PDA

View Full Version : Well Isn't This Delicious



gw67
06-09-2010, 08:17 AM
While I don't post much anymore, I always enjoy reading the front page articles/links and several of the threads. This morning, I read the the article concerning the hurrah that Northwestern raised about the apparently "biased" officiating in the women's lacrosse championship game with Maryland. DBR could hardly contain their glee because the official who made a call against the Wildcats late in the game is in a relationship with the trainer of the Terps and, obviously, this favored Maryland (So there, to you Maryland fans who complain about favortism toward Duke). So far so good and it sounds like Northwestern may have a gripe and DBR may have a point. However, a reading of the link indicates that it is a more complicated situation than presented by DBR. The official in question refereed Northwestern's semi-final game (won by the Wildcats) but did NOT referee the final with Maryland. Apparently, the NCAA committee was aware of the situation and concluded that she would not do any of the Maryland games. Since it was considered, I don't have much sympathy for Northwestern. Like Maryland in 2001, their "concerns" come accross as sour grapes to me.

gw67

DrChainsaw
06-09-2010, 09:45 AM
That's how I read the linked article as well. Unless there is another one to substantiate the details that DBR gives, it seems to violate the whole rumor-mongering ban.

MCFinARL
06-09-2010, 10:03 AM
Yes, based on material I read about this earlier, Northwestern's claim seems to be that the official who is in a relationship with the Maryland trainer was seen "conferring with" (i.e. talking to) the game officials before the game and during half time--not that she actually worked the game, which she didn't. And there didn't seem to be any evidence of what the conversation involved--it could have been about the weather, or the stock market. Seemed like grasping at straws on Northwestern's part to me.

A-Tex Devil
06-09-2010, 10:18 AM
While I agree with the sentiments of the post that this see a little petty by DBR, perhaps the better point would have been: "How does Maryland feel when they are the butt of unsubstantiated/false conspiracy claims about officiating? It's pretty dumb, right?"

Slackerb
06-09-2010, 10:22 AM
Par for the course if you ask me. This site has a decent community and provides a good source of ACC and Duke news, but the articles are sometimes petty, pedantic, opinionated, highly biased pieces that make me roll my eyes.

That attitude and tone of some of the articles really reinforces the stereotypes of Duke fans as elitist, self-entitled, etc.

JohnGalt
06-09-2010, 10:38 AM
Par for the course if you ask me. This site has a decent community and provides a good source of ACC and Duke news, but the articles are sometimes petty, pedantic, opinionated, highly biased pieces that make me roll my eyes.


Truly astonishing that the Duke Basketball Report produces biased material. Truly.

Ranidad
06-09-2010, 10:48 AM
I agree wholeheartedly that this isn't something to jump on about Maryland.

However, one point from the article that I didn't see mentioned in the posts is that the ACC doesn't allow Dillon to referee ACC games due to potential conflict of interest. The NCAA, or whoever oversees lacrosse, indicated that conference rules don't apply to championships. Given that there were 2 ACC teams (MD, UNC) in the final four it seems ridiculous for the NCAA NOT to recuse Dillon from the final four.

I somewhat roll my eyes at NU for bringing this up, but wonder why NCAA would create the situation in the first place.

cspan37421
06-09-2010, 11:36 AM
To Northwestern's credit, they brought up their concerns (according to the ChiTrib) before the Final Four took place, not after their championship loss occurred. Also, they brought up concerns about the ref's impartiality / professionalism / ethics as far back as 2007.

I've not seen a replay to judge whether the call had merit or not. Nor have I seen any reporting about what the officials talked about with Dillon. There's too little to go on here, so it's premature to throw either side under the bus. But it's not too early to recognize that sometimes the appearance of a conflict of interest is sufficiently troubling to enact rules that avoid such.

DevilWolf
06-09-2010, 12:22 PM
"Holding. On the offense. Replay fourth down."

Northwestern can eat a fat one when it comes to talking about bad calls impacting the outcomes of games.

devildeac
06-09-2010, 01:54 PM
"Holding. On the offense. Replay fourth down."

Northwestern can eat a fat one when it comes to talking about bad calls impacting the outcomes of games.

It was a good call but a bad play by our OL. Now if Thad hadn't underthrown/overthrown on the prior 2 plays, we would have had either a TD or at least another set of downs to work with from about the 10 yard line or closer with about 60 ticks to go on the clock.:>((

Spret42
06-09-2010, 01:54 PM
Par for the course if you ask me. This site has a decent community and provides a good source of ACC and Duke news, but the articles are sometimes petty, pedantic, opinionated, highly biased pieces that make me roll my eyes.

That attitude and tone of some of the articles really reinforces the stereotypes of Duke fans as elitist, self-entitled, etc.

As much as I respect DBR, it is true that there are times when this site seems to be about nothing but running other people down for their errors, failures and mistakes with snarky remarks and pumping up Duke at all costs.

I do like discussing college ball and reading this board at times though.

4decadedukie
06-09-2010, 02:26 PM
How frequently does a school of Northwestern stature -- or any university for that matter -- formally complain re an official's bias? I would wager it is most rare. If that is so, the very fact that an official objection has been issued indicates a great deal.

BD80
06-09-2010, 06:01 PM
Ditto - DBR blows the reading comprehension test.

That's how I read the linked article as well. Unless there is another one to substantiate the details that DBR gives, it seems to violate the whole rumor-mongering ban.


Par for the course if you ask me. This site has a decent community and provides a good source of ACC and Duke news, but the articles are sometimes petty, pedantic, opinionated, highly biased pieces that make me roll my eyes.

That attitude and tone of some of the articles really reinforces the stereotypes of Duke fans as elitist, self-entitled, etc.


As much as I respect DBR, it is true that there are times when this site seems to be about nothing but running other people down for their errors, failures and mistakes with snarky remarks and pumping up Duke at all costs. ...

Reading comprehension?

A top official with an admitted Maryland bias is seen talking to the refs before the game and IN THE OFFICIAL'S LOCKERROOM at halftime. Then NU's star player Danielle Spencer is called for charging at a crucial point in the game - disallowing the game-tying goal with 6 minutes to go). NU's opponents in the past have complained that Spencer gets away with contact on offense. This is is something that SCOUTING REPORTS would reveal. Charging is rarely called, so why at such a critical point?


... the ACC doesn't allow Dillon to referee ACC games due to potential conflict of interest. The NCAA, or whoever oversees lacrosse, indicated that conference rules don't apply to championships. Given that there were 2 ACC teams (MD, UNC) in the final four it seems ridiculous for the NCAA NOT to recuse Dillon from the final four. ...

"Maryland coach Cathy Reese .. is on [the] committee, which is responsible for assigning officials"

Nuff said. Even though Dillon didn't officiate the Maryland game, she was there as an official and has access to the game officials before and during the game. Reese certainly knew of the conflict, so she either did not tell the committee, or argued that it didn't matter. A Maryland coach was directly involved in the decision to allow the conflict.


Yes, based on material I read about this earlier, Northwestern's claim seems to be that the official who is in a relationship with the Maryland trainer was seen "conferring with" (i.e. talking to) the game officials before the game and during half time--not that she actually worked the game, which she didn't. And there didn't seem to be any evidence of what the conversation involved--it could have been about the weather, or the stock market. Seemed like grasping at straws on Northwestern's part to me.

Appearance of impropriety is enough. Should be avoided at all costs.

Here, there was direct contact with game officials and a crucial, questionable call occurred soon after.

I agree with DBR, unless Maryland actively works to correct the problem in the future, its fans should shut the eff up. Looks to me like at least DBR's reading comprehension is up to snuff.

DrChainsaw
06-09-2010, 06:56 PM
Looks to me like at least DBR's reading comprehension is up to snuff.

Just for the record, the original DBR front page post inaccurately stated that the official in question was not only officiating the final game, but made the questionable call against NU. The DBR realized their mistake, deleted the erroneous statements and appropriately apologized.

IMO, the reported pre-game protest by NU was appropriate, given the known potential conflict of interest and the previous actions by the ACC. The NCAA was in the wrong for not taking the appropriate action before the final four.

Kewlswim
06-10-2010, 12:43 PM
As much as I respect DBR, it is true that there are times when this site seems to be about nothing but running other people down for their errors, failures and mistakes with snarky remarks and pumping up Duke at all costs.

I do like discussing college ball and reading this board at times though.

Hi,

Certain posters on here seem to have carte blanche in being able to be cranky (to say the least), but they get a pass from the powers that be. Others, who now no longer post because they got so aggravated, were thrown under the bus for not kowtowing to this "in" group. Though, I guess that happens everywhere to a certain extent.

GO DUKE!

BD80
06-10-2010, 01:35 PM
As much as I respect DBR, it is true that there are times when this site seems to be about nothing but running other people down for their errors, failures and mistakes with snarky remarks and pumping up Duke at all costs. ...


... Certain posters on here seem to have carte blanche in being able to be cranky (to say the least), but they get a pass from the powers that be. Others, who now no longer post because they got so aggravated, were thrown under the bus for not kowtowing to this "in" group. Though, I guess that happens everywhere to a certain extent. ...

Just curious, but could either of these post be considered "snarky" or "cranky?"

What I find ironic is that the thread started with complaints about "the powers that be," specifically DBR's "errors, failures and mistakes" in commenting about an article linked.