View Single Post
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Fri Mar 23, 2018, 05:34am
crosscountry55 crosscountry55 is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 1,381
Quote:
Originally Posted by Multiple Sports View Post
Just put the whole game up there...that was a tough game to work.


I tend to agree. KY’s MO is to take it inside and get to the FT line. It worked, but KY also had some sloppy post play and they made some silly ball handling mistakes on offense due to their aforementioned game plan. All of this made for a very busy night for the crew.

Camron said he thought there were phantom calls on both sides. To be honest I agree with him. You could write a book about the evolution of the officiating in this game. It would be a great case study. I’ll bet the crew had a great pre-game, anticipated the physical play, and agreed to clean it up early. I think they probably went a little too far and got some stuff that just wasn’t there on both ends. I’m sure they had a feel for this as the game went on. So paradoxically in both halves—but especially the second—they started passing on some stuff that really needed to be called IMHO. When everyone has four fouls with six minutes left in a close game, that’s what tends to happen. Likewise when you realize both teams are in double bonus with eight minutes left in the first half.

I am not being critical of the crew at all. I thought they worked really hard and had the best intentions in mind with how they thought that game should be officiated. But I also believe that as a crew they would approach it differently if given another chance. This is why I’d argue the whole game is a fantastic case study.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote