Was it really that bad?

[CJP]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

I really enjoyed watching Caitlin Clark in the national semi, but I was unable to watch any of the Women's Final. This morning, however, I've heard several commentators say that the officiating was particularly poor. I expect to hear this from the loudmouths on TV, but I've heard from at least 3 people who are not normally ref-bashers.

For those that watched, did you find the officiating to be shaky? I honestly can't imagine the whole crew being bad for the whole game, but I've heard 2 different people say that the crew should not work the tournament again. But I honestly can't believe that it couldn't have been that bad, right?

Honest thoughts?

It couldn't have been that bad, they combined for 187 points. Iowa, who led the country in scoring at 87 ppg scored 85. This output despite 37 fouls is not all that bad considering the median foul count per team in NCAA women's basketball is 17 fouls per game.

LSU was the better team. They won.

[chapmaja]

Originally Posted by CJP

It couldn't have been that bad, they combined for 187 points. Iowa, who led the country in scoring at 87 ppg scored 85. This output despite 37 fouls is not all that bad considering the median foul count per team in NCAA women's basketball is 17 fouls per game.

LSU was the better team. They won.

LSU was the better team. Unfortunately, the officiating of this game did make a difference in the game. We don't know how LSU would have fared if they hand't picked up foul trouble in the first half. I do feel the calls on Clark did influence her game. Watching the semi-final, she seemed dangerous on dribble penetration and then either scoring or dishing the ball to open teammates. This aspect of her game seemed largely taken away by the two foul calls early.

The call I had the biggest problem with was the T on Clark. Yes, by the strict definition of the rule, this was the correct call. I don't think this was the intent of the rule, nor the spirit of the rule. In my opinion the spirit of the rule and intent is to prevent the game from being delayed (thus the DOG warning issued first). You can't tell me the game was delayed because of Clark's actions that got her the T.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by chapmaja

LSU was the better team. Unfortunately, the officiating of this game did make a difference in the game. We don't know how LSU would have fared if they hand't picked up foul trouble in the first half. I do feel the calls on Clark did influence her game. Watching the semi-final, she seemed dangerous on dribble penetration and then either scoring or dishing the ball to open teammates. This aspect of her game seemed largely taken away by the two foul calls early.

The call I had the biggest problem with was the T on Clark. Yes, by the strict definition of the rule, this was the correct call. I don't think this was the intent of the rule, nor the spirit of the rule. In my opinion the spirit of the rule and intent is to prevent the game from being delayed (thus the DOG warning issued first). You can't tell me the game was delayed because of Clark's actions that got her the T.

It's not about the delay, it's about the act of making somebody fetch the ball when you could handed it to an official, or just simply left the ball alone. Instead she CHOSE to grab the ball and purposely toss it towards the stands and away from the official. It's rolled up into the DOG rule to allow for a warning instead of immediately going to a Tech.

[chapmaja]

Originally Posted by Raymond

It's not about the delay, it's about the act of making somebody fetch the ball when you could handed it to an official, or just simply left the ball alone. Instead she CHOSE to grab the ball and purposely toss it towards the stands and away from the official. It's rolled up into the DOG rule allow for a warning instead of immediately going to a Tech.

It is also about the situation you are officiating. Yes, you do need to officiating a national championship game differently than you do an early season game. In my opinion, this call should not have been made, and nothing any of the so-called experts on this forum can say will change my mind on that.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by chapmaja

It is also about the situation you are officiating. Yes, you do need to officiating a national championship game differently than you do an early season game. In my opinion, this call should not have been made, and nothing any of the so-called experts on this forum can say will change my mind on that.

Thanks for the info. If that's what you were told to do when you ref'd that level of game, fine. I'm sure it won't change anybody else's opinion though.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by chapmaja

It is also about the situation you are officiating. Yes, you do need to officiating a national championship game differently than you do an early season game. In my opinion, this call should not have been made, and nothing any of the so-called experts on this forum can say will change my mind on that.

The only thing that should be done is recognize the emotion of the game is going to be different. But that does not mean you change the entire rulebook or ignore things you would not during the year. They got there because of what they did during the regular season. So as stated, opinion is noted, but I disagree with that premise.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

But that does not mean you change the entire rulebook or ignore things you would not during the year.

I can not ignore ( I can address) and at the same time not charge a technical foul, a technical foul that I've never see called in my fifty-five years around interscholastic basketball.

That said, the college rule is worded differently than the high school rule, and I'm not a college official.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

But that does not mean you change the entire rulebook or ignore things you would not during the year.

NFHS 4-47-4: Warning For Delay: A warning to a team for delay is an administrative procedure by an official which is recorded in the scorebook by the scorer and reported to the head coach: For failure to have the court ready for play following any timeout as in 10-2-1f.

NFHS 10-2-1-F Team Technical: Allow the game to develop into an actionless contest, this includes the following and similar acts: Not having the court ready for play following any time-out after any team warning for delay.

This high school rule (above) has been around for long time, and when it was first introduced the example given was water being spilled on the floor.

Despite the “water on the floor” rule being around for a long time, I’ve never called it, nor have I ever seen it called, probably for reasons of appearing overly officious, it being accidental, a common part of the game, not causing any advantage or disadvantage, and only taking a few extra seconds to clean up.

I was observing a friend (former science student of mine) in a state tournament semifinal a few weeks ago.

He, and of his two partners, are “regular” state final officials (after this semifinal game all three moved onto a state final), so all are considered to be some of the best officials in Connecticut.

During a charged timeout water was accidentally spilled the floor and had to be cleaned up, delaying the game by less than a minute, not much longer than any other water spillage I’ve ever observed.

My friend and one of his partners had a short chat and then my friend, the referee, had a delay warning recorded in the scorebook (no previous delay warning of any type) and reported it to both head coaches.

Since I’ve never called a “water on the floor” delay , nor have I ever seen it called, during the post-game conference I asked about the warning and if they had considered passing on the warning.

My friend (the son of a college and high school basketball coach, a truly outstanding high school player, a truly outstanding high school assistant coach, and now a truly outstanding basketball official) replied, “NOT IN A STATE SEMIFINAL”, and then later followed up by admitting that he may have, "Passed on it in a regular season game".

Maybe things are (and should be) called differently in big time, win or go home, games?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

NFHS 10-2-1-F Team Technical: Allow the game to develop into an actionless contest, this includes the following and similar acts: Not having the court ready for play following any time-out after any team warning for delay.

Just wondering ... Does "time-out" literally mean a "charged" timeout or can it be any "generic" timeout, for example water spilled during any intermission and delaying the game after the intermission?