Mike Kitts... B1G Championship

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by twocentsworth

I haven't seen much of his games @ the Big Ten tourney, but what I have seen is not good:

wrongly wiping off good layup by Illinois player
calling goal-tend as lead in transition (Ill v Iowa)
letting MSU post player literally sit on Sullengers back while tipping & then gathering a rebound. (MSU v OSU).
not calling obvious foul on OSU player...which lead to him whacking Izzo (when Izzo complained)
blowing whistle to end first half when time had not expired...it was only the shot clock horn (he's gotta know there will be 2 horns in that situation)

I hope, for his sake, it gets better! Hate to think what else he has screwed up if I actually watched ALL of his game....

This was the post that generated the fanboy comment, and I may have to agree with The Group. (Note the capitalization, and hence, the greater importance associated with it. )

Your opinion. Without additional specific information, such as when the offense gathered the ball, we cannot agree or disagree. And your comment in a previous post about allowing 2 steps has no basis in the rules, as Snaqs has pointed out. This gives you either fanboy status, or, at best, shows your inexperience as an official.
Why is this wrong? If Mike was trailing the initial fast break players, he would have a great look at the goaltend.
Really? Literally? So the MSU player had his butt on Sullinger? Another comment that has fanboy written all over it, rather than speaking as an official.
Without describing the specific play, why should we take your word it was an "obvious foul"? As far as the T, if it was deserved, that's a good thing for Mike that he didn't let a (possible) bad call keep him from taking care of business. Whether or not a call or no call is bad does not give the coach an opportunity to act unsportsmanlike. A negative for Mike, in my mind, would be if he had allowed Izzo to go nuts without penalizing him.
This comment pretty much sums up your very likely fanboy status.

Finally, we have to take your word that the above examples were all in Mike's primary, that they were his calls, and that they really were incorrect.

I don't know how long you've been reading this forum, but we have fans come out of the woodwork at this time of year, using pretty much the terminology you've used here, to show how the refs have screwed over their team. Even some part-time officials show their full-time fanboy status this time of year. Or, some lower level officials like to simply crap on the higher level officials, because it makes them feel more important. We all screw up, even the Big Dogs. And we've discussed many of those plays. But your post shows either your inexperience, or your inner fanboy is leaking out.

Just my two cents.

(rocky, aren't you glad you asked? )

[26 Year Gap]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

This was the post that generated the fanboy comment, and I may have to agree with The Group. (Note the capitalization, and hence, the greater importance associated with it. )

Your opinion. Without additional specific information, such as when the offense gathered the ball, we cannot agree or disagree. And your comment in a previous post about allowing 2 steps has no basis in the rules, as Snaqs has pointed out. This gives you either fanboy status, or, at best, shows your inexperience as an official.
Why is this wrong? If Mike was trailing the initial fast break players, he would have a great look at the goaltend.
Really? Literally? So the MSU player had his butt on Sullinger? Another comment that has fanboy written all over it, rather than speaking as an official.
Without describing the specific play, why should we take your word it was an "obvious foul"? As far as the T, if it was deserved, that's a good thing for Mike that he didn't let a (possible) bad call keep him from taking care of business. Whether or not a call or no call is bad does not give the coach an opportunity to act unsportsmanlike. A negative for Mike, in my mind, would be if he had allowed Izzo to go nuts without penalizing him.
This comment pretty much sums up your very likely fanboy status.

Finally, we have to take your word that the above examples were all in Mike's primary, that they were his calls, and that they really were incorrect.

I don't know how long you've been reading this forum, but we have fans come out of the woodwork at this time of year, using pretty much the terminology you've used here, to show how the refs have screwed over their team. Even some part-time officials show their full-time fanboy status this time of year. Or, some lower level officials like to simply crap on the higher level officials, because it makes them feel more important. We all screw up, even the Big Dogs. And we've discussed many of those plays. But your post shows either your inexperience, or your inner fanboy is leaking out.

Just my two cents.

(rocky, aren't you glad you asked? )

In the true spirit of things, shouldn't this be posted twice? Oh, wait. The quote feature does that.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by 26 Year Gap

In the true spirit of things, shouldn't this be posted twice? Oh, wait. The quote feature does that.

Shut up.

Shut up.

(Better?...)

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

This was the post that generated the fanboy comment, and I may have to agree with The Group. (Note the capitalization, and hence, the greater importance associated with it. )

Your opinion. Without additional specific information, such as when the offense gathered the ball, we cannot agree or disagree. And your comment in a previous post about allowing 2 steps has no basis in the rules, as Snaqs has pointed out. This gives you either fanboy status, or, at best, shows your inexperience as an official.
Why is this wrong? If Mike was trailing the initial fast break players, he would have a great look at the goaltend.
Really? Literally? So the MSU player had his butt on Sullinger? Another comment that has fanboy written all over it, rather than speaking as an official.
Without describing the specific play, why should we take your word it was an "obvious foul"? As far as the T, if it was deserved, that's a good thing for Mike that he didn't let a (possible) bad call keep him from taking care of business. Whether or not a call or no call is bad does not give the coach an opportunity to act unsportsmanlike. A negative for Mike, in my mind, would be if he had allowed Izzo to go nuts without penalizing him.
This comment pretty much sums up your very likely fanboy status.

Finally, we have to take your word that the above examples were all in Mike's primary, that they were his calls, and that they really were incorrect.

I don't know how long you've been reading this forum, but we have fans come out of the woodwork at this time of year, using pretty much the terminology you've used here, to show how the refs have screwed over their team. Even some part-time officials show their full-time fanboy status this time of year. Or, some lower level officials like to simply crap on the higher level officials, because it makes them feel more important. We all screw up, even the Big Dogs. And we've discussed many of those plays. But your post shows either your inexperience, or your inner fanboy is leaking out.

Just my two cents.

(rocky, aren't you glad you asked? )

Look, if you are just going to ramble on endlessly with these meandering posts, we might have to think seriously about kicking you out of tHe gRoUp (note the oddly capitalized words which implies a secret code between group members).

Ok...I know:

Shutup.

[M&M Guy]

Thank you for saving me the time.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

Look, if you are just going to ramble on endlessly with these meandering posts, we might have to think seriously about kicking you out of tHe gRoUp (note the oddly capitalized words which implies a secret code between group members).

I thought I heard a buzzing sound in my ears.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by GROUPthink

I thought I heard a buzzing sound in my ears.

Hopefully it's a wasp?

[Rich]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Hopefully it's a wasp?

I think it may just be a fanboy whispering in my ear.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by GROUPthink

I think it may just be a fanboy whispering in my ear.

Ahh...sweet nothings.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

A secret code between group members.

Someday I will, hopefully, become an esteemed Forum member and get the secret decoder ring. Do we get leather "Esteemed Forum Member" jackets like motorcycle club members wear? Now that would be really cool.

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

It's called a slow whistle.

It was, IMO, more than a slow whistle on at least one occasion. The shooter was fouled on a 5 foot shot from the endline. The ball went up, bounced around a few times, finally fell off the rim and only then did V call the foul. It certainly looked like result-oriented refereeing than a slow whistle. It was the right call, I think, but I'd like to see it made as soon as it's obvious that it's a shot rather than when it's obvious the shot was not good.

I don't think Kitts had his best game ever, but I'm sure he did far better than I would have.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

This was the post that generated the fanboy comment, and I may have to agree with The Group. (Note the capitalization, and hence, the greater importance associated with it. )

Your opinion. Without additional specific information, such as when the offense gathered the ball, we cannot agree or disagree. And your comment in a previous post about allowing 2 steps has no basis in the rules, as Snaqs has pointed out. This gives you either fanboy status, or, at best, shows your inexperience as an official.
Why is this wrong? If Mike was trailing the initial fast break players, he would have a great look at the goaltend.
Really? Literally? So the MSU player had his butt on Sullinger? Another comment that has fanboy written all over it, rather than speaking as an official.
Without describing the specific play, why should we take your word it was an "obvious foul"? As far as the T, if it was deserved, that's a good thing for Mike that he didn't let a (possible) bad call keep him from taking care of business. Whether or not a call or no call is bad does not give the coach an opportunity to act unsportsmanlike. A negative for Mike, in my mind, would be if he had allowed Izzo to go nuts without penalizing him.
This comment pretty much sums up your very likely fanboy status.

Finally, we have to take your word that the above examples were all in Mike's primary, that they were his calls, and that they really were incorrect.

I don't know how long you've been reading this forum, but we have fans come out of the woodwork at this time of year, using pretty much the terminology you've used here, to show how the refs have screwed over their team. Even some part-time officials show their full-time fanboy status this time of year. Or, some lower level officials like to simply crap on the higher level officials, because it makes them feel more important. We all screw up, even the Big Dogs. And we've discussed many of those plays. But your post shows either your inexperience, or your inner fanboy is leaking out.

Just my two cents.

(rocky, aren't you glad you asked? )

You could say that again.

[twocentsworth]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Your opinion. Without additional specific information, such as when the offense gathered the ball, we cannot agree or disagree. And your comment in a previous post about allowing 2 steps has no basis in the rules, as Snaqs has pointed out. This gives you either fanboy status, or, at best, shows your inexperience as an official.

I originally asked APG to post the video of this play (occurred at 11:44am CT on 3/8/12) just prior to the 12 minute media time out (Big Ten Ntwrk)....the Illini player LITERALLY gathered the ball, was bumped (whistle) took two steps and laid the ball in (Kitts incorrectly waved off the basket). If it gets posted, then people will see (make their own judgement) that, by rule, this basket should have been counted.

Why is this wrong? If Mike was trailing the initial fast break players, he would have a great look at the goaltend.

After the play I described above, Iowa stole the ball and missed a lay-up, a second Iowa player got the rebound and put up a lay up (Kitts STILL didn't make it to the baseline as the new lead - remember he was trail from calling the previous foul)...Kitts was the one official to have a whistle for goal-tending.

Really? Literally? So the MSU player had his butt on Sullinger? Another comment that has fanboy written all over it, rather than speaking as an official.

Yes. LITERALLY the starting center mis-timed his jump for an offensive rebound, landed on Sullinger's back/shoulder, stayed there a moment and THEN scored the rebound basket. No hyperbole/exaggeration....

Without describing the specific play, why should we take your word it was an "obvious foul"? As far as the T, if it was deserved, that's a good thing for Mike that he didn't let a (possible) bad call keep him from taking care of business. Whether or not a call or no call is bad does not give the coach an opportunity to act unsportsmanlike. A negative for Mike, in my mind, would be if he had allowed Izzo to go nuts without penalizing him.
This comment pretty much sums up your very likely fanboy status.



Finally, we have to take your word that the above examples were all in Mike's primary, that they were his calls, and that they really were incorrect.

I don't know how long you've been reading this forum, but we have fans come out of the woodwork at this time of year, using pretty much the terminology you've used here, to show how the refs have screwed over their team. Even some part-time officials show their full-time fanboy status this time of year. Or, some lower level officials like to simply crap on the higher level officials, because it makes them feel more important. We all screw up, even the Big Dogs. And we've discussed many of those plays. But your post shows either your inexperience, or your inner fanboy is leaking out.

I work NCAA-M D2 & D3, NAIA D1 & D2, Juco, and about 25% of my schedule is HS.....(49 games total from Nov 1 thru March 1)

You (and anyone else) can call me whatever you want - it doesn't bother me. What I find funny is how much people infer/how quick people are to make a judgement and then....how that judgement gets cemented into the psyche of the posters......

If people view me as a "fanboy"....fine.

Just my two cents.

(rocky, aren't you glad you asked? )

my response to each of your comments are included above (if I was a real fanboy, I would know how to format this differently....)

[fiasco]

What I find funny is how much people infer/how quick people are to make a judgement

Positively dripping with irony...

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by twocentsworth

my response to each of your comments are included above (if I was a real fanboy, I would know how to format this differently....)

Nah, fanboys and regular posters both have issues with formatting.

Maybe the issue is a combination of things, including perhaps your communication skills. Remember, what makes a great official over a good one is not just calling plays; most officials can do that. It's also being able to handle proper communication - both during a game and outside the game.

First, your description of the continuation play still does not determine Mike was wrong. It could be how you're describing the play. Or it could be your lack of rule knowledge. But, as you describe it, if the IL player had one foot on the floor at the time of the gather, the player traveled after the foul which would wipe of the shot attempt. So, it's either a communication issue or lack of rules knowledge on your part, whether or not we actually see the play.

On the Sullinger play, all you said was this was a play that was Mike obviously missed. But you didn't say where the play originated; you didn't mention whether Mike was the L, T or C; you didn't mention why the other officials definitely wouldn't have put a whistle on it if it was sooooo obvious and why it was Mike's fault alone. Communicating the specific play better might make it easier for us to discuss as officials, rather than simply crapping on him.

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Or, some lower level officials like to simply crap on the higher level officials, because it makes them feel more important.

Your mention of your schedule, rather than adressing this comment, seems to almost prove my point. Again, is it how you're communicating?

Finally,

Originally Posted by twocentsworth

What I find funny is how much people infer/how quick people are to make a judgement

Doesn't your own comment speak for itself, especially regarding Mike?