Ian Mooney?

Does anybody know why we didn''t sub in Atchley for Mooney at the end of the game yesterday? After the Kansas player stepped over the line and turned it over, we didn't put Atchley back in even though Mooney was just in there to foul. The announcers couldn't figure out why but it sure would have been nice to have him in there to at least rebound. I thought maybe we had a super secret game changing play for our secret weapon - Ian Mooney.
 
Because the KU player's foot was inbounds, no time expired and substitutions were not permitted. Until I read that explanation, I couln't understand why Mooney was still in the game.
 
I was puzzled, to say the least, about this too. The announcers obviously weren't aware of the rule since they were questioning why Barnes left him in. Glad to see an explanation.

But on a related note, why is Mooney our designated fouler? He's not exactly our quickest defender. It seems like Lewis or Smith might be a better choice.
 
Mooney does a better job of listening to the coach: He does what he is told. Plus, Mooney is more of a replacement for CA in defensive sets.
 
I was saying, "Oh no...Barnes is pulling a Chaney! SEND IN THE GOON AND BREAK THEIR ARMS OFF!!!"

Then my friends looked at me crazy and I went back to my pico de gallo and beer.
 
I think Barnes should Mooney more often. He is so pale-white that I think it would take a couple series for the opposing players' eyes to adjust, which could be good for a couple scores.
 
Back
Top