COACHING STRATEGY DECISION: FOUL OR DO NOT FOUL?

by Mac G, Mac G's World

Last weekend produced some great finishes in college hoops and you can definitely tell the calendar has turned to March and thus bring on the madness!

One scenario kept popping up in almost every college game that I viewed and it also occurred in one pro game.

When one team is up 3 points in the final seconds and their opponents have the ball, do you allow the team to attempt a 3? Or do you foul them and put them on the line for 2 shots?

If you choose to foul, the opponents would have to make the first foul shot, miss the second on purpose and hope to make an offensive rebound put back to tie the game.

If the team down 3 misses either the front end of the one and one or both FTs, they would have get the rebound and make a 3 to tie.

It seems the free throw scenarios would be more improbable than a team just making a 3 pointer.

As you will see from the game videos, coaches took different positions on the "foul or don't foul" decision with a variety of success.

Georgetown/Marquette

Marquette fouls but on the shot, giving Georgetown three free throws! Georgetown's Jonathan Wallace nailed all 3 free throws and the Hoyas prevailed in OT. Marquette should have fouled Wallace when he crossed half court on a reach in.

Texas/Texas Tech


Texas Tech wisely fouls but can not secure a defensive rebound on the front end of the one and one, giving Texas an open look for three. T Tech ends up pulling the major upset. A step back 3 off a rebound is a harder shot than one coming up the court.

Kentucky/Tennessee


Tennessee does not foul and Kentucky misses 2 game tying threes. This was a strange decision because in Tennessee's thrilling upset over Memphis, the Vols chose to foul Derrick Rose in the same situation. Rose made the first FT and missed the second. Chris Loftin grabbed the rebound and iced the game with 2 FTS. This was a perfect execution of the foul strategy.

UCLA/Arizona


This ending was very unconventional and bizarrely ended up agreeing with Billy Packer. UCLA does not foul then the Zona PG mistakenly passes up on a 3 and drives to the hole with 8 seconds left.

UCLA should have let him make a layup but instead commits a foul. These were moronic decisions by both teams. Zona catches a break by the having the rebound go off UCLA. However, Zona passes up a wide open 10 footer off the inbounds and then misses an off balance 3 when it only needed a 2.

Mavericks/Lakers


Announcers Jeff Van Gundy and Mark Jackson both correctly state that the Lakers should have fouled Jason Kidd when he caught the in bounds pass. Fouling is apparently against the Zen Master's coaching philosophy and Dirk burned him by drilling a 3 to send the game in to OT. The Lakers eventually triumphed but the no foul decision could have ended the game in regulation.

I feel a common coaching rule could be when a team is up 3, especially in college, and the clock is under 8-10 seconds to deliberately foul the opponent and take your chances with the rebound.

I am not smart enough to figure out the mathematical success rate odds of fouling compared to not fouling. Personally, I would foul as pulling off the miss FT on purpose/rebound/put back combination is more difficult than most people realize.

What would you do? Foul or Do Not Foul?