Controversial Foul in Iowa State–Houston Shows Why the NCAA’s Challenge System Needs Overhaul

admin-cdn3 hours ago

0 0 3 minutes read

Controversial Foul in Iowa State–Houston Shows Why the NCAA’s Challenge System Needs Overhaul

Among the most critical moments in No. 6 Iowa State’s rally from 10 down in the second half of its men’s basketball game to beat No. 2 Houston, 70–67, on Monday night came with 6:12 to go in the second half.

Iowa State had possession at the time, trailing by eight, when star point guard Tamin Lipsey tried to slot a pass between two Houston defenders to big man Dominykas Pleta. The pass was deflected by Houston’s Joseph Tugler (aided by his hawking 7′ 6″ wingspan) and stolen by Isiah Harwell, who would’ve been off to the races in transition. But referee Kipp Kissinger, among the nation’s most well-regarded officials, called a kicked ball on Tugler, negating the steal and giving the ball back to Iowa State. Tugler raced to Houston head coach Kelvin Sampson to plead with him to challenge the call, but there was nothing Sampson could do; the play isn’t among the types of calls currently allowed to be challenged.

Joseph Tugler was called for a kickball by the refs. Unreviewable play
Iowa State made a 3 on the following play. pic.twitter.com/BUusPvJj5I

— 𝐴 𝑈𝑛𝑖𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑜𝑓 𝐻𝑜𝑢𝑠𝑡𝑜𝑛 𝐹𝑎𝑛 (@NotWhoYouDream) February 17, 2026

On the ensuing Iowa State possession, Jamarion Batemon made a three. A lead that likely would’ve been 10 for Houston was five just seconds later. The missed call isn’t why Houston lost: The Cougars had six minutes to swing the momentum back and couldn’t, and there are a handful of plays Houston could’ve made down the stretch that would’ve won them the game that they failed to. Still, there’s no doubt it was a game-changing, maybe game-defining moment in one of the best games of the college hoops season to date, all for a call that could’ve been easily overturned on review in a few seconds.

College basketball’s move to a challenge system for this season has largely been a success. Some may quibble with certain aspects of it (I’ve personally found officials too hesitant to overturn misses on replay, and getting only one per game has sometimes meant teams get punished harshly for first-half misses), but it has largely worked as intended. Reviews aren’t that long, there are fewer late-game trips to the monitor, and teams can get obvious misses corrected outside of the last two minutes as was the case in the previous system. But Monday night’s game is a clear sign the NCAA should consider going a step further and open up an anything goes challenge system rather than the current narrow system.

At present, coaches in college can challenge only out-of-bounds calls, goaltending and whether a player was in the restricted arc on a block/charge foul call. They can also appeal for a review of a potential flagrant foul, though those don’t count as challenges. The pseudo-kicked ball ruling Monday night that helped swing the Big 12 title race? Tough luck.

What’s the point of a challenge system if you can’t fix obvious mistakes like that one? And what happens when something like this changes a game in the NCAA tournament?

Starting next season, I’d advocate for expanding the challenge system to allow for any whistled violation to be challenged. Fouls, travels, kicked balls, backcourt violations, 10-second calls all become reviewable. There might be a handful of minute ones that’d make sense to stay carved out, but for the most part, more options to challenge would be a win if the goal is to get the call right. It might even help the sport’s initial goal in adding the challenge (improve pace of play) but concentrating challenges even further to the end of games. Teams would still be limited to one challenge per game (with a second if you get the first correct), so making this change wouldn’t increase the parade to the monitor we already seem to get. And any 50-50 call would stay with the call on the floor; only obvious mistakes with indisputable evidence to overturn would be flipped.

Would this be perfect? Of course not. Imagine the suspense of a replay review of the controversial over-the-back foul on Cooper Flagg in last year’s Final Four game vs. Houston. Whichever side the referees had come down on there on replay would’ve been heavily criticized, though for my money, I’d have considered that one to be not quite enough to overturn.

But with the tools at our fingertips, it feels unnecessary to have so many games swung or even decided by calls that could’ve been fixed quickly and weren’t. Giving more challenge flexibility would leave fewer games marred with officiating controversy, even if it allows refs to insert themselves into the game more.

College basketball was too slow to adopt the challenge after it had worked successfully for years in the NBA. It needs to avoid being similarly slow in expanding its power before a much bigger call than the one Monday night gets missed avoidably.