PDA

View Full Version : This deserves it's own thread and outrage



Birddog
04-08-2015, 12:33 PM
I posted this in another thread but I am so pissed that I thought it should have it's own thread.

This will make you hurl. 3rd story down.
http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/ncaab-...213242341.html


To explain how the blown call transpired, NCAA head of officiating John Adams appeared on Sirius XM radio and made a pretty surprising admission that they never saw the definitive replay that viewers saw at home.

All four of our officials were involved in the review. We never saw, on our monitor, what everybody saw at home, if you can believe that,” Adams said.

However, after the officials left the monitor and made their ruling, Adams said he saw the zoomed-in view of the ball clearly touching Winslow’s finger.

At that point he had the opportunity to quickly make a decision.
“I saw it after they had left the monitor, and actually thought about, is it in my prerogative to get up, run over to the table, buzz the buzzer, and tell them to come back and look?” Adams said. “That’s how critical I thought the play was and concluded that this is a job for the guys on the floor. I’ve never done it before. Why would I do it tonight and perhaps change the balance of the game?
The head of the officials just asked that rhetorical question, can you believe it! How long will he have his job?

Birddog
04-08-2015, 12:52 PM
Well here's more and the job issue is settled.

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/12648171/ncaa-vp-says-officials-actually-did-see-replay-angle-disputed-bounds-call-duke-wisconsin-title-game

Mr Vulture
04-08-2015, 12:54 PM
I guess we are on different sides of this then. In my personal opinion, this call didn't cost Wisconsin the game although it didn't help. I agree that it most likely touched Winslow's finger. My personal feeling is that it seems almost ridiculous to stop a game for as long as they did to review something so close.

I don't see the conspiracy that it seems you are hinting at.

Birddog
04-08-2015, 01:04 PM
I don't see the conspiracy that it seems you are hinting at.
I'm not a conspiracy theorist, I'm an incompetence theorist.

FuManShoes
04-08-2015, 03:23 PM
Not sure what happened to the officiating thread. The problem is not so much that the fix is in (though at times it sure seems like it), but that officials offer these lame excuses for getting things wrong and what's more, try to even up the foul disparity which leads to capricious officiating. Apparently Coach K is a master of playing that game (see below). Coach Few and others would be wise to learn from him since the refs won't change and no one will be held to account anytime soon.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fancy-stats/wp/2015/04/07/duke-really-did-get-all-the-foul-calls-in-the-2015-ncaa-tournament/?postshare=7031428523582392

DixieZag
04-08-2015, 04:44 PM
I really don't think the fix is ever "in" - there is most certainly a way Wisconsin could have won, indeed we could have won. The officials do not control the game.

But they certainly influence it, greatly. All it takes is a few critical calls in the critical points of the games (runs, end of half, last 4) to at least have max impact.

I think that 95% of it goes absolutely unsaid, whether it is a coach working coaches more effectively, coaches intimidating refs, refs looking to even things up, sensing what the people who pick officials want (in style of play, or even the "best" outcome), and even cognizant of ratings. There is no question that the Duke-Kentucky match would be the ratings bonanza. Wisconsin simply outplayed UK. Duke got Utah's most critical player in foul trouble, our most critical inside bigs in foul trouble, the out of bounds calls, the obvious foul situations - - it just seemed to all go one way.

One can pick any reason from sheer chance to the awful. It's likely somewhere in between, lots of Koach intimidation, some awareness of their place is where I'd put it.

willandi
04-08-2015, 05:58 PM
Again, as I said in other threads, there needs to be a unified ref pool, with the refs working all the different conferences, going to a ref camp where they are taught what things to watch for and what is the emphasis. Then they need to be graded and monitored to ensure consistent quality. If they don't/can't cut it, bye-bye! $60,00 and up is enough to have full time, year round refs, working different leagues in summer, attending classes etc.

The other thing that I mentioned is, no talking to, or at, the ref for players or coaches during play. Yell at the ref and he/she calls one of your timouts, so you can discuss it. A player griping about a call on the way up the floor, it's a time out. During stoppages in play, a coach or player can politely engage the ref in conversation, otherwise, it's a no-no.

Do I think either of these will happen? Not in my lifetime, at least not w/o serious intervention from Vegas and the networks/TV people. I say Vegas because I think they want the games called as straight as possible, and if they refused to take any bets, it would bring the (other) criminal element of gambling more into play. I don't think the networks would really want that. I know, Naive! It's just what I hope would happen, and then I take my rose colored glasses off, calm down, and lapse back into complacency

jake
04-09-2015, 08:31 AM
A call influencing a game doesn't mean it changed the outcome, but it does mean it introduces uncertainty into the outcome. Duke probably still wins either way, but we'll never know, and that is what I think is unfortunate. I think it is ridiculous that the officials would not have access to all available angles. Having their replay system be separate from tv does not appear to be working as the best option.

Edit: Now the VP of the NCAA is saying they did see all the angles, but maybe not the zoomed in view. I don't think that view as necessary to see that it grazed his finger. Perhaps these officials are taking indisputable to something more than indisputable?

"Unfortunately, John misspoke yesterday," Gavitt told ESPN.com after his OTL appearance. "The officials did indeed have the camera angle that was shown on the CBS broadcast. It was the last angle they did see. They likely did not stay long enough with a review to see that angle magnified. But they made their determination based on the two-minute review and the camera angle that was shown on CBS and with that determined that there wasn't indisputable evidence to overturn the call. You need to have indisputable evidence by rule to change the call. The facts are they did have the angle the viewers had."

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/12648171/ncaa-vp-says-officials-actually-did-see-replay-angle-disputed-bounds-call-duke-wisconsin-title-game

gonzagafan62
04-09-2015, 08:38 AM
I see no outrage here. It is what it is. Referees don't control when the ball goes through the basket, nor do they control the player, the player's attributes, or when the player is going to have a "hot" or "cold" shooting day.

That being said, I do believe it does impact the game, but the blame is also not all on the officials either. Its really hard to be an official especially with how fast the game is today. If you could do a better job than the officials, I challenge you to do so. For real.

BoZarth
04-09-2015, 09:15 AM
Duke up by 1 with 3 minutes to play and Winslow clearly steps out of bounds. The result of this miss, which all refs know to look for and is rather straightforward, is an Okafor score. You let that one slide because refs miss calls. That happens. Although, you'd assume the 3 very best referees in college basketball were on the floor that night and something as simple as that would be seen.

But to miss that Winslow was the last one to touch the ball with replay as a tool is inexcusable. This was the National Title Game!

The result of this blown call was the potential of a 1 possession game turning into a 3 possession game. Unbelievable.

Go Zags!!!!

willandi
04-09-2015, 09:24 AM
I see no outrage here. It is what it is. Referees don't control when the ball goes through the basket, nor do they control the player, the player's attributes, or when the player is going to have a "hot" or "cold" shooting day.

That being said, I do believe it does impact the game, but the blame is also not all on the officials either. Its really hard to be an official especially with how fast the game is today. If you could do a better job than the officials, I challenge you to do so. For real.

I couldn't do their job better than they do...but they could! If they didn't look at the job as seasonal, and truly trained year round, classes, instruction on points of emphasis, HOW TO USE REPLAY etc, they could do a much better job.

I could, and do, do MY job better than they do. My job doesn't demand split second judgement calls, it demands that I don't chip your $10,000.00 diamond or sapphire or emerald. It is the job I have chosen for myself, and I strive to be as close to flawless as I can.

Their job is officiating basketball games. It should be their only job. And yes, the non called charges, the defensive fouls that should have been offensive fouls or no calls, the two out of bounds no calls, did influence the game. Would Wiscy have won? No way to know, but it is easy to know that the officials shouldn't have played, or mis-played, as big a role as they did. There is a reason that it is being talked about coast to coast, that we are still talking about it. Something stinks in Refland!

Zagceo
04-09-2015, 09:51 AM
No standard ball has always been strange…..I know I know its about money but playing with different balls could have been one of the reasons Pangos shot better at home.



"It's horrible. It's ridiculous," Cuban said. "It's worse than high school. You've got 20 to 25 seconds of passing on the perimeter and then somebody goes and tries to make a play and do something stupid, and scoring's gone down.
"The referees couldn't manage a White Castle. Seriously, the college game is more physical than the NBA game, and the variation in how it's called from game to game [is a problem]. Hell, they don't even have standards on balls. They use different balls. One team's got one ball, the other team's got another ball. There are so many things that are ridiculous."

LINK (http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nba-ball-dont-lie/mark-cuban-blasts-what-he-calls--horrible--and--ridiculous--ncaa-basketball-160308391.html)

Mr Vulture
04-09-2015, 10:04 AM
Sounds like someone who doesn't like Duke. What about the flagrant foul on Kaminsky that wasn't called when he wrapped up Okafor? That wasn't a play on the ball at all. What about the clear contact on Duke shooters down the stretch? Seriously, you are talking about a toe on the line that the official missed because he was behind the play (which happens) and a play that only one view even made it seem like Winslow touched the ball (he probably did). I don't like Duke but the officials didn't change the outcome of the game.


Duke up by 1 with 3 minutes to play and Winslow clearly steps out of bounds. The result of this miss, which all refs know to look for and is rather straightforward, is an Okafor score. You let that one slide because refs miss calls. That happens. Although, you'd assume the 3 very best referees in college basketball were on the floor that night and something as simple as that would be seen.

But to miss that Winslow was the last one to touch the ball with replay as a tool is inexcusable. This was the National Title Game!

The result of this blown call was the potential of a 1 possession game turning into a 3 possession game. Unbelievable.

Go Zags!!!!

zag944
04-09-2015, 10:44 AM
Personally I can't stand the argument that if this team made more shots or this guy didn't make that mistake it would have ended differently. Why the 3 guys out there getting paid shouldn't be held accountable but the 10 college athletes should is strange to me. I dont know or root for any of them, and I just want to watch good basketball.

Thank you to the players and coaches on the Final Four teams. They certainly did their part to make these games wonderful. I can't say the same for the officiating crews.

SunDevilGolfZag
04-09-2015, 06:06 PM
I'm not a conspiracy theorist, I'm an incompetence theorist.

Exactly. I say ditch the replay and keep the human competence/incompetence element. Maybe the game will become fun to watch again.

BoZarth
04-10-2015, 12:29 PM
Sounds like someone who doesn't like Duke. What about the flagrant foul on Kaminsky that wasn't called when he wrapped up Okafor? That wasn't a play on the ball at all. What about the clear contact on Duke shooters down the stretch? Seriously, you are talking about a toe on the line that the official missed because he was behind the play (which happens) and a play that only one view even made it seem like Winslow touched the ball (he probably did). I don't like Duke but the officials didn't change the outcome of the game.

Sounds like someone who missed the point of my post.

When it comes to officiating wouldn’t you agree that seeing a player step out of bounds isn’t a judgment call? Or that with the aid of replay seeing the player who last touched the ball before it went out of bounds isn’t either?

You’re welcome to go down the road of “clear contact” if you’d like but that doesn’t relate to what I’m talking about. That’s a judgment calls. And as for Kaminsky’s foul I’d categorize it more of an intentional foul. Or did you consider it to be excessive or severe or unsportsmanlike? I didn’t. You must’ve I guess. You do know what a flagrant foul is right?

And you did read where I said missing Winslow on the line happens right? Doesn’t make it right? There’s a referee on the baseline who’s responsible for that very call. That referee missed it. I thought he stepped out myself watching it live. I certainly wasn’t on the baseline like the ref.

Then again you think Winslow “probably did” touch the ball.

If you don’t think those two calls if called correctly wouldn’t have possibly changed the outcome of the game . . . okay. We can focus on the futile point of whether I like Duke or not. I’m a fan of Coach K if that matters. I do like Bo Ryan too though.

One more question Mr. Vulture, if you don’t mind?. If I told you we were going to play a 3 minute game and I get to start with the ball and a 1 point lead AND on top of that you would lose two possessions because the refs will miss me stepping on the out of bounds line AND me touching the ball before it went out of bounds would you be okay with that? And, how about we throw in a National Championship on top of that for the winner. You good to go?

Go Zags!!!!

FuManShoes
04-10-2015, 01:16 PM
Sounds like someone who missed the point of my post.

When it comes to officiating wouldn’t you agree that seeing a player step out of bounds isn’t a judgment call? Or that with the aid of replay seeing the player who last touched the ball before it went out of bounds isn’t either?

You’re welcome to go down the road of “clear contact” if you’d like but that doesn’t relate to what I’m talking about. That’s a judgment calls. And as for Kaminsky’s foul I’d categorize it more of an intentional foul. Or did you consider it to be excessive or severe or unsportsmanlike? I didn’t. You must’ve I guess. You do know what a flagrant foul is right?

And you did read where I said missing Winslow on the line happens right? Doesn’t make it right? There’s a referee on the baseline who’s responsible for that very call. That referee missed it. I thought he stepped out myself watching it live. I certainly wasn’t on the baseline like the ref.

Then again you think Winslow “probably did” touch the ball.

If you don’t think those two calls if called correctly wouldn’t have possibly changed the outcome of the game . . . okay. We can focus on the futile point of whether I like Duke or not. I’m a fan of Coach K if that matters. I do like Bo Ryan too though.

One more question Mr. Vulture, if you don’t mind?. If I told you we were going to play a 3 minute game and I get to start with the ball and a 1 point lead AND on top of that you would lose two possessions because the refs will miss me stepping on the out of bounds line AND me touching the ball before it went out of bounds would you be okay with that? And, how about we throw in a National Championship on top of that for the winner. You good to go?

Go Zags!!!!

Awesome post, and love this point, as it brings home the stakes:


One more question Mr. Vulture, if you don’t mind?. If I told you we were going to play a 3 minute game and I get to start with the ball and a 1 point lead AND on top of that you would lose two possessions because the refs will miss me stepping on the out of bounds line AND me touching the ball before it went out of bounds would you be okay with that? And, how about we throw in a National Championship on top of that for the winner. You good to go?

surfmonkey89
04-10-2015, 01:25 PM
Sounds like someone who doesn't like Duke. What about the flagrant foul on Kaminsky that wasn't called when he wrapped up Okafor? That wasn't a play on the ball at all. What about the clear contact on Duke shooters down the stretch? Seriously, you are talking about a toe on the line that the official missed because he was behind the play (which happens) and a play that only one view even made it seem like Winslow touched the ball (he probably did). I don't like Duke but the officials didn't change the outcome of the game.

How does saying that the out of bounds play and missed call on Winslow were blown calls mean that you hate Duke?

Grant Hill pointed out that Winslow steps out of bounds, AND he thought the ball was going to go to Wisconsin on the tipped ball out of bounds. Does that mean he hates Duke?

Maybe Kaminsky should have been called for a flagrant, I don't know. I do know that - whether you like it or not - there is a double standard for those kind of calls in big games, and at the end of games. I'm not surprised it wasn't called a flagrant. And if you're going to complain about that, what about the call where the guy got slapped in the face and there was no call at all?

As for Duke players getting contact, that's what Duke does. They barrel down the lane and get the whistle, regardless of whether they're the ones who initiate contact or not. It's always been the case, and one of the main reasons that people *really* hate Duke.

Mr Vulture
04-10-2015, 02:04 PM
My point is that this had the feel from the beginning, IMO, of saying the referees cost the game for Wisconsin. I probably read more into it than was there based on other posters on other sites whining and crying. To be honest though, in direct response to the questions posed to me.

1. Like I posted, the referee cannot always be in position to see when Winslow stepped out of bounds. I don't see where I said it was a judgement play and I don't see how a referee can be blamed on that one. All the refs were in the proper position and it was on a replay about a minute later that CBS showed him stepping on the end line. Missed call, absolutely, negligence or intent...I don't think so.

2. In regards to the tipped ball play...it took roughly 6 replays, in slow motion, before anyone showed that it was possible that Winslow touched the ball. Do I think he touched it, most likely, but if it's that close I can see erring on the side of the call on the floor. I do understand the issue of the contradictory responses after the game on the official and ncaa's part. Missed call, probably, negligent or intent...I don't think so.

3. In regards to Kaminsky, my understanding is that any intentional foul that is not a play on the ball but is not excessive is a flagrant 1 foul (no intentional fouls)..such as grabbing a guy with two arms. No, I am not talking about basketball plays.

Again, there were a lot of physical plays by Wisconsin that weren't called down the stretch of that game as well. I don't see anything as intentional and I don't think one or two plays determined the games outcome.

23zagmd
04-13-2015, 07:18 AM
My two points on this topic:

1. The referees move thru and up the tournament ladder the same way that the teams do, based on performance. They are graded after every game and it is very precise. I.e. missed a travel at 6:47 of second half. questionable call foul at 10:23 of first half. etc. They go to camps and seminars all year long to improve what they do, they even get graded at these camps.

Basketball is infinitely better than Football where the conferences have their own pool of officials and you get situations where Oklahoma absolutely gets homered in Eugene playing the Ducks on national TV by a group of Pac 12 officials. At least in basketball it is more regional. For instance, guys doing the WCC, routinely do MWC, Big Sky, and Pac 12 games.

2. The problem with officiating is not the lack of any of these systems to evaluate. It is who is doing the evaluation and what relationship they have to the group that they ARE evaluating. There is a good ole boy network in officiating like you can't even imagine and if you think Cops have each others back, you should all bear witness to the refereeing community. Until that is changed, we are basically stuck with the same pool of officials continuing to call the same very important games.

In a perfect world, with me making the decisions:) I feel like a decent solution to this problem would be to cleanse the pool every year with a mandatory "demotion" process. They should have to change out the bottom 10-15% of the graded pool every season. I.E. the guys with the lowest grades get demoted and they move guys up that were graded high at the lower levels. I think guys that are trying to get to the higher levels are more willing to listen and correct mistakes they make than guys/gals that are given all the high level games because they have been doing it for 25 years.

This will also keep the current pool in a more competitive environment where they continue to learn and adapt with the changes in the game and the changes in officiating. There are still way to many guys officiating games like they did 10 years ago. The NBA has successfully dealt with hand checking and how post play is officiated. The emphasis for the last couple of years has been to clean up college and high school in the same manner...to this point, it has failed because of some of the reasons I've mentioned before.