tomegun - I'm not sure how officials will take the "fall" more than in the past simply because we are in the "video age". Certainly there is more scrutiny than ever before because more people have the ability to see the games (more games are now being broadcast thru a variety of different sources).

It is incumbent on the supervisors of the various leagues to back up the game officials when needed (i.e. the pass interference in the end zone against Seattle is EXACTLY what the NFL wants called by its' officials) and admonish the officials when needed. I don't know that I agree with a public display of the punishment handed down to the officials (i.e. announcing game officials have been suspended one game), but a simple "the game officials incorrectly adminsitered the rule; measures have been taken so that this error does not occur in the future"

Hightower and the other "big time officials" ultimately get the calls and rules interps correct. I watch their positioning/angles during games - NOT their mechanics. BTW Scott Thornley is, IMO, the best at getting into the perfect position to see the play (you'll be amazed at how much he "moves to improve").

Jeffpea, you are definately drinking the Kool-Aid. Thornley is a very nice man with a passion for the game. He is a good official too. However, he is one of the best officials at getting into the WORST position to see plays. Instead of going top-side, he constantly goes low - almost to the endline. Why squat when looking at a play? Why move to the hoop with a play instead of stepping up so the play opens up? Why not take a step onto the court to see between players in the corner? Squating down, putting hands on knees, etc., is all very cute but it does nothing to help with angles. If those practices are so great, why don't the NBA officials do it? Some of them have their habits, but they spend at least $400 per game in evaluations, the price of laptops and the officials have to watch the entire game when they are done. That is training, number crunching and work to get the best angles on all the plays.

tom,

just wanted to let you know that though we don't agree on much that isn't related to officiating, our views on officiating are remarkably similary.

It isn't that we disagree on other things really. I just love a spirited debate. It is all in fun.

You just described the way David Hall officiates.

Did I do that? :D

[cough]Duke vs UCONN about three years ago[cough] breakdown the film [cough]14 or so blown calls [cough]

Oh, you mean this game?

College Basketball: 2004: Connecticut vs. Duke
NCAA Tournament semifinal, from 4/3/04.
CHANNEL: ESPN CLASSIC
DATE / TIME: March 15: 11:00AM EST
LENGTH: 120 Minutes

How convenient that it is being shown TODAY!!!
Record it, review it, grade it. :)

[cough]unbelievable[cough] :rolleyes:

[cough]unbelievable[cough] :rolleyes: [/B][/QUOTE]

Nah, I believe it. Not surprising at all.

btw, you guys should do something about that cough.

I wouldn't say Olandis Poole had the strongest game that night either. But he's in the NBA now, so I digress...

We all have our bad games, fortunately for most of us, ours are not replayed on ESPN Classic.

Olandis Poole is an outstanding ref, though.

I never really understood why this crew was as criticized as it was. Okafor's second was arguable. But he wasn't entirely vertical. Yes, it's one that maybe gets let go by other crews and it took the best player out of the game for a while, but they called it consistently, both ways.

It was two years ago, and it's hard to remember, but ultimately, looking at the big picture, the officials did not seem to me to have an impact on the result. Both teams were unhappy with the officiating, which is probably as good an indication that it was well called as if both teams were happy. The better team won. The players decided the game. Duke played better for an extended period, but Conncecticut dominated in winning time. All of the end of the game situations were called exactly right. I think there were two plays at the end of the game that got Kryzewski all worked up, but both were correct. On one, Redick drove in the lane and lost the ball and claimed contact, but on the replay, the ball goes straight down and it looks like the defender (Anderson? going by memory here) got ball. On the other, Redick went up for a game tying 3, and didn't come close to getting touched other than in Kryzewski's mind.

According to an NBA official, who has been breaking down tape for years, Poole did have a good game. Most of the calls that were pointed out had to do with an official being out of position. I just want to make it clear; this isn't something I came to on my own, it was in a learning environment.

A lot of the comments on here are pretty amazing to me. Every one of you that is criticizing one of these officials has something in common - you are all sitting at home while they are working!

If I were you, I'd start figuring out what these guys are doing that has helped them move up the ladder and stay there, rather than critique their mechanics, positioning, etc.

They are at the top level of the college game - and it is much different than high school / lower college level when it comes to having the ability to get there and (more importantly) stay there!

- Brad

Amen.

Kinda amazing to me that an oficial could blow 14 calls in one game and still keep his job after that, let alone go to a Final Four.