Article on NC State-Virginia Officiating

[gymrat]

I didn't see the game, but this is hard to believe.

Refs take charge in Pack-Virginia game
By GREGG DOYEL (Charlotte Observer)
Travis Watson charged. Adam Hall charged. Donald Hand did, too. We're not talking about a high-interest credit card, though the price was high for No.6 Virginia.

Virginia was called for 35 fouls in its 90-80 loss Wednesday at N.C. State, about seven of which came in late-game desperation. A bunch of others were charging calls called at a nearly impossible rate, mathematically speaking.

We say nearly impossible, and only nearly, because we know it happened. We saw it. Otherwise, who would believe the Cavaliers would be called for eight - count 'em, eight - consecutive charges?

If you consider the charge-block call a 50-50 proposition, the odds of eight in a row going against Virginia are 256-to-1.

This is not to suggest the referees had something against the Cavaliers. N.C. State's Damien Wilkins also was called for charging amid Virginia's run, meaning the first nine charge-block calls went against the offense - a 512-to-1 probability.

In all, 61 fouls were called, with three Cavaliers fouling out. The quickest goner? N.C. State's Damon Thornton, who fouled out in 11 minutes. Nothing odd there. Thornton has fouled out in five of eight ACC games.

[Hawks Coach]

I am not sure what relevant point this article makes. It was statistically improbable for Joe Dimaggio to hit in 56 consecutive games. That feat is made more improbable by the non-statistical factor of pressure that builds as a streak goes on. Yet we all know it happened and do not question it.

In statistics, if you repeat something thousands of times, statisitcal outliers have a very high probability of occurring. You just can't predict when and where they will occur. When you play thousands of games per year, the statistical outlier has a statistically high probability of occurring in one game. The article clearly suggests that the refs were off their rockers calling that many charges. It is quite possible that there was a series of out of control offensive plays, excellent defense, and good refs that refereed the defense, and a series of plays that defied the odds.

Also, the article relies on the adage that a block-charge is a 50-50 call, an assumption that only holds through for the close situations. Many others are much more obvious. The better statistic to examine would be, out of all fouls called, what ratio are charges? I think the probability of 9 in a row (with no other fouls) occurring is even lower than the article's flawed logic would suggest - probably 10,000-1 at a minimum. But remember, in all divisions of college basketball, mens and womens, there are probably more then 10,000 games played in just one year. That 10,000-1 chance will roll in sometime.

Also, were they all charges, or were they player control fouls, including those for a player pushing off while dribbling? If the refs are calling the latter tightly and teams don't adjust, they'll suffer the consequences. We had 4 of the latter in one game this weekend, 3 against the same player. She has bad habits, but rarely gets called. They called it tight, she didn't adjust.

So to me, it is an interesting event, but not unbelievable. And I won't listen to a homer paper blaming refs for calls that went against their team on the grounds that they aren't statistically probable, especially when the writer clearly demonstrates a flawed understanding of statistics and probabilities.

[mikesears]

Do you teach math? Wow! I would half expect that kind of a response from an official. But a coach (whom we repect) makes this even more of a blow! WOW!
And Thanks!

Originally posted by Hawks Coach
I am not sure what relevant point this article makes. It was statistically improbable for Joe Dimaggio to hit in 56 consecutive games. That feat is made more improbable by the non-statistical factor of pressure that builds as a streak goes on. Yet we all know it happened and do not question it.

In statistics, if you repeat something thousands of times, statisitcal outliers have a very high probability of occurring. You just can't predict when and where they will occur. When you play thousands of games per year, the statistical outlier has a statistically high probability of occurring in one game. The article clearly suggests that the refs were off their rockers calling that many charges. It is quite possible that there was a series of out of control offensive plays, excellent defense, and good refs that refereed the defense, and a series of plays that defied the odds.

Also, the article relies on the adage that a block-charge is a 50-50 call, an assumption that only holds through for the close situations. Many others are much more obvious. The better statistic to examine would be, out of all fouls called, what ratio are charges? I think the probability of 9 in a row (with no other fouls) occurring is even lower than the article's flawed logic would suggest - probably 10,000-1 at a minimum. But remember, in all divisions of college basketball, mens and womens, there are probably more then 10,000 games played in just one year. That 10,000-1 chance will roll in sometime.

Also, were they all charges, or were they player control fouls, including those for a player pushing off while dribbling? If the refs are calling the latter tightly and teams don't adjust, they'll suffer the consequences. We had 4 of the latter in one game this weekend, 3 against the same player. She has bad habits, but rarely gets called. They called it tight, she didn't adjust.

So to me, it is an interesting event, but not unbelievable. And I won't listen to a homer paper blaming refs for calls that went against their team on the grounds that they aren't statistically probable, especially when the writer clearly demonstrates a flawed understanding of statistics and probabilities.

[winston robinson]

I couldn't have said it better myself. Bravo!!!!

[Hawks Coach]

Not a math major, but took a few serious stats courses in college. Don't remember much of the serious number crunching stuff, but this is pretty basic stats and probabilities. One more pet peeve of mine - misuse and abuse of numbers to prove a biased point!

[mikesears]

I hate when I hear that a charge is a 50/50 proposition. 1 in 10 charges MAY be so close. 1 out of 2 fans tells me so.

:-)

[Mark Dexter]

I use the 50/50 "chance" as an arguement for officials.

Basically, when someone says that the officials won/lost a game for them, or just generally stink - I counter that on each call, half the fans approve and half disapprove.

If half are right, then the refs must have a 50% good call rate. A coach with .500 is doing pretty good for him/herself. A player hitting 50% of field goals is pretty good, too. When the players and coaches can all pull 50%, then the officials shold raise their standards.

Okay, odd arguement, but you get the point (I hope).

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by Hawks Coach
Not a math major, but took a few serious stats courses in college. Don't remember much of the serious number crunching stuff, but this is pretty basic stats and probabilities. One more pet peeve of mine - misuse and abuse of numbers to prove a biased point!

"87% of all statistics are made up."

[RookieDude]

Seems to me someone once said, "Figures don't lie, and Liars figure."

[Bart Tyson]

Mark, i can't recall any player or coach ever saying the officials won a gane for them. Just so you know the team won the game and the officials cost us the game.

[Mark Dexter]

Originally posted by Bart Tyson
Mark, i can't recall any player or coach ever saying the officials won a gane for them. Just so you know the team won the game and the officials cost us the game.

Guess I was having a Dan Quayle moment . . .

[BigDave]

As an official, it will never be an option for me to question another official's judgment call. We just don't do that to each other.


With that said, I'd like to give my opinion on the initial topic. I too have noticed a lot of charge calls at the NCAA level. I agree, the guys making these calls are some of the best officials around, but I think it is healthy to analyze their games on occasion. The old cliche "bread and butter" call has always referred to the block/charge. It seems to me as of late, that on the close block/charge calls, todays officials are calling the charge a lot. Are they trying to prove that they CAN make the "bread and butter" call? Then when we get to see the replay (lucky us), it was obvious that the defender moved under the shooter. Bummer, dude.


Overall, I think the D1 guys are awesome. I aspire to be in that elite group. But in this case, I think the calls concerning the block/charge are penalizing the offense.

[Peter Devana]

Right On Hawk's coach!!!!

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

I did not see the game in question, but I, for one, am happy to see more charges called. Coaches do a good job of teaching players how to play defense but we do a lousy job of calling the block/charge. The amusing thing is that after all of the teaching done by coaches to have their players play good defense they do not want charges called. And we officials play into the coaches hands.

I officiate approximately 350 (thats correct and don't ask) basketball games a year at all levels from CYO, jr. H.S. thru H.S. varsity, men's and women's jr. coll., AAU and YBOA, and men's church leagues and I call charges for more often that I call blocks in the bang bang block/charge plays because the defender is playing defense correctly.

As officials we have to do a better job of officiating the defense and applying the rules of defending as found in Rule 4 of both the NFHS and NCAA rule books. The player does not have free reign to go where ever he/she wants to go. The player who has control of the ball is expected to be guarded the instant he/she gains player control of the ball. As long as the player with the ball is not airborne time and distance is not a factor in obtaining (NFHS)/establishing (NCAA) a legal guarding position.

Furthermore, the defender CAN be moving and draw a charge. Instead of quoting the rule hear check out NFHS R4-S23 and NCAA R4-S32 for a complete reading of the guarding definitions. Please pay close attention to NFHS R4-S23-A3 and NCAA R4-S32-A4 for a defender moving after gaining a legal guarding position.

[BktBallRef]

For Hawks Coach - The Charlotte Observer isn't a home town paper for the Cavaliers. Charlotte is in NC, Charlottesville is in VA.

We, as officials, have been calling blocks for years that should have been charges. I'm glad that the powers that be are recognizing this and are no longer penalizing the defense for good position. Some of it also goes to eliminating rough play. Call a couple of PC fouls early in the game and a guard is less likely to go driving in to the paint.

During tonight's game, our crew had 5 player control fouls in our varsity girls game, all against one team. The visitors simply played defense with their feet, not their hands and establish great positions.

Here's part of a story posted on the ACCToday.com.

Gillen: Cavs Weren't Ready
by David Droschak, AP

RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) -- Virginia coach Pete Gillen and his staff sensed trouble in warmups. The No. 6 Cavaliers were about to take an Atlantic Coast Conference game and their ranking for granted.

They ended up paying dearly for it Wednesday night.

``Our assistants said, `Hey, we aren't ready,''' Gillen said following a 90-80 loss to North Carolina State. ``It was like a C-plus warmup. You've got to be ready to go in a house full of N.C. State fans. You've got to be ready to fight fire with fire.''

The Cavaliers (16-5, 5-5 ACC) came into the game with their highest ranking in 18 years, but played their second-worst game of the season. Virginia turned the ball over 22 times and committed 35 fouls - eight of which were charges.

``Maybe we got soft with a little bit of success. Fouls hurt us, but we didn't come out from jump-street aggressively,'' Gillen said.

Gillen's team is 0-4 on Tobacco Road this season, losing to the Wolfpack, Duke, North Carolina and Wake Forest by an average of 21 points.

``Sometimes on the road our guys aren't as confident,'' he said. ``Maybe they are nervous and apprehensive. Maybe we're a little tentative on the road. I wish I could put my fingers on it. All I know is we didn't play as desperate and as hungry as we had to.''



Notice that he didn't have a word to say about the charging calls. incidentally, the crew consisted of Tim Higgins, Robert Donato, and Ted Valentine.