Officiating

[Fish80]

Serious question, and it's hard to ask without sounding like a cry baby. Why do the officials let teams play so physically against Duke? Last year LSU deployed that strategy, and again this year VCU, and we know the result. Teams are going to do what they can to compete, and if the officials let them play rough, then they'll play rough.

I blame Paul Hewitt and Al Skinner for starting it. GT has used that strategy against us since Hewitt got there. And Skinner tries the same thing, and then tops it off by complaining about the calls. (What is in Skinner's mouth? He's always chewing something, you can see a buldge in his cheeks.)

If you want to go back a ways, you could blame John Thompson Sr, he used that style at Georgetown, but they did that to everybody.

Are there just teams that play a very physical style, and we happened to run into two of them in LSU and VCU? Or do teams crank the physicality up a notch against Duke?

How can we turn this around? I don't know. A guy like Battier had great relationships with the officials, he would talk and joke with them, and maintained his composure while still competing as hard as anybody. I saw Hansblahblah go over to the officials and say something like "good game" after the game yesterday. Good sportsmanship, and smart too. Does that make any difference in how games are called? I don't know.

Maybe the answer is to just get so good, it doesn't matter how they call the game.

[lavell12]

Un like common belief Duke doesn't get the calls from the refs.

In 2002 NCAA tourny game against Indiana, Carlos Boozer was tackeld as he tried to put back Jason Williams' missed free throw in the closing seconds.

In 2004 Semi-Final against UCONN Shelden and Shavlik fouled out on two horrible calls while Okafor did nothing against those two he took over the game. Later with Duke down one JJ went to the lane and was mugged but no call and Duke ended up losing by one.

LSU held JJ the whole game in last year's loss in the sweet sixteen.

[CDu]

This is my theory on the matter:

Part of it is a difference in officiating style between the ACC and the rest of college basketball. Historically, I think the ACC has tended to call the game tighter than most conferences. This has served to protect skilled players and promote a more open, "prettier" style of basketball (if you play too physically, you foul out, so it behooves you to lay off the grabbing/banging).

Part of this has been due to the coaching philosophies in the conference. We haven't generally been a conference where coaches try to bang. They usually coach sound defense and a more free style of play. But GT, BC, and VT have changed that in recent years. Their approaches have been to play as physically as possible. This eventually desensitizes the officials to some of the "lighter" physical play. Over time, what used to be a fringe foul call ceases to be called a foul.

The result is that teams who are comfortable with physical play (usually bigger/faster/beefier/more "athletic"/more aggressive teams) handle this style of officiating better than more "finesse" teams. With fewer fouls being called and more physical play allowed, the skill level goes down, and teams more prepared to bang gain an advantage. We've generally (though not universally, see Brand, Williams, Jones) been what you'd consider a more skilled/less physical team. Thus, the drift toward more physical play hurts us.

[ChrisP]

I was at that game in 2004 and I am one of the LAST people you will hear compaining about the refs, but we got HOSED against the 'Connvicts.

And, yeah, I know it probably never should have come down to that last play against IU in 2002, but Boozer was absolutely fould on that play when JW missed the FT. I mean, it shouldn't have come down to that, but, well, it did! And if it's a foul, then CALL IT!!!

[Chicago 1995]

Serious question, and it's hard to ask without sounding like a cry baby. Why do the officials let teams play so physically against Duke? Last year LSU deployed that strategy, and again this year VCU, and we know the result. Teams are going to do what they can to compete, and if the officials let them play rough, then they'll play rough.

I think part of it is that we've not had -- save for Shelden -- a terribly physical team. We don't play physically in response, and when you shy from contact and play soft -- as we've done a lot, especially in the paint the last couple of years -- they aren't going to make the calls on your opponent.

[throatybeard]

Interestingly, Carolina fans complain about this too over the last decade or so.

[dockfan]

I agree with CDu - a lot of it is the ACC refs call games tighter. I also think though there is a overall trend toward allowing more physical play, especially in the NCAA tournament games. It is a pretty disheartening trend, because many of the games turn into ugly, low-scoring slugfests. I noticed it in last year's tournament and it has been even worse this year.

The refs allow so much contact (off the ball screens, body checks, block outs, and on the ball "hand" checking, etc.) for the first 35+ minutes of the game. Then, like they have always done (and should), they swallow the whistle at the end and let the players decide the outcome. But by then, the game has been so physical already that the last 5 minutes are outrageous. Witness Oden's foul and the scrum that preceded it, or any of the rebounding battles down the stretch.

It is especially telling, IMO, that in this year of NBA-level freshmen back in college basketball (i.e. more talent), that there have been so many games struggling to get out of the 50s or 60s. It's not for lack of talent or scoring ability - I think it is the physical play. Watching overtime and double overtime games barely in the 70s and 80s on Saturday was the low point for me, even though the games are still tense from a competitive standpoint.

So, I don't think it is a Duke thing - it is a college basketball thing now, sadly.

Besides, Duke gets all the calls, don't you know??

Oh wait, BUTLER gets all the calls now.

[Bob Green]

This is my theory on the matter:

Part of it is a difference in officiating style between the ACC and the rest of college basketball. Historically, I think the ACC has tended to call the game tighter than most conferences.

I agree wholeheartedly. The ACC had a real problem with physical play in the NCAA tournament back in the 70s. In the mid-to-late 80s, as Coach K started having serious success at Duke, many of my whiney Carolina friends complained about Duke's physical play. Danny Ferry was the target of many Carolina fan tirades as was Christian Laettner.

IMO, the examples cited in this thread are all accurate. In addition, I would add Michigan State's mauling of JJ in the 2005 Sweet 16. As far as Indiana in 2002, I can never bring myself to complain about the no call because we never should have been in that position.

Bob Green
Yokosuka, Japan

[lavell12]

http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?vi...4&fr=yfp-t-391

[gep]

And, yeah, I know it probably never should have come down to that last play against IU in 2002, but Boozer was absolutely fould on that play when JW missed the FT. I mean, it shouldn't have come down to that, but, well, it did! And if it's a foul, then CALL IT!!!

Just to add a note to this... I remember that the player that "fouled" Carlos to prevent him from making the basket actually *admitted* to fouling Carlos for the sole purpose of preventing the basket.

[Ima Facultiwyfe]

I have to admit to having only really watched our own games this season up until this weekend. So, I've been leading a sheltered life. But, shifting gears in this fashion and suddenly watching everybody else bang around in these slugfests this tournament has pointed out more graphically to me that Duke doesn't have a team of players as strong, fast and mean as these I'm seeing. It's no wonder we can't survive and advance.

What saddens me, personally, is how out of step I feel with the whole process. I have to keep reminding myself that all those guys out there must like it this way or they'd not keep coming back for more. When I hear annoucers...most of whom are former players...laud aggressive and unsportsmanlike play I realize I'm just missing something here.

This idea of refs "swallowing their whistles" at the end of the game and letting the players decide the outcome is silly. A rule is a rule just as much at the end of a game as it is at the beginning of a game. Yes, the players should be deciding the outcome for the whole forty minutes...but, WITHIN the rules...or why have rules at all.

I can't think of a game more violent, more dangerous or more ugly than college basketball played the way it's being played now. We've lost something good.

I don't know why they just don't issue tire irons as game equipment, send the refs home and get on with it. As for me I think I may have something more important to do with my time...like maybe wash my socks.

Love, Ima

[Lulu]

I wonder if allowing more personal fouls before fouling a player out would make this problem better, or worse. I've always felt that in many physical games the refs will actually adjust how they are calling the game, if the whistle seems to be blowing too many times. It IS disruptive, after all, to enforce the rules. Plus, no one is going to accept that a team gets 4 players in foul trouble in the 1st half, etc... so the refs swallow their whistles, whether conscious of doing so or not, to prevent this from happening to games.

It's hard to blame anyone... a coach has to go with what he's got, and if the best option for earning a win is to play rough and see what the refs will allow you to get away with then that's what his team ought to do. Ultimately, it is the officials who are responsible of couse, but they are only human and just put in a difficult position, either wrecking the flow of the game (resulting in unhappy crowds) and seemingly dictating the outcome by calling tons of fouls, or just letting the fouls go. Now, refs like everyone else seem to have just grown accustomed to the physical play. It's not even hard to see why some conferences drifted towards this physical style while other conferences lagged behind; just depends on the types of players.

So, what do people think a soluiton (if any exist) to this problem might be? The officials could simply start calling fouls by the book, but that seems extrememly unlikely, and definitely won't help the situation unless somehow enforced by the NCAA as a whole and not by each conference at its own discretion. That would be the best option, imo, but if that's the only solution then I fear this will never change. We could then start looking at thigns like adjusting the number of fouls allowed, but I can't even figure out for myself what the results might be because there would be seemingly opposing forces in action. With more personals allowed, one could argue that the officials face less pressure in terms of fouling out too many players, and could blow the whistle a little more often (won't help the flow of the game still). However, you could also argue that the coaches with bigger, more athletic (i.e. less talent and less skilled) players could have their teams play an even rougher game since they have more fouls to give. I suppose we could also look at reducing the number of fouls allowed before awarding bonus shots (best option?). If the more talented teams shoot pretty well from the stripe this would definitely be a disincentive to foul (but again, will slow down the game). And lastly, in a completely opposite direction from the first suggestion, you could reduce the number of fouls allowed before fouling out; this gives the players reason to play more cautiously but puts even more pressure on the refs to not foul out too many players.

I should self-edit this post, but I won't. The bottom line I guess is that the coaches will less talented players have to find some way to compete with the more talented teams, and physical play is about the only way to do so. You could probably argue that relying on more physical play, and leaving the rest to the officials, is the only correct choice for them. It is therefore up to the officials to be willing to decide more games, at the price of both slowing down the game and annoying a lot more fans and likely commentators etc. Aside from blowing the whistle more often, harsher penalties (more bonus shots etc) would be the only other disincentive I see to this behavior. Any thoughts? I'm thoroughly confused.

All of this is probably moot though, because the first step toward any change would have to be that more people want it than not... and what's the chance of that? A few vs many I think. The quality of the game, I'm afraid, is probably a secondary issue to most... for reference, check out the NBA. ...So... aside from awarding five free throws for every foul, I'm not sure what could really work. ...then again, that would probably backfire and the officials would never call a foul.

Sorry for repeating myself multiple times, writing such a long post, and pretty much just posting my train of thought. If it was too pointless and stupid I sincerely hope you haven't read this far.

[HK Dukie]

Don't forget Langdon's mugging in the '99 title game.

The convicts stole two from us.

[bird]

Little doubt in my mind several VCU players, Maynor and Anderson in particular, were operating pursuant to script to attempt to "punk" Duke. And, am afraid, it worked to a degree. I was pleased Paulus in particular did not back down and got a little angry: one frustration is I didn't see anger / determination in reaction from anyone else. I find K's quote re getting our "butts kicked" after the game telling. Maybe he felt the same frustration.

Anyway, I enjoyed VCU's loss, and cheered every one of Maynor's air balls. I do not like where the "punk" players take the game.

Alan

[captmojo]

the last out of bounds pass in by Indiana following a time out the last time Duke lost to them. Side out, and the inbounder ran up and down the sideline freely when not allowed. Call should have been traveling. inbounding play leads to Hoosier basket, Duke loses, goes home.

[BoC]

http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?vi...4&fr=yfp-t-391

Can you describe what this video depicts? As soon as I saw that it came from "truth"aboutDuke.com, my interest level dropped like a stone.

[lavell12]

Don't forget Langdon's mugging in the '99 title game.

The convicts stole two from us.

that reminds me of earlier in that game with Duke within 1 point Elton Brand was tackled by the center for UCONN.

[feldspar]

Can you describe what this video depicts? As soon as I saw that it came from "truth"aboutDuke.com, my interest level dropped like a stone.

It's the (questionable, at best, IMO) no-call on Redick at the end of UConn in the 2004 FF.

[lavell12]

Can you describe what this video depicts? As soon as I saw that it came from "truth"aboutDuke.com, my interest level dropped like a stone.

it comes from that site yet it doesn't say anything bad about Duke just see the video for yourself, its JJ being mugged against UCONN in the final four in 2004.

[mapei]

It definitely looks like JJ was fouled before Horvath's foul on the UConn guy.

But we also benefited from officiating in that game, when Okafor picked up three quick ones and had to sit. I doubt we could have built up that lead without the best player in basketball that year sitting on the bench instead of in the game. Once he came back in, we had a much tougher time, and it wasn't all officiating.