PDA

View Full Version : God those refs were awful



Zag 77
12-10-2011, 09:03 PM
Maybe we did not lose because of it, but watching in person they were awful: e.g. when Dower gets pushed in the back under the basket and gets called for travelling.

I heard that the ESPN announcers did not think they were too hot either.



Officials: Scott Thornley, Lamont Simpson, Buddy Mayborg

:ban:

I remember seeing the black ref in one of our eariler games and he was awful then too.

04ZagFan
12-10-2011, 09:08 PM
Definitely far from perfect, but we beat ourselves.

NEC26
12-10-2011, 09:10 PM
They were bad but I'm not blaming the refs for this loss. The foul call on Stockton late in the game was terrible as well.

hooter73
12-10-2011, 09:12 PM
bad reffing is bad reffing, a good team works through it...we didnt work through it and its also not why we lost.



but yes some of those calls just make you want to shove a play back screen up their butts.

04ZagFan
12-10-2011, 10:07 PM
From my seat in K2, it was atrocious at best. Sure we shot ourselves in the foot with t/o's and lack of game plan adaptability, but the refs never let us get in the groove of the game.

Just not the case.

Marcel the Shell
12-10-2011, 10:44 PM
From an MSU perspective, I thought the refs were OK until the last few minutes. I probably would have called a travel on Appling instead of a foul on Stockton, and there was an instance where you guys had Trice (I think) trapped and stole the ball, but they called a foul on Pangos for reaching from behind. I didn't agree with that one either.

I personally don't think officiating decided the game, but I understand if you guys have some gripes.

I know you guys are a little frustrated with the way that game turned out, but you have some bright futures in Bell, Stockton and Pangos, although he struggled tonight. I hadn't heard of Bell until this week, and he really stood out to me. Very versatile, love his game. Also, I know Harris and Sacre to an extent may have disappointed tonight, but our bigs played their best game of the season. And when Payne AND Nix are playing well, I think we're pretty tough to beat.

Here's to hoping to see you win the WCC again and make some noise in March.

VinnyZag
12-10-2011, 10:50 PM
I personally don't think officiating decided the game

Absolutely true.

jim77
12-10-2011, 11:01 PM
The refs didn't cause 21 TO's. We lost to a good team and a top 10 player in D. Green.

Zig-Zag
12-10-2011, 11:22 PM
Part of Home and Home agreement; visiting bring thier conference refs. These were Big 10 refs. I thought for most of game they were fine, late we couldn't seem to get a call, but we lost the game.

GUnawinit
12-10-2011, 11:26 PM
Whow....funny you mention that...those watching with me stated the same...

Although, turnovers pretty much decided the outcome

3XaZag
12-11-2011, 12:00 AM
I too don't think the refs decided the game, but I have a question.

Marcel above mentions the call near the end of the game where Appling bumped into Stockton and they both went down and Stocks got called for the foul-- rather than a travel on Appling. I agree the call should have gone the other way... as a charge on Appling.

Here's my question. Two or three times earlier in the game, I think once with Dower and the other with Carter (and maybe one with Harris), almost the exact situaion occured where we had the ball...bumped into the defender and both players went down. In all the situations traveling was called against our players.

I don't see how the rule allows for this call. Contact created the travel (actually I don't think Carter traveled looking at the replay...in his case he was the exception and stayed upright)-- and it seems to me it needs to either be called a charge or a foul. This isn't the first time I have seen this type of call, but the frequent use of it tonight brought it to the foreground.

So what do you think? Do you like this option? Does it give the refs an another option by being able to say something like-- "hey, you were out of control, so you lose the ball, but it wan't flagrant, so I am not going to hang a charging foul on you." Is it in the rules somewhere I don't know about? Personally, I don't like it...and it seems to be called inconsistently within games (witness tonight) and especially from game to game...you get situations like tonight where its called...and then it disappears for 3 or 4 games.

Birddog
12-11-2011, 03:27 AM
Does it give the refs an another option by being able to say something like-- "hey, you were out of control, so you lose the ball, but it wan't flagrant, so I am not going to hang a charging foul on you.
It's a bailout option for the refs as you describe. Dakich mentioned it too. The ref doesn't have to decide between a charge and a block.

gu03alum
12-11-2011, 05:38 AM
http://a7.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/392473_10150373269037141_44946602140_8155259_12362 33605_n.jpg

JPtheBeasta
12-11-2011, 06:58 AM
The refs didn't cause 21 TO's. We lost to a good team and a top 10 player in D. Green.

Only true in part. Offensive fouls are counted as turnovers. Hacks on the arm that are no-calls leading to turnovers also contribute. I think we didn't play well enough to win, but after a loss like this I think it's fair to let people gripe. There were two crucial calls at the end of the game that, had they gone the other way, would have really helped our cause- the Stockton foul (Harris got called on an almost identical play for a travel) and the steal in the backcourt that was called a foul.

Threads like this always become a battle of ideologies, where some people want to blame the refs for a loss and the other camp thinks they have nothing to do with it, when in reality it's somewhere in the middle, IMO.

JPtheBeasta
12-11-2011, 07:00 AM
...

Here's my question. Two or three times earlier in the game, I think once with Dower and the other with Carter (and maybe one with Harris), almost the exact situaion occured where we had the ball...bumped into the defender and both players went down. In all the situations traveling was called against our players.

I don't see how the rule allows for this call. Contact created the travel (actually I don't think Carter traveled looking at the replay...in his case he was the exception and stayed upright)-- and it seems to me it needs to either be called a charge or a foul. This isn't the first time I have seen this type of call, but the frequent use of it tonight brought it to the foreground.

So what do you think? Do you like this option? Does it give the refs an another option by being able to say something like-- "hey, you were out of control, so you lose the ball, but it wan't flagrant, so I am not going to hang a charging foul on you." Is it in the rules somewhere I don't know about? Personally, I don't like it...and it seems to be called inconsistently within games (witness tonight) and especially from game to game...you get situations like tonight where its called...and then it disappears for 3 or 4 games.

I like it as long as it is called on both ends of the court.

Ekrub
12-11-2011, 11:05 AM
Only true in part. Offensive fouls are counted as turnovers. Hacks on the arm that are no-calls leading to turnovers also contribute. I think we didn't play well enough to win, but after a loss like this I think it's fair to let people gripe. There were two crucial calls at the end of the game that, had they gone the other way, would have really helped our cause- the Stockton foul (Harris got called on an almost identical play for a travel) and the steal in the backcourt that was called a foul.

Threads like this always become a battle of ideologies, where some people want to blame the refs for a loss and the other camp thinks they have nothing to do with it, when in reality it's somewhere in the middle, IMO.

Probably (95% chance) we wouldn't have come back even with those calls, but as fans we cling to that 5% chance. I agree, it's somewhere in the middle, though the refs were AMAZING compared to a WCC game for 90% of the game.

Reborn
12-11-2011, 11:23 AM
Green gets into foul trouble the second half when he picks up his third with 17 minutes left in the game. Izzo appears to not even think about taking him out. He stays in the game for most all of the 2nd half. Did Izzo have faith in those refs, or faith in Green. The calls at the end of the game in the last two minutes when Gonzaga was making their comeback, really took energy out of that comeback. To me the refs were making a point early in the last two minutes. The point was, Sparty will not lose this game.

And yet Gonzaga blew its own chances by turning the ball over twice in the last minute.

What amazes me is that the biggest question mark I had all year were about the Freshmen and Landry-Edi. As it has turned out so far the biggest surprise and yes even disappointing has been our veterans, and especially Carter and Dower. But obviously last night it was perhaps our best player who had no confidence at all. Wow!!!!!!! So I hope fans quit talking about our guards and their inexperience. Our guards played way better than I thought they would last night. And our rebounding was just outstanding, but when I watched the game later I noticed that Sparty was not crashing the offensive boards but hustling back on D in order to stop Gonzaga's transition game. Good coaching again by the best coach in America. So far no one has given this victory to the better coach. yet, the more you look at that game that fact becomes more and more obvious.

MDABE80
12-11-2011, 11:34 AM
Physical play...more than we're used to. Refs let it go. Although there were a few inappropriate foulds call ( and missed), the refs didn't decide the outcome. We did.
Guard play was timid. Stocks put up some points or it would have been a lot worse.

TO's and failure to develop and inside game with timid guards running the show....well...it's hard to win with this formula. It'll imporve with time but these are very inexperienced guards. Still, we're a man short in the wing/bigs devision. Edi will halp a lot when he's in game form.

Still though, something is missing with out team. Not sure what it is. Experience will help a lot..Kevin is a great player but he son't have a WSU game very often..who does? Glue these kids together and check in 1 month...it'll get better as to the mechanics of how the team plays. Nothing in the past two games was humiliating. We simply cannot blame the refs for us not having that "ONE" kid who is an Adam Morrison....nobody has one of those.

LynetteG
12-11-2011, 02:27 PM
Tale of two halves...first half they let stuff go, second half they started calling ticky-tack and phantom fouls. VERY frustrating to watch!

pbriz
12-11-2011, 03:02 PM
The refs didn't cause 21 TO's. We lost to a good team and a top 10 player in D. Green.

This. I think the 21 TO's hurt us a lot more than the refs

gamagin
12-11-2011, 03:17 PM
From my seat in K2, it was atrocious at best. Sure we shot ourselves in the foot with t/o's and lack of game plan adaptability, but the refs never let us get in the groove of the game.

without suggesting a conspiracy (because there wasn't), it seemed like our hustle plays, steals, tie ups and too many other situations that could have gone either way, went their way. Particularly in the last 10 or so minutes when we turned up the heat. It also seemed like we were getting too many touch fouls and they were getting too few Mug foul calls underneath. Three guys hanging on RS and no one touched him ? repeatedly.

That said, we need to work through this stuff and draw the fouls. They aren't going to get awarded because of frustration on RS's part. Or anyone else's.

Baldwinzag
12-11-2011, 03:28 PM
If we would have brought the same intensity, sticky defense, and hustle as we did the final 5 minutes for the entire 40, I don't the the refs would have "tightened" up the calls. Biggest pet peeve in sports is when a team shows they are capable of playing significantly harder when the game is on the line. Its human nature, yet we did the EXACT same thing vs Illinois. We were down around 10 pts, then all of sudden we're getting our hands on passes, trapping, flying around on defense, running harder on transition, moving quicker w/o the ball, etc. The team needs to watch the final 5 mins of both the Illinois & Mich St game and realize what they're capable of doing. All of a sudden our players magically develop the ability to get in someone's grill on defense when we're behind. Ugh.