Interesting Article/Read on Officials and Thoughts from Coaches

[Southgate0809]

There was an interesting one last night where a Pitt player had the ball and was moving towards the basket. RJ Davis was trailing him. The Pitt player stopped to try to draw the foul from the trailing Davis and wound up throwing his weight into Davis a little bit, bumping his butt into Davis as Davis was coming around his left side. On replay, I thought it was a block, but my bigger takeaway was that I don't know if I've ever seen a charge get called when the defender is behind the ball carrier moving towards the basket.

[luburch]

https://theathletic.com/2974610/2021...me-some-teddy/

I hope it's alright to post this article, but I found it really interesting. It gave coaches an anonymous platform to speak on some of the more well-known college basketball officials.

As a high school basketball referee myself, I understand how difficult the job can be and also recognize just how fast the pace of the game can be at the high school level. The job is NOT easy, folks.

Would like to point out that this article was written in November of 2021. Don't believe I saw that mentioned anywhere and seems like relevant information.

[mkirsh]

Oof. I don't mind the five second call coming back, but "advantage" is so very subjective. I don't want more judgment calls in the hands of officials. Sounds like more glacial replays at the end of a game to me.

I think the glacial replays are because rules have become so particular and less subjective (largely for good reason), but then as a result all the data needs to be assessed to input into the "rules engine". The best example is determining a catch in the NFL - I think instinctively most viewers have an understanding of when a player catches a ball and when they drop it, but to define it in clear and exact terms brings determinations like control, number of steps, whether the ball is "secure" if it touches the ground, etc. Again, it takes some subjectivity out of the system, but adds tremendous time to reviews to go down the rulebook check list from every angle.

[bshrader]

There was an interesting one last night where a Pitt player had the ball and was moving towards the basket. RJ Davis was trailing him. The Pitt player stopped to try to draw the foul from the trailing Davis and wound up throwing his weight into Davis a little bit, bumping his butt into Davis as Davis was coming around his left side. On replay, I thought it was a block, but my bigger takeaway was that I don't know if I've ever seen a charge get called when the defender is behind the ball carrier moving towards the basket.

Yea I remember that play. What officials are looking for in plays where there is contact is who is responsible for that contact? Is it contact where the defender continued toward the dribbler and created the contact or was it contact created by the dribbler himself?

I actually thought the official got this one correct, by rule. Remember that every player on the court is entitled to any space on the court, if it isnt occupied. I thought Cummings created the contact into Davis with his shoulder in space he did not occupy. Odd looking play, but I believe the correct call.

[Southgate0809]

Yea I remember that play. What officials are looking for in plays where there is contact is who is responsible for that contact? Is it contact where the defender continued toward the dribbler and created the contact or was it contact created by the dribbler himself?

I actually thought the official got this one correct, by rule. Remember that every player on the court is entitled to any space on the court, if it isnt occupied. I thought Cummings created the contact into Davis with his shoulder in space he did not occupy. Odd looking play, but I believe the correct call.

I'd say Cummings initiated the contact by moving to the left, but you could argue that he had a right to that space just as much as Davis, who didn't have legal guarding position.

[johnb]

My favorite discussion of refs is Michael Lewis's podcast, Against the Rules, which discusses various sorts of referees/judges. If interested, go directly to the podcast on April 2, 2019, entitled "Ref, You Suck." It focuses on NBA refs and is the 1st real podcast of the series.

One take-home message is that refs tend to actually be very good, much better than they used to be. Why? relentless scrutiny, replay, professionalization of refs, etc.

Another message is that the best players and teams seem to get the most upset by "bad calls." Why? Stars tend to think they should get all the ambiguous calls, which they probably did back in the day. In addition, because refs get rigorously graded, they're less apt to give make-up calls.

Anyway, the whole podcast series is interesting, but this one changed how I look at the role of refs in games...

[Phredd3]

Ayers is considered one of the best refs in the country: https://kenpom.com/blog/roger-ayers-is-the-best-ref/ even if fans like to complain.

tv Teddy gets deserved hate for his antics

With all due respect to KenPom, there is a lot of heavy lifting that has to happen between "Roger Ayers works a lot of high-profile games" to "Roger Ayers is one of the best referees in the country", and KenPom doesn't really even attempt to do it. I think it is beyond obvious that Ayers works a lot. I think the question is whether or not he should.

[weezie]

...I think it is beyond obvious that Ayers works a lot. I think the question is whether or not he should.

AMEN Phredd.

[OldPhiKap]

Right said Phredd.

[roge054]

ACC Now podcast had retired HOF ACC ref and supervisor of ACC refs John Cloughtery on with Luke DeCock. Luke asked John if, as suprevisor, did he ever hear from Coach K about
any bad calls in a Duke game. Cloughtery said he would hear from Coach K when certain officiating crews were named for a Duke game. Coach K would say "John you know we're
not going to get a good call from that crew". Luke asked why. John said that Coach K felt that certain refs were intent on proving they could stand up to him and it biased their calls.
Cloughtery said Coach K had a point. Podcast date 1/25/2022.

On another note, how does Ayers get assigned to Coach K's last two games with the cheats? The Final Four really!!! Could not believe it.

[jv001]

With all due respect to KenPom, there is a lot of heavy lifting that has to happen between "Roger Ayers works a lot of high-profile games" to "Roger Ayers is one of the best referees in the country", and KenPom doesn't really even attempt to do it. I think it is beyond obvious that Ayers works a lot. I think the question is whether or not he should.

I can answer that!

GoDuke!

[Southgate0809]

ACC Now podcast had retired HOF ACC ref and supervisor of ACC refs John Cloughtery on with Luke DeCock. Luke asked John if, as suprevisor, did he ever hear from Coach K about
any bad calls in a Duke game. Cloughtery said he would hear from Coach K when certain officiating crews were named for a Duke game. Coach K would say "John you know we're
not going to get a good call from that crew". Luke asked why. John said that Coach K felt that certain refs were intent on proving they could stand up to him and it biased their calls.
Cloughtery said Coach K had a point. Podcast date 1/25/2022.

On another note, how does Ayers get assigned to Coach K's last two games with the cheats? The Final Four really!!! Could not believe it.

Sounds like the Bilas effect. Becoming biased in the other direction in attempt to prove you're not biased.

[Skydog]

I look forward to the day that deep fake technology can switch the players in a video of a bball, football or soccer game. That is, everything is the same but the deep fake is able to make the home team appear as the opponent and vice versa. It would be interesting to have fans of one of the teams then watch to assess the officiating. In the minds of the fans would the plays they previously called "charges" become "blocks," incidental contact become fouls, etc. If - as I'm 100% sure would be the case - no matter which way you showed the video (normal or with players reversed) the fans always see their team as getting screwed by the refs we would have ironclad proof that refs can't win, no matter what they do or don't do.

[duke2x]

On another note, how does Ayers get assigned to Coach K's last two games with the cheats? The Final Four really!!! Could not believe it.

I would put the odds over 50% that you are going to be really unhappy at 6PM tomorrow. No official inside info here.

[House P]

I look forward to the day that deep fake technology can switch the players in a video of a bball, football or soccer game. That is, everything is the same but the deep fake is able to make the home team appear as the opponent and vice versa. It would be interesting to have fans of one of the teams then watch to assess the officiating. In the minds of the fans would the plays they previously called "charges" become "blocks," incidental contact become fouls, etc. If - as I'm 100% sure would be the case - no matter which way you showed the video (normal or with players reversed) the fans always see their team as getting screwed by the refs we would have ironclad proof that refs can't win, no matter what they do or don't do.

Occasionally when I have nothing better to do I'll watch a few minutes of a mid-major game involving two teams I care nothing about. One way to make this more interesting is to arbitrarily pick a team and see how long it takes until there is a questionable call which goes against them. I rarely have to wait until the next media timeout. It isn't always something egregious, but there are so many bang-bang plays and 50/50 calls that it is easy to find "evidence" that the refs are against you.

This is how I concluded with 100% certainty that Merrimack gets all the calls.

[Nepos]

I look forward to the day that deep fake technology can switch the players in a video of a bball, football or soccer game. That is, everything is the same but the deep fake is able to make the home team appear as the opponent and vice versa. It would be interesting to have fans of one of the teams then watch to assess the officiating. In the minds of the fans would the plays they previously called "charges" become "blocks," incidental contact become fouls, etc. If - as I'm 100% sure would be the case - no matter which way you showed the video (normal or with players reversed) the fans always see their team as getting screwed by the refs we would have ironclad proof that refs can't win, no matter what they do or don't do.

The low tech answer from a classic social psychology study in the 50s:

Citation
Hastorf, A. H., & Cantril, H. (1954). They saw a game; a case study. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 49(1), 129–134. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0057880
Abstract
When the Dartmouth football team played Princeton in 1951, much controversy was generated over what actually took place during the game. Basically, there was disagreement between the two schools as to what had happened during the game. A questionnaire designed to get reactions to the game and to learn something of the climate of opinion was administered at each school and the same motion picture of the game was shown to a sample of undergraduate at each school, followed by another questionnnaire. Results indicate that the "game" was actually many different games and that each version of the events that transpired was just as "real" to a particular person as other versions were to other people. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)

[weezie]

I would put the odds over 50% that you are going to be really unhappy at 6PM tomorrow...

I can't even bring myself to type the names...

[sagegrouse]

I suppose many people have the same story. Our PE coach in HS made the students ref the basketball games in class primarily to learn how hard a job it was. There may even have been an altercation or two over the student officiating.

[duke2x]

I can't even bring myself to type the names...

You could type the names you want on the I Don't Want to Jinx It thread.

[Skydog]

The low tech answer from a classic social psychology study in the 50s:

Citation
Hastorf, A. H., & Cantril, H. (1954). They saw a game; a case study. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 49(1), 129–134. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0057880
Abstract
When the Dartmouth football team played Princeton in 1951, much controversy was generated over what actually took place during the game. Basically, there was disagreement between the two schools as to what had happened during the game. A questionnaire designed to get reactions to the game and to learn something of the climate of opinion was administered at each school and the same motion picture of the game was shown to a sample of undergraduate at each school, followed by another questionnnaire. Results indicate that the "game" was actually many different games and that each version of the events that transpired was just as "real" to a particular person as other versions were to other people. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)

Were the authors of this study also Japanese filmmakers? Because I’m pretty sure I saw a major 1950 Samurai film based on their findings!