Had Officials waited, they would have seen what we saw

[OnceAhawk]

Check out the article and video at the end of this post. If Badger fans were not sick before, they will be now.

As you will see in the video (involves an interview of an NCAA VP), the refs had made their determination that there was not enough video evidence to overturn the out of bounds play RIGHT BEFORE CBS blew up the image, showing the ball go off the fingertips of a Duke player.

During this championship game, there were 18 different camera angles; in a regular game, you would have from 4-7 camera angles. As this VP points out, the time to review 18 angles takes more time; had the refs taken a little more time, they would have seen the blown up video image that we all saw on TV and they would have gotten the call right; they would have given the ball to WI, who was down by 5, with under 2 minutes to go in the game. Instead the ball was awarded to Duke, who went down and hit a 3, increasing their lead to 8, where the ball game was essentially over.



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

 

[northernboarderhawk]

Well if that is the only reason they didn't overturn the call then they need to go back and get more training, because any one that has Refed or watched bb enough would not have needed to see the blown up video. if you watched close enough you could see the rotation of the ball change even with out the blown up video. Bad officiating on that call, especially with replay.

 

[OnceAhawk]

agreed; they have video to bail them out, and the refs still mess up the call;

also, note that the VP basically said if they had just waited a little bit longer, they would have seen CBS blowing up the image, just like what we saw on our TV sets, making the call even more obvious

The 1987 UNLV game has haunted Iowa fans; so has the 1980 Final 4 game vs L'ville (what if Lester had not gotten hurt); this game will haunt WI fans because this likely is as close as they will ever get to a national title in men's basketball

Originally posted by northernboarderhawk:

Well if that is the only reason they didn't overturn the call then they need to go back and get more training, because any one that has Refed or watched bb enough would not have needed to see the blown up video. if you watched close enough you could see the rotation of the ball change even with out the blown up video. Bad officiating on that call, especially with replay.

 

[L. Wade Childress]

I said this Monday and people seemed in awe that's how it worked. the refs see everything we see, but it's not a simulcast. they can pick what views they feel will be best. they don't have the luxury of a huge production crew.

 

[2432Hawk]

So CBS delayed showing it to create a controversy and help Duke win..... ah....haaaaaa!
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[KeyWest Tim]

They also appear to have lied/ not correctly explained how they did have access according to the story out Wednesday.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[OnceAhawk]

Originally posted by L. Wade Childress:
I said this Monday and people seemed in awe that's how it worked. the refs see everything we see, but it's not a simulcast. they can pick what views they feel will be best. they don't have the luxury of a huge production crew.

Here's the printed version of what Dan Gavitt (NCAA's vice president of men's basketball) had to say:

Gavitt would like college basketball referees to take more time to make the right calls, especially with a national championship at stake.
Less than 48 hours after a crucial call helped Duke hold on for a 68-63 victory over Wisconsin on Monday night in the title game, the NCAA's vice president of men's basketball told The Associated Press that the referees could have been "more patient" at the replay monitor.
A magnified shot that aired during CBS' live telecast appeared to show a Duke player touched the ball last when Badgers guard Bronson Koenig missed a layup with 1:54 to play and Duke leading 63-58. But Gavitt said the officials never got a chance to see that replay because they had already decided to uphold the original decision that the ball went off Wisconsin.
"All I'm saying is that I think there's a chance that if there had been a longer review, especially on the blown up one, the magnified version, there's a chance there would have been enough evidence to overturn the call," Gavitt said Wednesday. "But it's still a judgment call."

With a longer review, they would have seen this:

This post was edited on 4/9 4:31 AM by OnceAhawk

 

[markfromj]

Who touched the ball last BEFORE the disputed Winslow tip/non-tip?

 

[hawkeyesports92]

Only a strong bias could keep you from seeing who it was out on without the blown up picture.

 

[DavenportHawk8]

This is where the NCAA needs to improve their "review" process. It seems like these officials go to the monitor WAY Too many times in a game and most of the time it takes 1-2 minutes and they end up not reversing the call?? Whats the point of looking at it.

This where I think the NCAA needs a 4th official (bench guy) who sits at the bench or out in the TV truck. They watch the replays and if they feel that a call needs to be changed, they buzz one of the officials or sounds the horn. They stop play for 40 seconds while he looks at it. If he feels it needs to be changed he will buzz them down. If it doesn't get over turned, then they play on and it only took 30-40 seconds.

I am sure they could tweak the system to make it work better. hell if a coach wants you to look at the monitor, Fine stop play and have the guy look at it. IF the call is the same that coach gets a Time-out charged. If it is changed, then they do not get charged a time-out.

I counted one time during the conference championship week and there some games where they had almost 12-14 stoppages under 6 minutes for (Time-outs, reviews, media time-out, and fouling out). That game took FOREVER to complete and seriously by the end of it most of the people were bored. Need to speed the game up anyway possible.

 

[HoustonREDHawk]

Somehow the review process needs to get better. If this were the only bad call that went against Wisconsin in the second half, it wouldn't be a big deal. Duke is champ. Long live King K.

 

[OnceAhawk]

it appears a lot of things need to be looked at, including the process of reviewing video (example:when you have 18 cameras instead of 4, how long do you wait for the perfect angle and for a blown up shot of the video?)

there needs to be consistency in officiating across the country; things that need addressing:

* if the offensive player initiates contact by backing into the defensive player, is that an offensive foul, defensive foul, or a play on? Or does the defensive player need to flop to get his point across that he was the one who got fouled?

* if the offensive player drives, initiates contact with a defensive player who is set, is that an offensive foul, defensive foul, or a play on? Or does the defensive player need to flop to get his point across that he was the one who got fouled?

* coaches need to shut up; if they don't, T them up?

Originally posted by DavenportHawk8:
This is where the NCAA needs to improve their "review" process. It seems like these officials go to the monitor WAY Too many times in a game and most of the time it takes 1-2 minutes and they end up not reversing the call?? Whats the point of looking at it.

This where I think the NCAA needs a 4th official (bench guy) who sits at the bench or out in the TV truck. They watch the replays and if they feel that a call needs to be changed, they buzz one of the officials or sounds the horn. They stop play for 40 seconds while he looks at it. If he feels it needs to be changed he will buzz them down. If it doesn't get over turned, then they play on and it only took 30-40 seconds.

I am sure they could tweak the system to make it work better. hell if a coach wants you to look at the monitor, Fine stop play and have the guy look at it. IF the call is the same that coach gets a Time-out charged. If it is changed, then they do not get charged a time-out.

I counted one time during the conference championship week and there some games where they had almost 12-14 stoppages under 6 minutes for (Time-outs, reviews, media time-out, and fouling out). That game took FOREVER to complete and seriously by the end of it most of the people were bored. Need to speed the game up anyway possible.

 

[OnceAhawk]

the refs missing Winslow stepping out of bounds was big; of course, he then passed to Okafur, who laid it in;

just these 2 missed calls subsequently resulted in Duke scoring 5 points.......in a 5 point win....i can see why the Wi coaches, players and fans would have sour grapes

Originally posted by HoustonREDHawk:
Somehow the review process needs to get better. If this were the only bad call that went against Wisconsin in the second half, it wouldn't be a big deal. Duke is champ. Long live King K.

 

[ddelzell]

I would like to see officials in post game news conferences the same way that coaches and players are. I firmly believe that if the people who can so dramatically impact a game are held accountable for their calls then they might make a more concerted effort to get the call right. It might also remove any bias officials might have regarding certain teams, coaches and players. Imagine this scenario.

"Ref, in the second half you and your crew missed two calls that both went against Wisconsin, one of them with the benefit of replay, and missed both. Those two misses directly led to 5 points for Duke. How do you respond to this?"


I would imagine that there would not be too many officials excited with the prospect of having to explain big disparities in fouls and other calls.

 

[OnceAhawk]

good idea.

Teddy V cost Iowa a berth in the Big Dance in 2013 (BTT game vs MSU) and we all felt sick. Imagine how sick WI fans feel?This was their chance....

I just hope some THINGS happen where officiating improves. Its nice that the media is putting a big spot light on this. It can't do anything for WI but maybe, just maybe, it will force some changes for the better.

What do you think about coaches having 2 total challenges in a game (similar to football)? So if a ref misses a call, the team calls time out and says they want to use one of their challenges. If the challenge is upheld, they don't lose a time out or challenge; otherwise, you lose a time out and a challenge. Just a thought; not that it would have mattered with the out of bounds play but might have w/ the Winslow play.

Originally posted by ddelzell:

I would like to see officials in post game news conferences the same way that coaches and players are. I firmly believe that if the people who can so dramatically impact a game are held accountable for their calls then they might make a more concerted effort to get the call right. It might also remove any bias officials might have regarding certain teams, coaches and players. Imagine this scenario.

"Ref, in the second half you and your crew missed two calls that both went against Wisconsin, one of them with the benefit of replay, and missed both. Those two misses directly led to 5 points for Duke. How do you respond to this?"


I would imagine that there would not be too many officials excited with the prospect of having to explain big disparities in fouls and other calls.

 

[Section8]

The refs, in all sports, also have the safety blanket of "irrefutable evidence" to fall back on. This takes us back to before replays. A wrong call can still stand. It just let's the ref initially making the call share blame with other refs.

 

[ddelzell]

Originally posted by OnceAhawk:
good idea.

Teddy V cost Iowa a berth in the Big Dance in 2013 (BTT game vs MSU) and we all felt sick. Imagine how sick WI fans feel?This was their chance....

I just hope some THINGS happen where officiating improves. Its nice that the media is putting a big spot light on this. It can't do anything for WI but maybe, just maybe, it will force some changes for the better.

What do you think about coaches having 2 total challenges in a game (similar to football)? So if a ref misses a call, the team calls time out and says they want to use one of their challenges. If the challenge is upheld, they don't lose a time out or challenge; otherwise, you lose a time out and a challenge. Just a thought; not that it would have mattered with the out of bounds play but might have w/ the Winslow play.

Originally posted by ddelzell:

I would like to see officials in post game news conferences the same way that coaches and players are. I firmly believe that if the people who can so dramatically impact a game are held accountable for their calls then they might make a more concerted effort to get the call right. It might also remove any bias officials might have regarding certain teams, coaches and players. Imagine this scenario.

"Ref, in the second half you and your crew missed two calls that both went against Wisconsin, one of them with the benefit of replay, and missed both. Those two misses directly led to 5 points for Duke. How do you respond to this?"


I would imagine that there would not be too many officials excited with the prospect of having to explain big disparities in fouls and other calls.

The "coaches challenge" isn't a bad idea, in my opinion, but it still doesn't address the fact that the officials don't have to answer for the calls that they make or don't make. I really believe that until the officials are held accountable, then there is no reason for them to fear the consequences of making bad calls.

I don't doubt that there are good officials who make bad calls. I get it. Refs are human and bound to make mistakes. It happens. The thing is, why are we always complaining about the same officials over and over and over again? Are they that incompetent?

 

[BubsFinn]

Originally posted by ddelzell:

I would like to see officials in post game news conferences the same way that coaches and players are. I firmly believe that if the people who can so dramatically impact a game are held accountable for their calls then they might make a more concerted effort to get the call right. It might also remove any bias officials might have regarding certain teams, coaches and players. Imagine this scenario.

"Ref, in the second half you and your crew missed two calls that both went against Wisconsin, one of them with the benefit of replay, and missed both. Those two misses directly led to 5 points for Duke. How do you respond to this?"


I would imagine that there would not be too many officials excited with the prospect of having to explain big disparities in fouls and other calls.

The LAST thing refs like TV Ted Valentine need is access to a microphone. You thought he and Ed Hightower were drama queens? That's nothing compared to what they'd be like if they had the media listening to them after the game.

 

[L. Wade Childress]

no one could tell who touched it before Winslow. the ball was hit out of hands so it's a 50/50 call. much like I did, they were focused on that call rather than the critical tip after it was jarred loose. it honestly took me 5-6 replays to even see it, so I'm not faulting the refs for missing it on their little monitor.

 

[OnceAhawk]

Originally posted by ddelzell:

Originally posted by OnceAhawk:
good idea.

Teddy V cost Iowa a berth in the Big Dance in 2013 (BTT game vs MSU) and we all felt sick. Imagine how sick WI fans feel?This was their chance....

I just hope some THINGS happen where officiating improves. Its nice that the media is putting a big spot light on this. It can't do anything for WI but maybe, just maybe, it will force some changes for the better.

What do you think about coaches having 2 total challenges in a game (similar to football)? So if a ref misses a call, the team calls time out and says they want to use one of their challenges. If the challenge is upheld, they don't lose a time out or challenge; otherwise, you lose a time out and a challenge. Just a thought; not that it would have mattered with the out of bounds play but might have w/ the Winslow play.

Originally posted by ddelzell:

I would like to see officials in post game news conferences the same way that coaches and players are. I firmly believe that if the people who can so dramatically impact a game are held accountable for their calls then they might make a more concerted effort to get the call right. It might also remove any bias officials might have regarding certain teams, coaches and players. Imagine this scenario.

"Ref, in the second half you and your crew missed two calls that both went against Wisconsin, one of them with the benefit of replay, and missed both. Those two misses directly led to 5 points for Duke. How do you respond to this?"


I would imagine that there would not be too many officials excited with the prospect of having to explain big disparities in fouls and other calls.

The "coaches challenge" isn't a bad idea, in my opinion, but it still doesn't address the fact that the officials don't have to answer for the calls that they make or don't make. I really believe that until the officials are held accountable, then there is no reason for them to fear the consequences of making bad calls.

I don't doubt that there are good officials who make bad calls. I get it. Refs are human and bound to make mistakes. It happens. The thing is, why are we always complaining about the same officials over and over and over again? Are they that incompetent?

isn't there a B1G Supervisor of officials who sits down w/ these guys and goes over questionable calls? I thought there was a process in place where the supervisor actually gives game by game performance reviews

 

[dawgs_04]

Originally posted by L. Wad...ldress:
no one could tell who touched it before Winslow. the ball was hit out of hands so it's a 50/50 call. much like I did, they were focused on that call rather than the critical tip after it was jarred loose. it honestly took me 5-6 replays to even see it, so I'm not faulting the refs for missing it on their little monitor.

It was a 50/50 call live. Replay was clear as day. The ball changed direction. Fingers bent backwards. That's not 50/50. It's 100/0 & they still got it wrong.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[ddelzell]

Originally posted by OnceAhawk:

Originally posted by ddelzell:

Originally posted by OnceAhawk:
good idea.

Teddy V cost Iowa a berth in the Big Dance in 2013 (BTT game vs MSU) and we all felt sick. Imagine how sick WI fans feel?This was their chance....

I just hope some THINGS happen where officiating improves. Its nice that the media is putting a big spot light on this. It can't do anything for WI but maybe, just maybe, it will force some changes for the better.

What do you think about coaches having 2 total challenges in a game (similar to football)? So if a ref misses a call, the team calls time out and says they want to use one of their challenges. If the challenge is upheld, they don't lose a time out or challenge; otherwise, you lose a time out and a challenge. Just a thought; not that it would have mattered with the out of bounds play but might have w/ the Winslow play.

Originally posted by ddelzell:

I would like to see officials in post game news conferences the same way that coaches and players are. I firmly believe that if the people who can so dramatically impact a game are held accountable for their calls then they might make a more concerted effort to get the call right. It might also remove any bias officials might have regarding certain teams, coaches and players. Imagine this scenario.

"Ref, in the second half you and your crew missed two calls that both went against Wisconsin, one of them with the benefit of replay, and missed both. Those two misses directly led to 5 points for Duke. How do you respond to this?"


I would imagine that there would not be too many officials excited with the prospect of having to explain big disparities in fouls and other calls.

The "coaches challenge" isn't a bad idea, in my opinion, but it still doesn't address the fact that the officials don't have to answer for the calls that they make or don't make. I really believe that until the officials are held accountable, then there is no reason for them to fear the consequences of making bad calls.

I don't doubt that there are good officials who make bad calls. I get it. Refs are human and bound to make mistakes. It happens. The thing is, why are we always complaining about the same officials over and over and over again? Are they that incompetent?

isn't there a B1G Supervisor of officials who sits down w/ these guys and goes over questionable calls? I thought there was a process in place where the supervisor actually gives game by game performance reviews

Yeah, there is a B1G supervisor of officials who sits down with these guys after the games. I imagine the conversation goes something like this: "Where's my cut?"

Seriously, though, I doubt if the head of officials is going to admit there is a problem. If he would, it would amount to him admitting that there were/are problems within his department.

 

[DavenportHawk8]

Originally posted by ddelzell:

Originally posted by OnceAhawk:

Originally posted by ddelzell:

Originally posted by OnceAhawk:
good idea.

Teddy V cost Iowa a berth in the Big Dance in 2013 (BTT game vs MSU) and we all felt sick. Imagine how sick WI fans feel?This was their chance....

I just hope some THINGS happen where officiating improves. Its nice that the media is putting a big spot light on this. It can't do anything for WI but maybe, just maybe, it will force some changes for the better.

What do you think about coaches having 2 total challenges in a game (similar to football)? So if a ref misses a call, the team calls time out and says they want to use one of their challenges. If the challenge is upheld, they don't lose a time out or challenge; otherwise, you lose a time out and a challenge. Just a thought; not that it would have mattered with the out of bounds play but might have w/ the Winslow play.

Originally posted by ddelzell:

I would like to see officials in post game news conferences the same way that coaches and players are. I firmly believe that if the people who can so dramatically impact a game are held accountable for their calls then they might make a more concerted effort to get the call right. It might also remove any bias officials might have regarding certain teams, coaches and players. Imagine this scenario.

"Ref, in the second half you and your crew missed two calls that both went against Wisconsin, one of them with the benefit of replay, and missed both. Those two misses directly led to 5 points for Duke. How do you respond to this?"


I would imagine that there would not be too many officials excited with the prospect of having to explain big disparities in fouls and other calls.

The "coaches challenge" isn't a bad idea, in my opinion, but it still doesn't address the fact that the officials don't have to answer for the calls that they make or don't make. I really believe that until the officials are held accountable, then there is no reason for them to fear the consequences of making bad calls.

I don't doubt that there are good officials who make bad calls. I get it. Refs are human and bound to make mistakes. It happens. The thing is, why are we always complaining about the same officials over and over and over again? Are they that incompetent?

isn't there a B1G Supervisor of officials who sits down w/ these guys and goes over questionable calls? I thought there was a process in place where the supervisor actually gives game by game performance reviews

Yeah, there is a B1G supervisor of officials who sits down with these guys after the games. I imagine the conversation goes something like this: "Where's my cut?"

Seriously, though, I doubt if the head of officials is going to admit there is a problem. If he would, it would amount to him admitting that there were/are problems within his department.

There is actually a very formal process for these officials. They get reviewed by their supervisor and also the head of officiating for the NCAA. IF there are any issues, the officials get a "mark" and sometimes that can be the difference from working in the NCAA tournament the following year. These guys have to fill out paper work and answer to their conference supervisor and the head of the NCAA.

Im sorry but most officials do not look at a game as, "boy i want to screw someone over today." They just don't have that mentality. Every official wants to call the perfect game, but lets be honest it can't happen. With the coaches/players/fans today, there is no way to call a perfect game, because no matter what someone is upset with your call. I do not know when it started, but I remember playing in high school and hardly ever hearing anything from coaches/fans about the officiating. They were more worried about yelling at their son/daughter than they were about officiating. I don't know where this entitlement came from that you can question every call and act like a jack@ss doing it. Officials will make mistakes and miss some calls. They are not perfect.

I always remember working with one official and we had a good ballgame on our hands. We had a breakaway going the other way and our lead guy was a little slow (older gentlemen) and there was a strip of the ball as the player was going up for a lay-up and he didn't see who it was off of. So we went to the arrow and gave the ball back to the other team. The coach was upset and rightfully so. My other partner had the best line and the coach actually shut up after it, the line was, "Coach we will call a perfect game, when you coach and your players play a perfect game."

After the game the coach complimented us on our effort and said, "i could not do what you guys do." I get it he was upset but he understood that mistakes happen in officiating. Some calls will go missed and that's just the nature of officiating. If an official actually called all of the fouls that happen in a game, there would not be enough players to finish the game. Everyone would foul out, and then you would hear from the stands, "LET THEM PLAY", "WERE NOT HERE TO WATCH YOU BLOW YOUR WHISTLE."

 

[ddelzell]

Originally posted by DavenportHawk8:

Originally posted by ddelzell:

Originally posted by OnceAhawk:

Originally posted by ddelzell:

Originally posted by OnceAhawk:
good idea.

Teddy V cost Iowa a berth in the Big Dance in 2013 (BTT game vs MSU) and we all felt sick. Imagine how sick WI fans feel?This was their chance....

I just hope some THINGS happen where officiating improves. Its nice that the media is putting a big spot light on this. It can't do anything for WI but maybe, just maybe, it will force some changes for the better.

What do you think about coaches having 2 total challenges in a game (similar to football)? So if a ref misses a call, the team calls time out and says they want to use one of their challenges. If the challenge is upheld, they don't lose a time out or challenge; otherwise, you lose a time out and a challenge. Just a thought; not that it would have mattered with the out of bounds play but might have w/ the Winslow play.

Originally posted by ddelzell:

I would like to see officials in post game news conferences the same way that coaches and players are. I firmly believe that if the people who can so dramatically impact a game are held accountable for their calls then they might make a more concerted effort to get the call right. It might also remove any bias officials might have regarding certain teams, coaches and players. Imagine this scenario.

"Ref, in the second half you and your crew missed two calls that both went against Wisconsin, one of them with the benefit of replay, and missed both. Those two misses directly led to 5 points for Duke. How do you respond to this?"


I would imagine that there would not be too many officials excited with the prospect of having to explain big disparities in fouls and other calls.

The "coaches challenge" isn't a bad idea, in my opinion, but it still doesn't address the fact that the officials don't have to answer for the calls that they make or don't make. I really believe that until the officials are held accountable, then there is no reason for them to fear the consequences of making bad calls.

I don't doubt that there are good officials who make bad calls. I get it. Refs are human and bound to make mistakes. It happens. The thing is, why are we always complaining about the same officials over and over and over again? Are they that incompetent?

isn't there a B1G Supervisor of officials who sits down w/ these guys and goes over questionable calls? I thought there was a process in place where the supervisor actually gives game by game performance reviews

Yeah, there is a B1G supervisor of officials who sits down with these guys after the games. I imagine the conversation goes something like this: "Where's my cut?"

Seriously, though, I doubt if the head of officials is going to admit there is a problem. If he would, it would amount to him admitting that there were/are problems within his department.

There is actually a very formal process for these officials. They get reviewed by their supervisor and also the head of officiating for the NCAA. IF there are any issues, the officials get a "mark" and sometimes that can be the difference from working in the NCAA tournament the following year. These guys have to fill out paper work and answer to their conference supervisor and the head of the NCAA.

Im sorry but most officials do not look at a game as, "boy i want to screw someone over today." They just don't have that mentality. Every official wants to call the perfect game, but lets be honest it can't happen. With the coaches/players/fans today, there is no way to call a perfect game, because no matter what someone is upset with your call. I do not know when it started, but I remember playing in high school and hardly ever hearing anything from coaches/fans about the officiating. They were more worried about yelling at their son/daughter than they were about officiating. I don't know where this entitlement came from that you can question every call and act like a jack@ss doing it. Officials will make mistakes and miss some calls. They are not perfect.

I always remember working with one official and we had a good ballgame on our hands. We had a breakaway going the other way and our lead guy was a little slow (older gentlemen) and there was a strip of the ball as the player was going up for a lay-up and he didn't see who it was off of. So we went to the arrow and gave the ball back to the other team. The coach was upset and rightfully so. My other partner had the best line and the coach actually shut up after it, the line was, "Coach we will call a perfect game, when you coach and your players play a perfect game."

After the game the coach complimented us on our effort and said, "i could not do what you guys do." I get it he was upset but he understood that mistakes happen in officiating. Some calls will go missed and that's just the nature of officiating. If an official actually called all of the fouls that happen in a game, there would not be enough players to finish the game. Everyone would foul out, and then you would hear from the stands, "LET THEM PLAY", "WERE NOT HERE TO WATCH YOU BLOW YOUR WHISTLE."

I agree with you, for the most part. I think the majority of officials try to do the best job that they can. Basketball is a fast sport where young men are running up and down the floor as fast as they can while middle aged men try to keep up. It's asking a lot of the older guys to try and keep up with the younger guys.

No matter what you say, however, will convince me that there are not officials who are not biased in assessing fouls at the end of a game.

 

[OnceAhawk]

Originally posted by ddelzell:

Originally posted by OnceAhawk:

Originally posted by ddelzell:

Originally posted by OnceAhawk:
good idea.

Teddy V cost Iowa a berth in the Big Dance in 2013 (BTT game vs MSU) and we all felt sick. Imagine how sick WI fans feel?This was their chance....

I just hope some THINGS happen where officiating improves. Its nice that the media is putting a big spot light on this. It can't do anything for WI but maybe, just maybe, it will force some changes for the better.

What do you think about coaches having 2 total challenges in a game (similar to football)? So if a ref misses a call, the team calls time out and says they want to use one of their challenges. If the challenge is upheld, they don't lose a time out or challenge; otherwise, you lose a time out and a challenge. Just a thought; not that it would have mattered with the out of bounds play but might have w/ the Winslow play.

Originally posted by ddelzell:

I would like to see officials in post game news conferences the same way that coaches and players are. I firmly believe that if the people who can so dramatically impact a game are held accountable for their calls then they might make a more concerted effort to get the call right. It might also remove any bias officials might have regarding certain teams, coaches and players. Imagine this scenario.

"Ref, in the second half you and your crew missed two calls that both went against Wisconsin, one of them with the benefit of replay, and missed both. Those two misses directly led to 5 points for Duke. How do you respond to this?"


I would imagine that there would not be too many officials excited with the prospect of having to explain big disparities in fouls and other calls.

The "coaches challenge" isn't a bad idea, in my opinion, but it still doesn't address the fact that the officials don't have to answer for the calls that they make or don't make. I really believe that until the officials are held accountable, then there is no reason for them to fear the consequences of making bad calls.

I don't doubt that there are good officials who make bad calls. I get it. Refs are human and bound to make mistakes. It happens. The thing is, why are we always complaining about the same officials over and over and over again? Are they that incompetent?

isn't there a B1G Supervisor of officials who sits down w/ these guys and goes over questionable calls? I thought there was a process in place where the supervisor actually gives game by game performance reviews

Yeah, there is a B1G supervisor of officials who sits down with these guys after the games. I imagine the conversation goes something like this: "Where's my cut?"

Seriously, though, I doubt if the head of officials is going to admit there is a problem. If he would, it would amount to him admitting that there were/are problems within his department.

sometimes the league issues a statement stating they got a call wrong.... will the NCAA?

 

[DanL53]

""If an official actually called all of the fouls that happen in a game, there would not be enough players to finish the game. Everyone would foul out, and then you would hear from the stands, "LET THEM PLAY", "WERE NOT HERE TO WATCH YOU BLOW YOUR WHISTLE.", DavenportHawk8

This doesn't help the case that officials are just trying to do their jobs.

Who cares what the fans in the seats are yelling? Kind of explains home court advantage though.

And since we're deciding which fouls to call and not call I guess it really is true the rules don't matter. I suppose that is a good explanation of how the game has become so physical.

All I know, is the officiating has become as crappy as it has ever been. The games look like Hockey games! And it is pretty obvious that there is a class system going on of which teams get the calls.

I will never buy this "innocent" game. People are as much crooks as they are honest and that's just human nature. Officials do NOT need to be blindly trusted. First time they appear to be bad at their jobs...they should be gone. That's how to fix this mess. No more coddling!

 

[El Simbolo]

How big and how high res is the monitor they use? It just seems odd that they rely on refs hunching over a small monitor (probably with arena lighting reflecting off the screen) to make these calls. But in football they have a guy in a booth with huge monitors and dim lighting, ,I assume