Referees

[MartyFine]

And 90% of those calls have been correct. This is another case where people need to know the rules before they *****.

Being wrong 10% (or more according to your arbitrary calculations) of the time is OK? That is a horrible rate.

They need a rule that allows the official to call an automatic foul on any player that clearly flops. That will clean the game up and improve upon a play that is not basketball related in any way.

People need to have played the game to understand.

 

[hoopitup]

I think the only thing worse than being a coach is being a ref and sometimes its the other way around. People will always question coaching moves and decisions and refs are always scrutinized by fans.

Rarely, if ever, has 1 call or a no-call by a referee cost a team a game. There are so many things that occur during the course of a game that go unnoticed. Failure to execute throughout the game usually puts a team in position to lose or not perform as well as they should when it comes down to crunch time. But it is too easy to say the refs cost a team a win, etc...

 

[ruxCYtable]

Being wrong 10% (or more according to your arbitrary calculations) of the time is OK? That is a horrible rate.

They need a rule that allows the official to call an automatic foul on any player that clearly flops. That will clean the game up and improve upon a play that is not basketball related in any way.

People need to have played the game to understand.

Even if you did that it would still be subjective. Every charge call that went against ISU, you'd be screaming that he flopped. And every time ISU flopped but still got the charge call you'd be saying it was a great call (Knowing our fans someone would still find fault with it. The "wrong" official would call it, or the whistle would be too "late" even if it was the right call.)

I agree with you flopping is a problem and it definitely should not be rewarded. But there is not "automatic" rule that can fix it. It will still be a subjective call. That is an area where every official has to strive to improve.

 

[IcSyU]

Being wrong 10% (or more according to your arbitrary calculations) of the time is OK? That is a horrible rate.

They need a rule that allows the official to call an automatic foul on any player that clearly flops. That will clean the game up and improve upon a play that is not basketball related in any way.

People need to have played the game to understand.

Um, there is. A technical foul can be called for flops. However, the call isn't very easy to make unless you have the perfect angle. Even what most consider "flops" are still charging. If I'm standing between you and the basket, there is not a rule that says I need to push back when you initiate contact into my body. When I have my back to the hoop and try to back down my defender, I'm going through the space he's established initial legal guarding position. That's charging. He has the right to that space and as the offensive player I need to go around.

Most of the officials in any sport played that sport. Do you really think they don't understand? So it's ok to screw defensive players who are where they should be playing within the rules and reward the offensive players who are clearly breaking the rules? How is that understanding?

I think the only thing worse than being a coach is being a ref and sometimes its the other way around. People will always question coaching moves and decisions and refs are always scrutinized by fans.

Rarely, if ever, has 1 call or a no-call by a referee cost a team a game. There are so many things that occur during the course of a game that go unnoticed. Failure to execute throughout the game usually puts a team in position to lose or not perform as well as they should when it comes down to crunch time. But it is too easy to say the refs cost a team a win, etc...

One call has never cost a team a college basketball game. "But he didn't call the obvious foul there!" Yeah, had you not bricked 17 threes I'm sure that would've helped.

 

[VeloClone]

I have posted complaints about officiating here and there. I have also shown respect for some of the officials who regularly post here and solicited their expertise on rules and officiating. With those disclaimers, I have to say that there were not glaring issues with the officiating in the Baylor game. They called it in a way that didn't necessarily favor Iowa State, but they called it fair and pretty even. I think it is ridiculous to say otherwise.

I reserve the right to call out officials for blown calls or showboating (I'm looking at you, Timmy) but officials are never going to be perfect. No one is unless JC decides to pick up a whistle, but he is too busy answering "No" to my lottery prayers.

 

[BCClone]

Best way to get a grasp of actual officiating is to attend a game that you have NO care who wins. I live in my wife's hometown and have attended many sporting events there. I laugh at times when I see the both crowds chewing on the refs at the same game. The calls were fine, we're some missed yes but some were called that I couldn't see, but each team thought they were getting hosed.

My wife hated it when I tried to explain the rules to people at football games, most had absolutely no clue but still said I was wrong because they got the short end. I quit when I realized it was like talking to a post.

I tell my kids and those I coach that there will be a handful of bad/wrong calls (for both teams) and no matter what happens, there were things we could have done to make the blown call irrelevant. Most refs do this for the love of the game, same thing as coaches, fans and anybody else involved in sporting activities. They don't get paid much, can't make a living off it, so they are not out there to hose a team.

 

[IcSyU]

Best way to get a grasp of actual officiating is to attend a game that you have NO care who wins. I live in my wife's hometown and have attended many sporting events there. I laugh at times when I see the both crowds chewing on the refs at the same game. The calls were fine, we're some missed yes but some were called that I couldn't see, but each team thought they were getting hosed.

My wife hated it when I tried to explain the rules to people at football games, most had absolutely no clue but still said I was wrong because they got the short end. I quit when I realized it was like talking to a post.

I tell my kids and those I coach that there will be a handful of bad/wrong calls (for both teams) and no matter what happens, there were things we could have done to make the blown call irrelevant. Most refs do this for the love of the game, same thing as coaches, fans and anybody else involved in sporting activities. They don't get paid much, can't make a living off it, so they are not out there to hose a team.

Easy ways to pick out idiots:
1) People begging every possession for 3 seconds in the lane (it does happen, but most of the time someone in the crowd is just trying to get a whistle for their team).
2) People who think "over the back" is a foul (it doesn't exist...goes into the book as a push in the back or likewise).
3) People whose first response to a charging foul is "bad call, defender wasn't set" (being "set" is not a requirement for an offensive foul to be called).

 

[ruxCYtable]

No one is unless JC decides to pick up a whistle, but he is too busy answering "No" to my lottery prayers.

He's doing this to you too? WTF, JC?

 

[VeloClone]

He's doing this to you too? WTF, JC?

Yeah, he keeps telling me that I have to buy a ticket.

 

[BCClone]

He's doing this to you too? WTF, JC?

A WTF to JC? Let me take a few extra steps away from you before you do it again. :smile:

 

[ajk4st8]

Easy ways to pick out idiots:
1) People begging every possession for 3 seconds in the lane (it does happen, but most of the time someone in the crowd is just trying to get a whistle for their team).
2) People who think "over the back" is a foul (it doesn't exist...goes into the book as a push in the back or likewise).
3) People whose first response to a charging foul is "bad call, defender wasn't set" (being "set" is not a requirement for an offensive foul to be called).

:notworthy:


Well said.... If you yell for 3 seconds, or for traveling more than a time or 2 during a game, you are an idiot.

 

[Knownothing]

Not traveling. I am fine with the traveling thing. The ref missed a big travel during the A@M game and was looking right at the guy. Good thing we had already blown them out.

 

[CYcoFan]

Ever since the Harold and Kumar movie came out it has taken me back. Been listening to a lot of Wu-Tang recently. Like last night I caught myself rapping "I want a beef, so I'll start a ruckus, CYcoFan ain't nothing.........

Now to be serious

Fundamental Flaw in NCAA Officiating is that it is not uniform. NCAA Referee Union? If not then at least a structure some what similar. Compared to PRO officials, College officials are over worked and under paid. Not a productive environment.

2nd prob stems from first. Conf's shouldn't be able to pick which officials do their games there should be a committee. At any Big 12 game you can have for instance one guy that also does Big East, another that does Big 10 and another that does say Pac 12. Sometimes I think the NCAA really likes the negative perception to spark controversy. I come to that conclusion By reading Sepp Blatter's comment's about FIFA officiating

 

[Goothrey]

This is a classic example of someone assuming that college referees do nothing but show up and call the game. I know many college refs and everyone of them is reviewing tape after every game. They take their practice very seriously and work to get better all the time. These officials are going to clinics in the Spring and Summer as well.

Officiating is a tough gig. No matter how well you do, people will think you are terrible. Most of the time it's because 90% of fans don't know the rules.

Rather than people running their mouths about "the lack of accountability" or "how bad the refs are", try putting the stripes on yourself and work a varsity basketball game at the high school level. Then you may have a better understanding of what it's like in those shoes.

Why would I assume that? Because the process isn't transparent. How do you know what they do after a game? They volunteered to take the position. They get paid to do a job. Just because it is a "tough gig" doesn't mean they shouldn't have take accountability for their job performance. This isn't referring to those refs who officiate ISU games, but officiating in general. I agree, they are usually the most hated people in the arena, and usually for unjust/incorrect/wrong reasons. But when I see a call that is blatantly wrong(and confirmed when I see a replay or two of it) I would LOVE to see a ref justify their call.

 

[ruxCYtable]

Why would I assume that? Because the process isn't transparent. How do you know what they do after a game? They volunteered to take the position. They get paid to do a job. Just because it is a "tough gig" doesn't mean they shouldn't have take accountability for their job performance. This isn't referring to those refs who officiate ISU games, but officiating in general. I agree, they are usually the most hated people in the arena, and usually for unjust/incorrect/wrong reasons. But when I see a call that is blatantly wrong(and confirmed when I see a replay or two of it) I would LOVE to see a ref justify their call.

Officials are accountable to their conference supervisors, not fans. Transparent? Are your job reviews public? Why should officials' reviews be different? Because you don't like them?

I love to hear a person who's probably never reffed a game in his life talk about officials having to take accountability. They are accountable, just not to YOU. The guys refereeing major college basketball are doing so because they do the best job a HUMAN can do. If someone could do it better, they WOULD.

 

[statsaholic]

Good grief. Baylor had 12 team fouls, same as ISU. Baylor shot 8 FTs, same as ISU. How much more even could officiating have been? We got outplayed in nearly every phase of the game tonight, refs didn't have anything to do with that.

To me this comment is a FAIL! And I am not saying anything about the quality of officiating vs. Baylor. But comparing fouls and freethrows in a box score to determine if things are fair is wrong. Do you think that Texas A and M women should typically be even in fouls with an ISU or KSU, teams that play with more finesse? I detest boiling things down this simplistically. Sometimes a team has more fouls because they foul more. Period.

 

[ruxCYtable]

To me this comment is a FAIL! And I am not saying anything about the quality of officiating vs. Baylor. But comparing fouls and freethrows in a box score to determine if things are fair is wrong. Do you think that Texas A and M women should typically be even in fouls with an ISU or KSU, teams that play with more finesse? I detest boiling things down this simplistically. Sometimes a team has more fouls because they foul more. Period.

Agree with this too. You cannot tell if a game was well-officiated based on the box score. One team might press, the other might not. One team is content to play zone, the other man-to-man. One team is aggressive offensively and drives to the hole every possession. The other team is lazy offensively and launches threes all night. No way that game ends up even in the box score.

 

[IcSyU]

Ever since the Harold and Kumar movie came out it has taken me back. Been listening to a lot of Wu-Tang recently. Like last night I caught myself rapping "I want a beef, so I'll start a ruckus, CYcoFan ain't nothing.........

Now to be serious

Fundamental Flaw in NCAA Officiating is that it is not uniform. NCAA Referee Union? If not then at least a structure some what similar. Compared to PRO officials, College officials are over worked and under paid. Not a productive environment.

2nd prob stems from first. Conf's shouldn't be able to pick which officials do their games there should be a committee. At any Big 12 game you can have for instance one guy that also does Big East, another that does Big 10 and another that does say Pac 12. Sometimes I think the NCAA really likes the negative perception to spark controversy. I come to that conclusion By reading Sepp Blatter's comment's about FIFA officiating

I'm almost sure the Big 12 has a list of approved crews who can be used for games (hell, even most of the high school conferences in Iowa have them). They do multiple conferences because of travel limitations. I have my doubts a lot of referees do Big East games and Big 12 games, but there are a handful who do Missouri Valley/Big 12 games because the footprints are about the same and flights are reasonable.

And NCAA referees are not underpaid. How many jobs have you had where you can make about $700 in about 3 hours with travel costs and food paid for? The guys who ref three or four nights per week are making $40,000 in four months. Some of them work jobs on the side as consultants or salespeople but the majority make a very good living.

Why would I assume that? Because the process isn't transparent. How do you know what they do after a game? They volunteered to take the position. They get paid to do a job. Just because it is a "tough gig" doesn't mean they shouldn't have take accountability for their job performance. This isn't referring to those refs who officiate ISU games, but officiating in general. I agree, they are usually the most hated people in the arena, and usually for unjust/incorrect/wrong reasons. But when I see a call that is blatantly wrong(and confirmed when I see a replay or two of it) I would LOVE to see a ref justify their call.

I personally know because I know a couple guys who do college games for a living. You seem to be missing a couple big points:
a) what you can see isn't necessarily what a referee can see. Ref zones don't overlap much so if you have a 6'5" 220 lb guy in front of you screening you, you can't make a call. Officiating is a hell of a lot easier sitting in the stands where you can see over everyone than it is on the floor where everyone is as tall if not taller than you are.
b) you get to see the replay. That's part of why people think officiating is worse. It isn't worse, you just get to watch on TV and see replays or rewind your DVR.

The referees do have to justify their calls. There is someone in the conference office whose job is to watch every game and they conference call the referees involved in the game to correct any mechanical errors which may have been made and they have the opportunity to answer why they didn't make certain calls.

Application of some common sense would be useful here. Do you really think the Big 12 Conference assigns referees and just says, "here's your check guys, best of luck!" How many jobs do you know of where there aren't performance reviews? Come on.

 

[Cy25]

Cy25, PM me and let me know where you live. I will put you in touch with your local officials association. Maybe you don't want to bother with that route, however, because clearly your experience watching games on television means you could skip working your way up and just buy a uniform, step out on the court and do a better job than any D-I official without any training.

Has any coach coached a perfect game? No.

Has any player played a perfect game? No.

Has any official called a perfect game? No.

I would love to. Last time I checked, my experience runs a lot higher than sitting on a couch and watching games. Refereeing is tough yes but dont miss obvious crap. It was pretty obvious to me that Thomas Robinson travels 80% of the time he faces the hoop and how often do the refs leave him alone. Refs pick favorites and you cant argue that. Michael Beasley was the perfect example. That guy was gift wrapped free throws. And yes, i do think that refs give more calls to the better teams, which most years kills ISU.

 

[RolandRocket]

I have read many of your posts here, and respect your knowledge of the rules. I, too, have done some officiating, and you are right that many folks dont know the rules. But there is one area that NCAA BB officials consistently misjudge.

In the rules under establishing legal guarding position, the last item listed is that the defensive player must establish his legal guarding position before the opponent, if airborne, either with or without the ball, leaves the floor. On a very regular basis, officials call the foul on the offensive player when the guarding position was not established until after the offensive player left the floor.

The rule clearly does not state that legal guarding position can be established up until contact is made, but this is how the rule is routinely applied.