There is a lot to learn — for officials, coaches, fans, and players — from the play which fouled out JuJu Watkins.
The USC Trojans lost to the Colorado Buffaloes on Sunday for several reasons, not just one. However, their chances obviously took a hit when superstar JuJu Watkins fouled out with 5:50 left in the game. USC had to play nearly the last six minutes without its best player in a tight game, on the road, against a top-10 opponent. That’s a tough task. The Trojans almost pulled it off, but not quite. If they had JuJu, they wouldn’t have been guaranteed to win, but their odds would have been better for sure.
The play on which JuJu Watkins fouled out is the kind of play which could be discussed in a classroom setting for half an hour. There are so many details and lessons to take away from the play. Fans will have their own opinions on the play. USC fans probably think it was a bad call. Colorado fans probably thought it was a great play by CU’s Jaylyn Sherrod to draw the foul.
It’s a lot more complicated than that.
Let’s look at the play first so we can then discuss it:
What do you see here? You see Watkins knocking over Sherrod. Charge, right? That’s what the ref called. However, in order for a charge (a player control foul, to use technical jargon) to exist, the defender must allow the receiver of a pass to come down on both feet and possession of the ball. The defender cannot undercut or crowd the receiver of the pass. If you look at the replay (the second look) of the sequence, Sherrod didn’t do that. So, it was a bad call and it wasn’t necessarily a sound basketball play by Sherrod. Yet, it’s not that simple.
I have officiated basketball, albeit at the high school level and not college. I have seen this play before. In many cases, the player who catches a pass in the middle of the floor and then immediately turns and sees a defender travels with the ball. JuJu Watkins didn’t do that here, but any college-level referee has officiated so many basketball games that s/he has seen this play before. While the call was not correct, officials have such a large memory bank in terms of sequences that they often have an instinct to make a certain kind of call on a certain kind of play. Usually, this kind of play leads to a turnover, so the instinct on the part of the official here might have been to call the charge. I’m not defending the call. I am pointing out that human nature is part of officiating, and it does affect calls.
The next point to make here: McKenzie Forbes never should have thrown this pass to JuJu. She led JuJu into Sherrod, the defender. If she hands the ball off, there’s no risk of an offensive foul on a bad call. Lindsay Gottlieb will surely tell Forbes not to make this pass. Forbes probably already knows she won’t make this pass again.
The final point: It was not a good basketball play by Sherrod of Colorado, in that she didn’t let JuJu land with possession. The play should have been called a foul on Sherrod, not JuJu. However, Sherrod knew there was a real chance JuJu could foul out on the play. Sherrod took a risk which frankly had a very high risk-reward calculus. Stealing a foul on JuJu and getting her out of the game was worth the risk of committing a foul herself. The official never should have rewarded this play, but Sherrod did her game theory and took a risk which was handsomely rewarded. There’s a lot to learn on many levels.
Visit our friends at Fighting Irish Wire, Buffaloes Wire, and Ducks Wire.
