Kim being Kim.....

[tooney]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nc...ts-on-official-gets-technical-foul/ar-AAUDAym

Kim loses her cool.....get T'd up!!!:ez-laugh:

 

[betterstill]

:ez-roll:

 

[MsProudSooner]

That's nothing compared to her behavior in OKC at the Regional finals.

 

[swok34]

She really needed to have been ejected. Maddie steps one foot over the line vs TCU and gets ejected? And the refs allowed that behavior from Kim?

 

[SoonerSpock]

She really needed to have been ejected. Maddie steps one foot over the line vs TCU and gets ejected? And the refs allowed that behavior from Kim?

True! Kim carried it too far. But Madi broke a very defined specific rule and her ejection wass absolute by that rule. Kim is allowed by the rules to argue/question a call by the ref and in the course of the game. Hence her ejection is the subjective decision of the ref not absolute by rule.

 

[giraffespots]

thats not entirely accurate. I believe Kim actually touched the ref. That is an absolute ejectable infraction. It was in the heat of emotion for her and that constitutes violating the intent of the rule about touching the refs as well as the language of the rule which should have required her ejection.

I do believe Kim was right about the refs not calling that blatant and obvious foul. And she was right in protesting. However, there was absolutely no reason for her to react as ridiculously as she did because it would have had zero impact on the game. LSU had already lost. And by reaching out and actually touching the ref, there should have been no question as to her ejection.

Madi, on the other hand, violated the language of the rule, but not the intent. The refs were fully within their authority to eject her but I don't know if they were required to eject her.

Either way, the refs did what they did, different ref crews and different leagues. So, who knows. It doesn't really seem fair to Madi though.

 

[SoonerinNC]

I am not a Kim fan, but she had to go nuts. Her 3 point shooter not only was fouled but the defender fell on top of her, nothing called. No conseqence, game was well out of hand and a chance to show her players that she was there for them.

 

[SoonerinNC]

Depending on the situation, intentionally getting a T is not a bad strategy. Very often the next call goes your way and maybe several others.

Same thing sometimes when an obvious call is missed the next call is an even up call.

 

[SoonerSpock]

thats not entirely accurate. I believe Kim actually touched the ref. That is an absolute ejectable infraction. It was in the heat of emotion for her and that constitutes violating the intent of the rule about touching the refs as well as the language of the rule which should have required her ejection.

I do believe Kim was right about the refs not calling that blatant and obvious foul. And she was right in protesting. However, there was absolutely no reason for her to react as ridiculously as she did because it would have had zero impact on the game. LSU had already lost. And by reaching out and actually touching the ref, there should have been no question as to her ejection.

Madi, on the other hand, violated the language of the rule, but not the intent. The refs were fully within their authority to eject her but I don't know if they were required to eject her.

Either way, the refs did what they did, different ref crews and different leagues. So, who knows. It doesn't really seem fair to Madi though.

On one view I saw behind the ref it appeared Kim might have touched the ref. However, the side view I saw clearly showed she did not touch the ref. I cannot speak to the language as I heard nothing. To me it clearly was a subjective ejection not a mandatory ejection. To each his own.