Main was in the middle front rotation at the time) Did anyone else notice that the ESPN commentary started off poorly? At the very beginning of the match, one of them said "They are running a 5-1 offense." I think she assumed it was a 5-1 because only 1 setter was on the court at that particular moment. I figured the commentary would be bad all along given that they didn't understand the difference between a 5-1 and 6-2 offense. But hey - at least it was a match on tv. Got to start somewhere.
|
|