If you caught TBS’ postgame show right after Houston’s thrilling Sweet 16 victory over Purdue, you likely witnessed Milos Uzan’s game-winning basket and heard analysis from Adam Lefkoe, Seth Davis, Candace Parker, and Jay Wright about the play. However, what went unnoticed was the critical moment that preceded it.
Let’s recap the events leading up to the basket. Just before making the winning shot, Uzan missed a potential game-winner after running down the shot clock. He attempted a turnaround jumper to his right, which failed to find the basket. Fortunately for Houston, Purdue’s Camden Heide couldn’t secure the rebound, pushing the ball out of bounds and allowing the Cougars to retain possession. Although Uzan had a less-than-ideal offensive possession before his shot, he was given a clean look at the basket. Upon reviewing the replay, Steve Lappas, the TBS color commentator, noted that Uzan appeared to push off Purdue’s Braden Smith, an act that went unpunished.
“HE GOT AWAY WITH ONE THERE!” – Steve Lappas on the Milos Uzan push-off that was not called an offensive foul.
Houston would score the game-winning bucket on the ensuing play. 🏀🎙️ #MarchMadness https://t.co/NbEPFU1DFe pic.twitter.com/k8jN0hw843
— Awful Announcing (@awfulannouncing) March 29, 2025
If that push-off had been called, Houston wouldn’t have been able to set up for the eventual game-winning shot.
HOUSTON FOR THE WIN! #MarchMadness pic.twitter.com/6vQC9KBN52
— Awful Announcing (@awfulannouncing) March 29, 2025
Although the game ended late, TBS aired a full postgame show. Given Lappas’ comments and the significance of the no-call at such a crucial moment, one would expect it to be covered. Yet, when the show concluded, it had not been addressed.
And the postgame show signs off, without one word on the no-call. https://t.co/F7OhjrNmU0 pic.twitter.com/03lGx2luGk
— Awful Announcing (@awfulannouncing) March 29, 2025
How could this happen? This wasn’t a close call in the first half or even one occurring with five minutes remaining. If Lappas’ assessment was correct, that no-call fundamentally altered the game’s outcome.
There are multiple approaches the show could have taken regarding this issue. For simplicity, let’s consider two options.
Option 1: A Debate
One panelist could have argued that it was a clear no-call, while another defended the officiating. Similar discussions arose regarding the game-winning basket, with Parker and Wright analyzing whether it was due to Houston’s offense or Purdue’s defense. It would have been feasible to include a brief segment discussing the preceding play.
Option 2: Just the Facts
While reviewing the highlights, simply show the play and state, “Many, including our own Steve Lappas, believed this may have been a push-off,” before continuing with the recap. Presenting the play, noting the controversy, and letting viewers form their own opinions would have sufficed.
Ideally, having someone like Parker or Wright comment on the no-call would be beneficial. However, if that wasn’t possible, at least covering this significant moment would be critical.
That’s all we seek. This isn’t about whether Uzan pushed off or Smith flopped; that’s another debate entirely. We simply believe it merited discussion during the game analysis.
Ultimately, if the postgame show isn’t going to acknowledge such a pivotal play at the game’s conclusion, what purpose does it serve?
