College Basketball Officiating

[SoCalDukeFan]

I hope for two things tomorrow night = 1. A Duke win and 2. That the refs had nothing to do with it.

Some KY fans are very mad about the non shot clock call last night, and I gotta agree with them. Of course the refs did not make KY create their own shot clock violations or make KY rebound poorly or a host of other things but that was a key call and apparently the wrong one.

More importantly some of these games have just looked like they were poorly officiated. Lots of contact one play, no call, then a touch foul called. Nothing as bad as UConn-Duke in 89 and especially 04, but still pretty bad.

I think something has to be done to improve the officiating. Maybe change the rules somehow to make it easier to call. I don't want more replay review. And if they shorted the shot clock that will create more plays and more fouls and more key players fouling out or playing with four or maybe they will raise the limit to 6.

SoCal

[Saratoga2]

I hope for two things tomorrow night = 1. A Duke win and 2. That the refs had nothing to do with it.

Some KY fans are very mad about the non shot clock call last night, and I gotta agree with them. Of course the refs did not make KY create their own shot clock violations or make KY rebound poorly or a host of other things but that was a key call and apparently the wrong one.

More importantly some of these games have just looked like they were poorly officiated. Lots of contact one play, no call, then a touch foul called. Nothing as bad as UConn-Duke in 89 and especially 04, but still pretty bad.

I think something has to be done to improve the officiating. Maybe change the rules somehow to make it easier to call. I don't want more replay review. And if they shorted the shot clock that will create more plays and more fouls and more key players fouling out or playing with four or maybe they will raise the limit to 6.

SoCal

Fans need to understand that even good refs will make a number of mistakes during a game. Things happen quickly and they have partial views of those. The best we can hope for is the refs attempt to call the game consistently and in accordance with the rules and that the mistakes go both ways and cancel out.

[kshepinthehouse]

I hope for two things tomorrow night = 1. A Duke win and 2. That the refs had nothing to do with it.

Some KY fans are very mad about the non shot clock call last night, and I gotta agree with them. Of course the refs did not make KY create their own shot clock violations or make KY rebound poorly or a host of other things but that was a key call and apparently the wrong one.

More importantly some of these games have just looked like they were poorly officiated. Lots of contact one play, no call, then a touch foul called. Nothing as bad as UConn-Duke in 89 and especially 04, but still pretty bad.

I think something has to be done to improve the officiating. Maybe change the rules somehow to make it easier to call. I don't want more replay review. And if they shorted the shot clock that will create more plays and more fouls and more key players fouling out or playing with four or maybe they will raise the limit to 6.

SoCal

In my opinion the shot clock violation and the non flagrant call are a wash. Actually, the non flagrant call was worse because they did review but somehow didn't call it even after that.

[hughgs]

Fans need to understand that even good refs will make a number of mistakes during a game. Things happen quickly and they have partial views of those. The best we can hope for is the refs attempt to call the game consistently and in accordance with the rules and that the mistakes go both ways and cancel out.

This is only partially true. I've made this point but it bears repeating: the refs cannot be held accountable for "calling the game consistently". My father, an international judo referee who has led many international clinics and was invited to the 1980 Olympics, once made this point to me.

Referees have a procedure to follow which takes into account their placement, their view of the players, what they see, etc. Referees can only be accountable for following their procedures and calling the fouls they witness. Any other criteria would make it impossible to ensure that refs could be objectively graded. The hope is that if the refs follow their procedures perfectly then the fouls that are missed are minimized.

So, while I agree with your sentiment, the idea that the refs call the game consistently is an impossible objective. It would be impossible to grade whether a ref calls a game consistently. You cannot tell what the referee sees and the referee cannot make a call on something he doesn't see. However, ensuring that referees follow their procedures and make the calls they do see is measurable objective. And, if the referees are able to do that then that is the best we can hope for.

[bob blue devil]

This is only partially true. I've made this point but it bears repeating: the refs cannot be held accountable for "calling the game consistently". My father, an international judo referee who has led many international clinics and was invited to the 1980 Olympics, once made this point to me.

Referees have a procedure to follow which takes into account their placement, their view of the players, what they see, etc. Referees can only be accountable for following their procedures and calling the fouls they witness. Any other criteria would make it impossible to ensure that refs could be objectively graded. The hope is that if the refs follow their procedures perfectly then the fouls that are missed are minimized.

So, while I agree with your sentiment, the idea that the refs call the game consistently is an impossible objective. It would be impossible to grade whether a ref calls a game consistently. You cannot tell what the referee sees and the referee cannot make a call on something he doesn't see. However, ensuring that referees follow their procedures and make the calls they do see is measurable objective. And, if the referees are able to do that then that is the best we can hope for.

thanks for sharing; i agree with the sentiment here. i really dislike the idea that a ref consistently calling something wrong is somehow acceptable because they were consistent. i'd much prefer they try to call each play accurately, rather than systematically skewing the game one way or another due to an inherent bias.

[weezie]

Kersey will be there, I'm just feeling it, so I hope he's in a pleasant mood.

[hughgs]

thanks for sharing; i agree with the sentiment here. i really dislike the idea that a ref consistently calling something wrong is somehow acceptable because they were consistent. i'd much prefer they try to call each play accurately, rather than systematically skewing the game one way or another due to an inherent bias.

However, it is impossible for the referee to call each play accurately. That's the whole point. The only thing that the referee can control is following his procedures.

[Bluedog]

Kersey will be there, I'm just feeling it, so I hope he's in a pleasant mood.

Nope: "Championship Game: Michael Stephens, Joe Derosa and Pat Driscoll, alternate Jeff Clark."

[-bdbd]

In my opinion the shot clock violation and the non flagrant call are a wash. Actually, the non flagrant call was worse because they did review but somehow didn't call it even after that.

The problem is that fans never want to see "the whole picture." I dealt with this in the 2001 (?) semi's vs MD, with many MD-fan friends/neighbors here in the DC area. All they wanted to talk about how the refs "gave" the game to Duke, including the critical 5th foul with a few minutes to go on a charge call against their star forward. Of course they never want to talk about how MD "gave away" a 22 point lead in that game to Duke, or that that same player had committed at least three previous "uncalled" fouls against us, or that, at the point of the 5th foul, MD was already heading downward in defeat anyway...

We see this with anti-Duke fans all the time, where they lose a close game, and then want to point to a single "blown call" down the stretch that "cost them the game..." while ignoring all of the "blown calls" that went their way for the prior 39.5 minutes, or that their team benefitted greatly, overall, from the WAY that the game was called, etc. Fans will see what they want to see, and most certainly the KY fans are very much in that category. I've long since ceased to worry about it.

Blaming the refs is the final vestige of fans of the losing team. :rolleyes:

[OZ]

Blaming the refs is the final vestige of fans of the losing team. :rolleyes:

When I was a high school official (a hundred years ago), I attended a workshop taught by an ACC official. I will always remember his closing words of wisdom... "Remember that the people in the stands know just enough about what is happening on the court/field to show their ignorance."
I must confess that I have often found that to be true with me. More times than I want to admit, I have erupted in Cameron (and elsewhere) at a blown call by an official, only to come home, watch the replay and see a totally different perspective. The ref had been correct after all. However, understanding that has not stopped me from revealing my ignorance.

One could even point out that the creator of this thread, while offering his critique of officials making errors, misspelled "Basketball." :)

[CoachJ10]

I hope for two things tomorrow night = 1. A Duke win and 2. That the refs had nothing to do with it.

Some KY fans are very mad about the non shot clock call last night, and I gotta agree with them. Of course the refs did not make KY create their own shot clock violations or make KY rebound poorly or a host of other things but that was a key call and apparently the wrong one.

More importantly some of these games have just looked like they were poorly officiated. Lots of contact one play, no call, then a touch foul called. Nothing as bad as UConn-Duke in 89 and especially 04, but still pretty bad.

I think something has to be done to improve the officiating. Maybe change the rules somehow to make it easier to call. I don't want more replay review. And if they shorted the shot clock that will create more plays and more fouls and more key players fouling out or playing with four or maybe they will raise the limit to 6.

SoCal

I agree with the sentiment about the officials in Monday's game, as well as the more general sentiment regarding the poor reffing and the impact it has on games. There are 13 people on the court during games...to not have reasonable expectations for the 3 adults seems strange to me.

With regard to Monday, Wisconsin has been called for a historically low amount of fouls this season (something like 12 fouls per game, a full 2 lower than even UVA). It often didn't pass the eye test, especially compared to the touch fouls that are endured by most teams (us included). If they are allowed to play physical, grabby defense...and not get called for it, that will be a huge advantage for them.

In addition...the non defensive fouls and violations are also important. The amount of travels and moving screens that everyone but Jahlil and Marshall respectively get away with, is very frustrating (Sparty's entire offense seemed to revolve around moving screens). Watch for the travels that Dekker and big Frank get away with on Monday. They are tough enough to guard legitimately without advantages.

The reffing in college basketball does need to be improved (one of my theories is that all the running around by refs actually decreases their effectiveness dramatically, and that is the area that should be looked to adjust). But it isnt going to happen by Monday. I hope that the 3 adults let the 10 kids decide the outcome of the game...but the evidence suggests they won't. Hope our boys will survive whatever gets thrown their way.

[subzero02]

The problem is that fans never want to see "the whole picture." I dealt with this in the 2001 (?) semi's vs MD, with many MD-fan friends/neighbors here in the DC area. All they wanted to talk about how the refs "gave" the game to Duke, including the critical 5th foul with a few minutes to go on a charge call against their star forward. Of course they never want to talk about how MD "gave away" a 22 point lead in that game to Duke, or that that same player had committed at least three previous "uncalled" fouls against us, or that, at the point of the 5th foul, MD was already heading downward in defeat anyway...

We see this with anti-Duke fans all the time, where they lose a close game, and then want to point to a single "blown call" down the stretch that "cost them the game..." while ignoring all of the "blown calls" that went their way for the prior 39.5 minutes, or that their team benefitted greatly, overall, from the WAY that the game was called, etc. Fans will see what they want to see, and most certainly the KY fans are very much in that category. I've long since ceased to worry about it.

Blaming the refs is the final vestige of fans of the losing team. :rolleyes:

The call you are talking about was a hook by Lonny Baxter against Carlos Boozer. It was a questionable offensive foul and it sent Gary Williams into a maniacal rage.

[brlftz]

did anyone see any coverage that gave an explanation why lyles wasn't called for a flagrant? it looked so obviously flagrant that i feel like someone with authority has to have addressed it somehow.

[MChambers]

The call you are talking about was a hook by Lonny Baxter against Carlos Boozer. It was a questionable offensive foul and it sent Gary Williams into a maniacal rage.
It wasn't questionable. Baxter reached back and grabbed Boozer with both hands, and also grabbed his shorts.

[cruxer]

I agree that no officiating crew can be perfect, but I think there's a reason officiating is a perennial issue in college basketball, while you never hear about it in the NBA. The big 5 conferences and NCAA can certainly afford to have full-time professional officials who do nothing but officiate. Having your local dentist sideline as a big-time college official makes no sense and can't possibly produce as good a product. I understand that smaller conferences couldn't afford to go full-time, and so should continue using the contractor model. For the big 5 and NCAA tourney, there should be a full-time professional officiating staff. It would likely be the same big guys we already know, and who really can officiate well if given the right circumstances.

-c

[captmojo]

I look at the shot-clock violation as, "Well, they just missed it. It was a bang-bang type of thing. After all, what was the time lapse? Less than a second?"

As for the 'Neck-Slap'. The announcers had even been trouble trying to figure out if the flagrancy was a category 1 or a 2.
NO CALL? After stopping the game to check the monitor?
What was the thought process here? I'm not sure they had one.

[dukebluesincebirth]

I'm still trying to figure out why they didnt even look at the replay when Jahlil took a hard shoulder to the cheek bone Saturday night. I've see other plays reviewed and called flagrant for much less this season. But not in the Final 4?? Why?

[captmojo]

I'm still trying to figure out why they didnt even look at the replay when Jahlil took a hard shoulder to the cheek bone Saturday night. I've see other plays reviewed and called flagrant for much less this season. But not in the Final 4?? Why?

Bo Ryan had to beg for them to take a second look at what happened Saturday with Lyles.

[GGLC]

did anyone see any coverage that gave an explanation why lyles wasn't called for a flagrant? it looked so obviously flagrant that i feel like someone with authority has to have addressed it somehow.

I'd like to know this as well.

[captmojo]

Whatever the reasoning is, I repeat from another thread, I don't ever want to hear UK people give reference to Laettner.

[brevity]

Having your local dentist sideline as a big-time college official makes no sense and can't possibly produce as good a product.

Local dentist, huh? I guess that explains why watching the officiating can feel like torture. (And why those in the DBR chat room react with by saying things like "Grhrdbauboiqoweioe".)

[SoCalDukeFan]

In my original post I pointed out the shot clock as a big call that was probably missed. I probably should not have mentioned it as I fully understand that the refs are human, college basketball can be fast paced, and the call are bam-bam. I wish that they could be perfect but thats not my concern.

My problem is sometimes it seems like every ticky-tack foul gets called, then you see a guy get clobbered and no call. Or the opposite, lots of contact allowed then a touch foul is called. You see moving screens all over the place then one gets called. Also how the games are called affects the play. Why should one game have lots of allowed contact and the next very little. Or one half and not the next.

Full time officials might help as in the NBA. I don't watch much NBA but think in general less contact is allowed, players know it, and the games can be less physical than college games and they officiating is more consistent.

SoCal

[Highlander]

I'd just note for the record that the officials missed a pretty big shot clock violation (http://scores.espn.go.com/ncb/recap?gameId=400587943)in one of our games earlier this year, and fans (myself included) were pretty upset about it. Calls like that are different from fouls in that there is no debate. You either got the ball off before the horn or you didn't. Those kinds of plays should be reviewable IMO.

The reason UK fans point to the shot clock violation and not the flagrant 1 is that they lost, so Wisconsin won in spite of the no call, where UK lost because of the missed violation (or so the argument goes). If the colors were reversed, the arguments would be the same.

Personally, I think it is good that the refs went back to look at the play before making their decision. Like the Laettner stomp play, the referees saw it and made a judgment call; it wasn't "missed," and no one can argue the refs didn't see the play. In both cases, I think the refs wanted to let the players handle it on the court rather than drastically affect the game on their whistle. I think if the flagrant 1 play happened in the first half it would have been called. Since it was late in the game in a close affair, they let it go.

As the old Rush song says "If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice." The refs were going to impact the game one way or the other on a play like that.

[Newton_14]

I'd just note for the record that the officials missed a pretty big shot clock violation (http://scores.espn.go.com/ncb/recap?gameId=400587943)in one of our games earlier this year, and fans (myself included) were pretty upset about it. Calls like that are different from fouls in that there is no debate. You either got the ball off before the horn or you didn't. Those kinds of plays should be reviewable IMO.

The reason UK fans point to the shot clock violation and not the flagrant 1 is that they lost, so Wisconsin won in spite of the no call, where UK lost because of the missed violation (or so the argument goes). If the colors were reversed, the arguments would be the same.

Personally, I think it is good that the refs went back to look at the play before making their decision. Like the Laettner stomp play, the referees saw it and made a judgment call; it wasn't "missed," and no one can argue the refs didn't see the play. In both cases, I think the refs wanted to let the players handle it on the court rather than drastically affect the game on their whistle. I think if the flagrant 1 play happened in the first half it would have been called. Since it was late in the game in a close affair, they let it go.

As the old Rush song says "If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice." The refs were going to impact the game one way or the other on a play like that.

Good memory. I had forgotten but did not even need to look. St Johns just before half. Dude drains a 3 and the ball is still in the palm of his hand with his hand about face high in his shooting motion when the clock struck midnight! I could not believe they counted that basket. Thankfully we overcame it.

[77devil]

Personally, I think it is good that the refs went back to look at the play before making their decision. Like the Laettner stomp play, the referees saw it and made a judgment call; it wasn't "missed," and no one can argue the refs didn't see the play. In both cases, I think the refs wanted to let the players handle it on the court rather than drastically affect the game on their whistle. I think if the flagrant 1 play happened in the first half it would have been called. Since it was late in the game in a close affair, they let it go.

Actually, it initially appeared that the refs either missed the foul or choose to ignore it until Bo Ryan made a stink. The let them play or let it go late in the game arguments are terrible. If there is a violation, the referees should make the call whether it's the first minute or the last.