Final Four Officials

[cmathews]

Any one of us "sitting" at home and watching tv should realize a couple things.

1: how many times have we talked about howler monkeys, fans or anyone else not having the same angle on a play as we do on the floor...well guess what it works that way from the couch too..Those guys on the floor have the best look at the play.. From the replays I saw of Reddick going to the lane, I can see nothing that says there should or shouldn't have been a foul. There wasn't a whistle so evidently no foul.

2:how many times have we talked about howler monkeys, fans or anyone else not having put in the time and effort it takes to be an official. Well here we go again, it is the same thing from the couch. Those guys working the final four certainly didn't go to footlocker and buy a shirt and some slacks from JCPenny on the afternoon of the game, and show up and get chosen from a random lottery. They made it due to hard work, and an evaluation process that occurs throughout the tourney....

I guess what I am trying to say is they certainly deserve the benefit of any doubt that anyone has. They most certainly should never have their integrity challenged. I for one thought that the game was pretty well officiated. Everyone is giving Hall a bad time about the way he was moving on the court...I see him alot out here, he does that a lot of the time and evidently the powers that be like the way it works for him.

[iamaref]

Jurrassic..

I was not implying that the officials "cheated". I was merely sayin that they had there "own agenda" in call selection. Maybe trying to control the game to much. Not by any means cheating... or tryin to affect the outcome.

[jeffpea]

The answer to the question (from a couple of pages ago) -
"who is the alternate offical at the table" - is J.D. Collins. He has had what I would call a "meteoric" rise in this years' tourney (similar to Olandis Poole). He worked the East Rutherford NJ Regional Semi - Pitt vs. OSU. I believe it was his first Regional game in his career. He is from the midwest; works the Mid-Continent (Conf. Champ. game), Horizon League, Missouri Valley (Conf. tourney quarter & semi game), and Big Ten.

He may have the best "gig" of all.....he gets to sit courtside for all 3 Final Four games (and therefore doesn't have to deal w/ coaches/fans *****in' about calls) and will have plenty of time to check out San Antonio's best golf courses.............

[Mark Dexter]

Originally posted by jeffpea

He may have the best "gig" of all.....he gets to sit courtside for all 3 Final Four games (and therefore doesn't have to deal w/ coaches/fans *****in' about calls) and will have plenty of time to check out San Antonio's best golf courses.............

As table personnel myself, I have to agree.

Of course, the alternate often helps out on replays, CE's, etc. - but its worth the free ticket.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by iamaref

I was merely sayin that they had there "own agenda" in call selection. Maybe trying to control the game to much. Not by any means cheating... or tryin to affect the outcome.

That's a better explanation of what you meant. At least now it's discussable, imo, whether we agree or not.

What we don't know, and probably never will, is what direction these officials were given before the game. These guys are usually pre-gamed by one of the NCAA officials' supervisors on things that they should be aware of, or problems that they might face. I don't know whether any of these guys had done any previous Duke or UConn games, but the usual procedure is to try and have fresh faces out there, if possible. Somebody might have said before the game- "look guys, there's been too much contact let go with these 2 teams, and we want you to clean it up. Make 'em play ball". If that's what happened, then that's the NCAA's agenda and not the official's agenda. I just can't see solid, experienced and very capable officials like these guys going into any game with their own pre-conceived ideas of how they're gonna call the game. I think that, at this level, the officials usually let the game come to them, and not vice-versa. That's why I personally don't like judging individual performances.

[juicesty]

Jurrasic

Good point !

[tomegun]

So who will we see tonight? Clougherty, Libbey, Cartmel?

[bigwhistle]

The problems that happened in the UConn game, if you felt that there were problems, were not because of the abilities of the officials involved in the game. They are all very deserving officials. The problem was that for some reason they were not on the same page as a crew during that game. Any time that the crew is not in synch, it will make for a game that has problems.

This can be a very difficult situation to fix during the course of a game, especially when you have 3 strong willed and strong minded officials in the game. Nobody likes to think that the way they are calling the game is not the best way for that particular game to be officiated. However, in order for the game to be called at it's highest potential, egos must be set aside and happy mediums found in order that all officials are calling the game using the same basic criteria. This might mean that certain officials need to tighten their selection, or it might mean that they need to allow certain things to happen without whistles.

This clearly did not happen during this game.

[cmathews]

Originally posted by tomegun
So who will we see tonight? Clougherty, Libbey, Cartmel?

Verne Harris, Randy McCall, and I don't know the 3rd
well I don't know any of them but I know who two of the three will be

[wizard]

I find it amusing to here that Coach K wasn't so complimentary towards the officials after the UConn game. Why? Because the game wasn't called to his advantage?

The semifinal game was called no differently than the week before vs. Xavier. Both games were called tight. In the Xavier game, it effected the Musketeers more because of lack of depth behind Myles. In the UConn game, the roles were reversed. Duke's bench couldn't match UConn's.

In the postgame interviews, a reporter asked K about his team's "collapse". Coach K replied with "Obviously, you didn't see the game."

I beg to differ.

[tomegun]

Coach K and Duke have been picked on a lot recently. They are like the Yankees/Braves/Cowboys of college basketball. It is just too bad. People don't like loaded teams that seem to have an advantage all the time and have the "best coach." If Coach K wants to get people off of his back he needs to quit crying and win his last game of the year! There have been the comparisons to Wooden and Dick Vitale always defends him by saying times have changed. Times have changed but there are three things that will never change and Coach K has two of them in common with Wooden.

Wooden was considered the best coach of his time. Coach K is too.

Wooden got more talent than other teams. Coach K does too.

Wooden used that talent to win a number of championships as expected with his talent. Well Coach K, you will probably be the pre-season number 1 for the millionth time!

Cry me a river!

[Indy_Ref]

As officials, I think we are all entitled to our own opinions about how each of the officials are doing in their respective tournament assignments. Being officials and performing this avocaton ourselves gives us that right. That being said, I also agree that we absolutely are NOT entitled to question any one of these officials' integrity! We as officials should know, if we do not have our integrity, then we have NOTHING!!!

When I used to watch games, I would always try to pick out the missed calls the officials would make...professing "I would have called it differently!" Then, I grew up a bit. Now, instead of always trying to find fault with an official's call, I try to find a reason to defend and explain how an official called something a certain way. My first jump is to DEFEND what the guy/gal called. I often say to myself...or whoever is watching with me, "I can see why s/he would call it that way..."...even though I may not agree with it.

Now, all this being said, I have seen a few whistles/scenarios in the past few games that I simply cannot find an explanation for why a certain play was called...or no-called...the way it was. I think we all have issues with some of the calls being made. I see nothing wrong with explaining and/or discussing our differences in opinion as long as we respect these officials for the levels to which they have progressed...and as long as we never question their integrity!

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Indy_Ref

Now, all this being said, I have seen a few whistles/scenarios in the past few games that I simply cannot find an explanation for why a certain play was called...or no-called...the way it was. I think we all have issues with some of the calls being made. I see nothing wrong with explaining and/or discussing our differences in opinion as long as we respect these officials for the levels to which they have progressed...and as long as we never question their integrity!

Agree completely!

[Nevadaref]

Originally posted by jeffpea
The answer to the question (from a couple of pages ago) -
"who is the alternate offical at the table" - is J.D. Collins. He has had what I would call a "meteoric" rise in this years' tourney (similar to Olandis Poole).

Thanks for all the info, Jeff. Very nice.
I do think that Orlandis has an "r" in his first name, though. Of course, I could be mistaken.

[Woodee]

Originally posted by cmathews

my eval is that he was working the final 4.....

Yeah Buddy, thats why I was surprised to see his style in the Final Four.

I think his style is very different and would lose points in an eval, thats all.