On the issue of questionable calls

[YCN]

They are certain to occur in each and every game. And we can argue and discuss endlessly the consequences of those calls. I'm all for any type of discussion that promotes better officiating in the women's game, but I'm completely opposed to using calls/non-calls as a debating point about the outcomes of games.

While in the near term those discussions offer consolation to those whose teams have lost, and cautions to those whose teams have perhaps benefitted from those calls; in the long term it does nothing to distinguish the women's game from the men's, and promotes feelings of ill-will among both those who feel slighted and those whose teams are accused of being the beneficiaries of calls that are deemed questionable.

It is hard enough in this world just balancing our personal budgets and dealing with personal crises and re-installing operating systems on computers that have crashed (I know all about that one) that it just isn't worth a lot of time and discussion to rehash what is going to happen anyway.

The reality is that the fans of any losing team naturally look toward those things that might have happened differently, and officiating is nearly always one of those things.

I've been a sports fan for what seems like forever, and I'm ever more convinced that eventually all of the factors of human decision eventually balance out.

At least I certainly hope so. I wouldn't in any way want my team to be the beneficiary of biased officiating, because that would mean that my team was unable to win on its own merits.

If that was the case, I'd much rather that my team lose. No one is improved by improper officiating or undeserved praise.

[Bob_Ballew]

YCN, I agree with you and I am one of the fans who has strong feelings about the officiating in the Big XII. I just want some consistency. (I'm afraid I am getting what I have wished for...consistently bad officiating.) When I complain about the officials, it is usually a mutual frustration for both teams and I hate to ever blame a loss on the officials. It can happen however. When I watch top rated teams play on TV in other conferences, I don't seem to get caught up in the officiating because they do a better job and you don't notice them as much. Your attention is always on the bad calls the officials make, not the good ones.

I would rather see a good no call rather than an official make an anticipation call, out-of-position call, or the old X ray vision call (the worst kind).

I prefer the women's game to the men's game but I don't mind seeing a little physical action. The ladies are taught to be tough and bang around in the paint. If players could figure the way a game is being called, they can adjust. But when it changes each time down the court, players have to get frustrated.

Much of the bad officiating comes from the same officials repeatedly! Most of them I know by sight, some by name. %$#$@
http://hoopscoop.net/ubb/frown.gif

[This message has been edited by Zo3157 (edited 01-29-2003).]

[swok34]

but I don't mind seeing a little physical action. The ladies are taught to be tough and bang around in the paint

I agree; I did hear that the NCAA wants the officials to focus on rough play away from the ball this year. I just hate to see them let one another kill each other, and then call a touch foul on the next play. Stacey Dales explained a "posting up related foul".....I think she said that if the lower body's are touching, the arms and hands cannot and vice-versa". So, I'll be the first to admit I don't know the rules.

I recall in last years' Texas game here in Norman, I think.....
the officials stopped the game and warned the players that if the physical play didn't lighten up, they were going to call a foul EVERY time down the court.

Mostly what I want is to NOT know that the officials are on the court and to call the game consistently between the two halves.
I've seen a game called "loose" in the 1st half and then players adapt to that, and then in the 2nd half......get called for touch foul after touch foul.....a team CAN beat bad officiating, but they have to adapt quickly to the way it's called.....

it's almost like the old adage, say in Dionnah's case the other night......we can say that Dionnah's shot WON the game, but without every single player on the court, Dionnah wouldn't have had the opportunity to have a last second shot......meaning that
one play, one shot, one bad call, one good call do not a game make.....that's why they play 40 minutes and not 2 minutes.

in effect, I really think it even's out.....consistent or inconsistent......good or bad.

I think the Big XII and the SEC are probably the most physical of the conferences, and would put the Big 10 up there with them.

[This message has been edited by swok34 (edited 01-29-2003).]

[35TangoTango]

I was amazed to find out how much the Big 12 does to try to improve the officiating. According to my source, the conference has a representative at every single game, writing a review on the officiating. The conference commissioner sends out a videotape to all officials every two weeks with examples of good calls and bad calls, and voice-overs explaining why.

All, it would seem, to no avail! If anything, maybe it causes the officials to be over-analytical rather than just go with the flow, like the men's officials.

I liked Stacey's info on post defense. I don't know if it's a rule, or just a convention that refs go by, but you can't have two different parts of your body in contact with the player you are defending. i.e. if you're using your forearm to keep contact with the other player, you can't have your body or your leg up against them, too. That explains all the calls that Beky got early in the season.

[swok34]

Now men's basketball is a WHOLE different story. OU has been involved in two questionable "time-clock" issues......one which was not in OU's favor and the other that was. This is an interesting article in what the Big XII can do and can't do.

OU timekeeper gets clocked by Big 12
01/29/2003
By BRIAN DAVIS / The Dallas Morning News


The Big 12 has determined that clock operator error was the reason for two timekeeping errors in the final seconds of the Texas Tech-Oklahoma game in Norman, Okla., on Jan. 20, and immediate changes have been made in an effort to prevent future problems.

Commissioner Kevin Weiberg said that Oklahoma officials agreed to reassign the clock operator, who has not been identified, and replace the operator with another member of the scorers' table crew at Lloyd Noble Center.

The new clock operator was expected to begin working Tuesday when Oklahoma hosted Texas A&M.

"Whether it was an inadvertent bumping of the switch, we don't know," Weiberg said. "But we reached an agreement with Oklahoma that it was in the best interest of all involved to change the assignment of who runs the clock."

In reviewing the game tape, the Big 12 said the clock stopped for less than one second at the 6.7 mark of regulation. The clock then resumed normal operation before a foul was called with 4.5 seconds remaining.

On the ensuing inbounds pass, the clock did not start for about half a second after OU's Hollis Price received the ball, the league said. Price drove nearly the length of the floor and hit a buzzer-beating shot from 15 feet that forced overtime. OU eventually won, 69-64.

"Sure we're aware that people feel like had the game been properly timed the outcome would have been different," Weiberg said. "It's just impossible to know that for sure."

The Big 12 allows each school to employ its own clock operators. Weiberg said that practice will not change. There is no league rule that allows the commissioner to change the outcome of a game unless an ineligible player was used.

"I don't think that with all that's at stake at games today, the clock should be handled by an employee of the institution," Tech coach Bob Knight said. "The situation at Oklahoma, as it ended, should be a reviewable situation, without any question."

Referees will also begin using their Precision Timing wireless packs to start and stop the clock themselves in the final minute of each half and in overtime. Previously, referees used the equipment to only stop the clock.

[Jennifer]

Well, since Swok mentioned the men's side--I'm sure a lot of you heard about the shot clock thing during the bedlam game a couple of weeks ago. Basically, and OSU player shot the ball after the shot clock expired but the refs counted the bucket and OSU won.
It stunk for OU, but that was such a tough call to make. Sure, OU likely would have won if the refs got it right. But, to hit on some other points made on this thread, there was another almost 40 minutes of ball played. If OU doesn't miss all those free throws, the last play is a non-issue and they win the game. Can't blame the refs for that. SOme of the OU men's fans on the other boards were relentless in their whining about it. Maybe just because it was bedlam...

[35TangoTango]

Personally, I think this clock thing has gotten out of hand, all because someone is playing back tv tapes in slow motion hours after the game. Accept the referee's calls and go on! The OU men lost one and won one on timing calls, but that's part of the game. They could have avoided those situations by taking care of business earlier.

And now we find out that the clocks are connected to a wireless pack that is activated by the referee's whistle? Actually, by their breath action - so an out of shape, wheezing ref has the potential to stop the game?

Looking back at the OU women's Baylor game, one could say that Baylor got a lot done in the final 2 seconds, also - but that's part of the game - the last thing we need is (not so) instant replay!!!!

[RaiderPower1]

Giving Price an almost extra two seconds seems a bit unfair to me. Shouldn't have happened and I am glad that someone (the timekeeper) was punished.

[BenEClone]

"... a little physical action ... tough and bang around in the paint . . . adjust..."

I think this is part of the philosophical difference we have when we distinguish the women's game from the men's. Some players and teams do not do as well in a physical game and can not adjust. If physical play is permitted at all, a coach must recruit and teach players to play the physical game. How is that game different from the men's game?

[YCN]

Unfortunately, Jennifer, that whining occurs just about every time that OU loses a close game, which is most of their losses. A whole lot of people seem to regard each close loss, especially on the road, as a "setup job" or "homer officiating" that was specifically designed to make OU lose. They point out this or that instance of a call that was made against OU or not against their opponent.

When I watch a game, I try to watch it as objectively as possible, which is hard when watching your favorite team. But it was invaluable to me to take a blank slate of bias into viewing games, because when a person starts making a list of calls/non-calls during the course of a game, it is easy to find a half dozen or more on each team. Of course it is only those one or two calls late in the game that stole the game away from the team that really deserved to win.

In a way, bad officiating is a self-sustaining issue, because when a substantial number of people at the games are harrassing the refs for their calls (as I could easily hear over the internet broadcast of the OU-Baylor game) then the refs are undoubtably distracted and hampered in their officiating, which doesn't help the issue one bit. The best way to ensure improved officiating is to let your opinion be known in a fair way, but to curb your impulses when at the games. Hostile "ref-baiting" creates an overall atmosphere of animosity and hostility that has been known to increase the liklihood of the occurrence of negative incidents during and after games both inside and out of arenas. It isn't as likely in women's basketball, but there have been countless cases of rioting, assault and vandalism that have occurred at all levels of sport as a result of abusive fan behavior. I don't want to overstate the issue, though - just wanted to state some opinions and facts.

[35TangoTango]

Originally posted by RaiderPower1:
Giving Price an almost extra two seconds seems a bit unfair to me. Shouldn't have happened and I am glad that someone (the timekeeper) was punished.

Well, here we are getting into the typical men's game smack talk that this board usually is above. RaiderPower, let me point out the ignorance of your comment.

1. The first pause occurred when Tech had the ball, so who was getting the advantage? Are you saying that the timekeeper knew Tech would score with time left and then Price would get the ball?

2. It is also possible that the pause was caused by the ref puffing and setting off his wireless control. Anyway, at that point, you can't say that a half-second pause was an advantage to one side over the other.

3. The clock stops on a made basket, stopped (we now learn) by the ref with his wireless device. The timing official then has to restart the clock when the player inbounds touches it; the timing official is half a court away, and very possibly screened from the action by other players or the officials themselves. How quick would your trigger finger be under those circumstances? Half a second isn't very long! And you talk about punishment? How about a little rational thought here!

I'm not just being a homer; I know most of the people working the scorer's table (don't know which one ran the clock), and I resent any attack on their integrity - I know better, and if you think about it, you do too!

And Bobby's remarks? Now we are all going to go hire outside help to run the clock? Women's games too? What will that cost? Wouldn't you rather spend the money getting competent referees, which is what this thread was about in the first place?

[Bob_Ballew]

YCN, I have to agree again with you on "ref-baiting" and the hostile environments. At the BU Tech game in Lubbock, a Baylor fan behind me kept yelling at the female official "How much are they paying you, we will pay more". This is uncalled for and it was all I could do to sit and listen to his rantings. Someone sitting beside me finally turned and told him to lighten up. If I was officiating a game, I may tend to give the benefit of the doubt call to the team that was not harassing me. I really believe that a group of fans can piss the refs off and you may never get a call to go your way.

BenEClone, I have to disagree with your statement about the physical play. The women's game will never be like the men's game and physical play is definitely part of division 1 WBB and it is not likely to go away. It is still a very finesse, below-the-rim game compared to the men's game.

[RaiderPower1]

Originally posted by soonerman:
Well, here we are getting into the typical men's game smack talk that this board usually is above. RaiderPower, let me point out the ignorance of your comment.


hahaha...well, someone must be worked up about something! I was just stating my opinion and my view of the situation. All I did was point out the obvious and you decided to make an excuse for the timekeeper. That's your opinion of how the situation unfolded and mine is that the timekeeper knew better (as they should). I'm no timekeeper so I don't have to worry about how fast my finger can flip a switch. He/She should have been more aware of the situation instead of sitting back in their chair allowing others to block their view (if that is what happened according to you). JMO

As for half a second...apparently it was long enough for Mr. Price to get a shot off and long enough for the North Carolina women to win a national championship. http://hoopscoop.net/ubb/smile.gif

[Bball Girl]

The local sports gal said the tie clock problem was caught by ESPN when they were reviewing the tape, they sent it off to the Big 12...and here were are.

Having watched the OU Tech game...it seemed to take forever for Price to bring the ball down and take that shot. If the game hadn't gone into OT, then Tech would have a right to gripe...but we had our chance.

Except for a couple of weird things I didn't understand, I thought the refs did a pretty terrific job last night with Mizzou...they pretty much let the teams play. As we were walking out of the arena...here came the refs and I started to say something nice to them...but didn't.

I don't understand how they decide to call tie balls. Sometimes it's enough for the defensive player to put a hand on the ball and other times..four players are grabbing the ball, wrestling around on the floor and they don't call a tie ball.
Maybe I'm imagining it (I too have been wrestling with computer systems)..but it seems that more tie balls are being called with a simple strong hand on the ball.

[mc6821]

Oddly enough a person who grades Big-12 officials spoke to our fan club tonight and many of these questions came up.

I did hear that the NCAA wants the officials to focus on rough play away from the ball this year. I just hate to see them let one another kill each other, and then call a touch foul on the next play. Stacey Dales explained a "posting up related foul".....I think she said that if the lower body's are touching, the arms and hands cannot and vice-versa". So, I'll be the first to admit I don't know the rules.

We were told that the officials are on the lookout for hand checks this year, so that may explain a lot of the touch fouls being called. Post players are allowed to make contact using their forearm while establishing position (hence the "forearm in the back" that you see so often), but they cannot make contact in more than one place simultaneously, i.e. they cannot use both a forearm and also a hip or leg.

I was amazed to find out how much the Big 12 does to try to improve the officiating. According to my source, the conference has a representative at every single game, writing a review on the officiating. The conference commissioner sends out a videotape to all officials every two weeks with examples of good calls and bad calls, and voice-overs explaining why.

I think that every conference does something like this. The person who spoke to us also does work for the WAC.

Also, I was surprised to hear that many of the officials work for more than one conference. Some of our Big-12 officials also call MWC, WAC, PAC-10, etc. games.

[NormanGlenn]

The regular timekeeper was not working the night of the OU-TT game, so the newspaper article was incorrect. The regular timekeeper, Bob Thompson, returned for the OU-TAM game and will be on the job for all future games.

[swok34]

Thanks for that info, mc........I think it's very insightful that Colorado's donor club brings in folks like that.