Louisville/Michigan- Natl Championship
 

Good pace to start the game.

Looks like a missed goaltending call early on.

This game is phys.i.cal.

They're certainly "letting em play early."

Goaltending
 

Aren't the college and NFHS goaltending rule the same? Does it matter that it touched the backboard?

No, they're not the same. In college, it matters (if the ball is completely above the rim, too.)

I've seen hockey games with less contact. :-)

Badly missed kick ball then a questionable travel after a lot of contact by the Louisville defenders.

So far this crew ain't doing a good job and the game is starting to get sloppy and out of their control. Very poorly officiated first half.

No the rules aren't the same. In college, the ball, with a chance to go in, is considered on its downward flight if it's touched the backboard and above the level of the rim. Under NFHS, hitting the backboard doesn't change how you adjudicate this play.

I do like how they addressed Pitino after his pirouette following a questionable foul call. Looked like Michigan #2 had lost ball and was going to floor on his own before contact.

I agree.

Does this mean one of them goes all Kim Mulkey, and one of these teams complains about how physical it is?

Two nights ago that was a held ball.

I don't think so. Both teams are just so athletic and physical that I don't see one team getting an unfair advantage. It's very, very physical, but I don't see rough. It's a bitch of a game to ref... right on the edge and so many close decisions to make.

I didn't like the travel call either. It came at 4:43 in the first half.

I liked the call after I saw the opposite baseline camera angle.

Agreed. The Louisville player bumped Spike off his path on to the floor.

Pitino in spaghetti straps? No thank you.

Looks like POE's on rough play won't be ending any time soon. This crew is definitely not helping the cause in that regard. Very unfortunate.....

I agree.

There have been some misses for sure but I'm more inclined to agree with the above than to characterize this as unfortunate.

Both teams are giving as good as they're getting.

I would have liked a foul called at 6:51
 

Lots of contact at 6:51...I would have liked to have seen a foul called.

Michigan Block/Foul
 

5:09 Michigan Block

Wow....great block by Burke with a bad whistle at 5:09.

5:09 Second half, good block or good call?

I am leaning toward good block form the camera angles they gave us...

Should have been a no call regardless but especially in this game given the level of contact allowed since the opening tip.

True on the earlier contact allowed, I was just talking about this block itself though.

No call.

That's a clean play regardless of anything.

Totally a good block. L is straightlined on the play, so what is he seeing? T should have the best look between players from behind and also for contact up top. Total guess by Greene on that one.....

Usually I am very hesitant to question or criticize, but I am a bit surprised... I was really expecting a heck of a game from an officiating point of view with this crew. I've seen a lot of Higgins games in the Big 12 and he has looked a lot better before.

Is it just the pace of this one that won't slow down that is forcing it?

It's not difficult to see that they came out with the 'let them play' mentality. Problem is, when you then have a few touch or phantom fouls, it just plain looks bad. I'd rather have the officials set the tone for the game rather than the players.

This game has not benefitted from the 'let them play' philosophy. It has only made them look bad and has drawn more frustration from the players than need be.

The delay of game warning the first half......the Louisville guy was over the OOB line, just dancing all over it before the ref stepped in with a warning. The announcers were miffed, I call and see a warning in most high school games. Isn't it that referee's job to keep a count and watch for this? Are you seen as "that" guy for calling it I D1?

This is what will stick with me from this game....

The best play of the game (Burke's block) got penalized.

One of the worst plays of the game (Hancock jumping sideways into a defender when shooting from the corner) got rewarded.

If you're calling it every game, you may want to consider adjusting. That doesn't mean you should, but I would consider it unless you're working the highest level to which you're striving.

It's possible you're being too nit picky on when a player is getting close. Of course, it's possible the kids in your area just aren't catching on. I would watch some games at higher levels, and talk to some higher level local officials, and see how they call it.

I was watching the game when it happened. The announcers weren't miffed, just confused until it was reported. It was pretty blatant so it needed to be called. If you are calling it in most high school games, maybe you need to start working on preventative officiating. You can usually tell when a kid is going to aggressively harass the inbounder..... they get all excited before you even hand the ball to the thrower. Take a few seconds to remind the jacked-up kid what will happen if he violates the invisible plane prior to the throw-in. Then you won't see it so much. :)

The problem is, the L hustled too fast to the end line and got a bad look. Slow, fat guys like me would have stayed a little behind the play and had a better angle.

agreed 100% maybe not about the fat guy part. straight line city. no whistle with that look.

Really? I thought all of those were good fouls. Defenders were making poor plays and they got burned.

And this defender had jumped straight up and down?

The problem is Greene made a call I'm sure he's told a hundred campers over the years not to make.

Good whistle on the Burke block. Going to goal, offensive player in the air, contact and offensive player hits the floor. Watch the off hand on Siva's hip. Entirely too much contact. Why would an official hold whistle just because of a high stakes game? A foul is a foul.

That was not a foul. The UL player went to the floor because he got his dunk attempt blocked, not because of some off hand contact.

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="http://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/9mNlowCKXRg" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

An official would hold his whistle because that's not a foul at any level of play.

That is a great block. I would not have called a foul if I see the entire play. But if that was the only missed call, then they did pretty good. I felt the game overall was well officiated. There are always calls that we can disagree with with slow motion replay.

Peace

Yeah, that was the only single play I was disappointed in. I think they could have put a few more whistles on defenders putting theirs hands on dribblers but I felt they allowed the same amount of contact on both ends in the paint and the players adjusted to it.

Burke's off-arm got pinned against his own body, what are you talking about? :rolleyes:

Anyone else worried about how the national media is portraying this game. Saying every game should be officiated like this, Jay whatshisface said, "The officials got out of the way and let the players decide it" I thought officials are there to enforce the rule book to create level play.

Personally I thought the game was very rough. I thought there was contact severe enough to create a disadvantage. On a couple loose balls, there were guys just punching at the ball and striking the opposing players arm. Isn't this a foul?

I don't want to see the trend going this way. It will filter down to all levels. Am I way off base here?

Thanks Zebra. I bring it up in the captains meeting and also remind the coaches before the game. I will talk to upper officials in our area to see what they think. Is this one of these rules that's really not a rule unless the defender contacts the thrower-inner?

I am just surprised that in so many games the defenders feet land out of bounds regularly right in front of the official. Obviously the plane was broken, why no call?

Were you officiating the game? If not then there will always be things that happen you do not like. And I would have to watch the game from a TV perspective, but nothing about that game looked rough anymore than any other game I have seen. There were players going to the basket and when you have defenders contesting shots, you will have contact.

I really hate to say this, but this is what I find about this site, most people here only officiating high school but then come up with every little contact play and want to call a foul. This was an up and down game and a lot of fouls were called. Because they did not call 20 more the game was rough?

Peace

Good grief.

#1) There was no off hand on Siva's hip.

#2) Even if the off hand had been on Siva's hip, no way could the L see that from where he was at.

Not a foul. Not a foul. Not a foul. I would bet that in the locker room, that was that officials biggest disappointment - that he blew his whistle on that play.

And you, of course, being the big-time D-I official that you are, get to tell those lowly high school officials that their opinions and questions don't count. :rolleyes:

A foul is a foul but that wasn't. The L was blocked out in terms of any potential body contact and the block itself was clean.

I'll bet anything the L wanted that one back the second he blew his whistle. I'll also go all in that he took at peek at the C's face to get some kind of confirmation. I know we can't see his - the C's - face but a blank stare says a lot.

We're there to enforce the rule book but try to use this as a guideline, no matter the level: Did the crew call the fouls that needed to be called? If the answer is "yes" then things will generally be okay. There were things missed but that's going to be the case every game. D1 kids are very fast and very strong. We're not :)

Going back to my last BV game a few weeks ago I still go over some of the calls I thought I should have made but the assignor/observer said exactly what I just wrote: "You guys made the calls that needed to be made." Neither team had the advantage tilted in their favor by what we did or didn't do.

Would love to debate it if someone could post the clip..... From the replay, the defender's path totally missed the shooter and was actually past the shooter when the shooter initiated the contact by jumping sideways.

Never saw Hancock jump sideways on any other shot he took during the game, so I don't believe that was his normal shooting motion...

This play should NEVER, EVER be called a foul in any game at any level.

Why, you ask?

Because it isn't a foul under any rule set you use (NFHS, NCAA, FIBA, NBA).

37 fouls in the game..... 4-5 of those fouls by Michigan at the end to get up to 7, to put L'ville in bonus, etc.??? So 'actual' fouls committed was in the low 30's... From my end of the world, that's not a lot of fouls for a game.

You said it right there, "from your end of the world." None of us (presumably) were there, and so no one here knows what directive these officials may have been given by their assigner. Perhaps the NCAA specifically wanted to "let them play" this game.

No... the game was rough because the game was rough. (Perhaps you didn't get the angles we all did because you were there... have you seen it on tv yet?)

Well, I don't remember the touch/phantom calls you're talking about other than the Burke block where it seems the L just reacted and thought he saw something that wasnt there.

And as far as setting a tone and who should do it, that's an argument that can go both ways. What I say in my pre-games is that it should not take us long as a crew to figure out what the game needs and what kind of whistles we need to put in it.

This game had two athletic and aggressive teams. There were many plays that could have had whistles but I think the crew did a good job of passing on marginal contact and was consistent on both ends. IMO, the game did not need more whistles.

What sticks with me is that it was a fast paced, competitive natl championship game where both teams played hard and did not make for the easiest game to officiate but the crew overall did a nice job.

If you want to focus on two plays that's fine but you could do that in almost any basketball game.

The Burke block and the kick ball where it looks like the C got straight-lined were the only real plays that stuck out to me.

There was definitely some contact that could have been called but I felt they were consistent on both ends and players adjusted well. As zebraman said earlier and I stated above, it was two athletic, aggressive teams and not an easy contest to officiate but I think they did a nice job.

Perhaps the NCAA did ('let them play' would infer that fewer fouls were called, right?), however that would contradict the comment that I was responding to... that there were 'a lot of fouls called'.

That was a great game. The officiating was just right for this game.

My only issues:
1) Early GT that did not get called
2) Kicked ball that did not get called
3) Incorrect call by L on clean block by Michigan's Burke

Glad that there were no weak held/jump ball calls like there was on Saturday :)

This was the BiG 10 vs. the Big East, probably the 2 most physical conferences in all of basketball (including the NBA). It's "Big Boy" basketball. Wait til you go to a camp full of D1 prospects and with D1 officials observing you. A lot of whistles is not what they will be looking for.

In those situations you get graded more on what you DON'T call.

Also, I hate when people say that officials 'let them play". It implies that the prior 30+ games were called incorrectly. It's my pet peeve but I hate when officials change the way they call the game because of the stage it is one. The teams got where they are playing a certain style that was in part dictated by the officials all year. Officials should either 'let them play' all year or call the game they've called all year. Thank you for your time. We now continue with our regularly scheduled program 'Gottleib and Burke: In the Paint'

You do not have to work D1 to know that players at the college level (Men's basketball especially) are a little rougher and more physical than high school basketball in general. Bigger and quicker people. That does not mean that because it is rougher than what some might see, does not equate more fouls must be called. Players right or wrong are not as disadvantaged. Sorry, but people try to equate high school thinking to college basketball. It does not apply all the time.

Peace

So they are just under a foul a minute and you think that is not a lot of foul?

Peace

Of course it doesn't apply. But when someone posts their opinion or asks a question and the response they get is basically a slap in the face of "well, you are just a high school ref", then that is BS.

What was that word I used before?

Oh yeah...a$$ hat.

OK, but I also hear, "Well those were obvious because I see them on a computer screen" attitude that gets on my nerves. I watch a lot of high school games just as an evaluator and I see a lot of these same plays missed by high school officials in their games all the time. I have said before, I call more travels than most of my partners at the high school level, because most officials I come in contact with often will not call a basic travel in the post or on the perimeter. I do when it is obvious, but I do not think that makes me so much more talented because I see them when I do.

Peace

Added #4 and I'm right there with you.

That was a wildly entertaining game. Only a couple of late made 3FGA by Michigan would have made it even better.

The athleticsm, speed and quickness were off the charts.

I have to admit, "the officials might be losing a little bit of control of this game" briefly occurred to me 5 or 6 mins into the game. But, the players handled themselves beautifully, as did the coaches.

Entertaining game. Loved it.

(I'm not a L'ville fan by any stretch, either.)

That would be good if your #4 was actually correct. :D

:p

I'd love to see video of it posted here. Replay showed the play was absent of any contact by the defender.

edit: just watched it in a separate thread. camera angles do not reveal any contact.

I just want to know why Big-12 officials ball watch from the C during uneventful transtions? Multiple times Higgins would have his eyes on the ball handler slowing dribbling up the court while 8 other players are ahead of him.

Higgins also works in the Big Ten along with about 3 or 4 leagues

I agree with you and icallfouls both.....I thought it was a very entertaining game to watch and I thought the officiating was just right for this type of game. Yes it was physical, but as another poster said it was "big boy" basketball last night. Both of these teams were use to that style of officiating from the regular season.

That has nothing to do with my statement. My statement refers to officials who work in the Big 12.

Bad, that is a pretty broad based brush to paint with. I have not noticed that of Big 12 officials specifically, I do see it generally cross all leagues, predominately by older officials versus younger officials

I don't know, you're the expert, you tell me. I'm guessing though that Higgins, Greene, and Cahill all must of called a ton of fouls this year as they averaged 33.9, 35.2, and 32.8 FPG respectively this season.

I notice it most in B12 games.

I am obviously more of an expert than you are. I work those games and monitor what gets called in my games. I had a game with about (correction) 55 fouls and it was a miserable night as an official. One team shot 38 FTs and the other shot 30 FTs and it was not a fun game in comparison to others. The score was 87-77. And when I told other officials how many fouls we called in that game, they were like "Damn that is a lot of fouls."

Peace

I think crews need to have this kind of awareness. I had a game this year and the crew called 32 fouls in the 1st half. In my opinion it was just too many. The half was excrutiating to be part of. There were too many whistles on marginal contact.

We talked at half, and only had 17 fouls the rest of the game. They were obvious, they fit the game, and they were correct.

I have no idea why this went from saying a game's foul count in the low/mid 30's is a 'lot of fouls' to talking about a game with 55 fouls.

Games in the 30's implies both teams probably got into bonus each half but probably not double-bonus. I call that a good night at the office. Evidently you don't, or maybe you do. It's hard to tell with someone who's all over the map....

I really do not get what your point is. I think 30 plus fouls are quite a bit and usually results in a lot of FTs and players in foul trouble. If you have more than that number (which was suggested) then you really have a lot of problems. Many players last night were in foul trouble and if you have more fouls then players are sitting down more than they would have normally.

And I really think you should be careful talking about someone being all over the map when you have a problem with a shooting foul when a defender is not in LGP, not vertical and rules stipulate what happens with an airborne shooter and most of all interpretations that support that way of thinking. You need to get in that rulebook more and worry less about what I think about how many fouls are normal in a game.

Peace

Less than 40 / No more than 20 !!!!!
 

ICF -

Great point !!! What usually happens is some guy goes into the locker room at half time thinkin he just got right 7 whistles where he had "and 1's (hate that term), but the reality is he didn't have to call 6 of those because the kid played through marginal contact on all of them. The crew talks about it, players come out at half time referee is more patient and everyone is happy. Same contact occurs, ball goes in bucket and all is well!!!!

I think this is along the line of what Rut is talking about...

Long time ago went to a camp and was told "philisophically speaking" to keep the foul total below 40 and each team shooting less than 20 ft's a night and in most situations this will lead to a good night.....20 years later that statement proved right more often than wrong.....

I will now wait for the purists who don't go to camp to bash me :D:D:D

I think a target foul count is a very bad idea. I'm quite OK with low foul counts and have had numerous games where the total count was in the 20's and maybe a few in the 10's. But if the trend is going higher, I'm not going to change the calls so I don't go over some magical number.

In reality, it is the way the teams play, more often than not, that affect the number of fouls committed. If they want to be sloppy and play poor defense, they end up with a lot of fouls and I'm not going to call less just to stay under 40. The game is going to be ugly if they're going to play ugly and pacing your foul count will definitely not make it better....it will probably make the game worse.

What usually happens is that, after a first half of a lot of fouls, most teams that are capable come out and play better basketball and the foul counts go down naturally.

Trying to avoid unnecessary foul calls is certainly a great goal but it is worse to have a nasty brawl just for the sake of having a low foul count.

Here's a thought for everyone: why not simply blow the whistle when warranted.

Don't go into the game with an agenda to "get" a player or coach (ala Arizonas' Miller).
Don't go into a game with a pre-concieved notion of how many fouls are too many or too few.

I do not think the a goal is to be taken so literally that you only focus on the actual number. I think the goal is just that a goal to try to not call or over call the game where you are not adequately calling the right things. Heck in many cases we do not even control how many plays would be potential fouls. Shooting 3s or jump shots often lead to less fouls just like the more the ball goes in the hole are likely fewer opportunities to call a foul. But nothing wrong IMO in having a goal. That goal does not mean you will always accomplish them, which is why a lot of officials strive to call things that are obvious.

Peace

A would like to think a foul is a foul, period. I have heard officials on this forum say that if a team has only one good ball handler that they would try not to foul them out.....what??!?!!?

I had an ugly game where there was easily double bonus for both teams in both halfs. So some quick sports math puts that way over 40. It was a JV girls game, with no real player on either team. What are you suppos to do when they are all blatant? We called two intentional fouls as well. It was so bad the V refs wanted to make sure we knew we could "call" a game over. We knew this but played out the game anyway.

As far as being judged on the fouls you don't call......that seems a bit weird to me.

How did these varsity referees suggest one go about "calling" a game over? Is this a specific area thing that is allowed there? I've never heard of anyone calling a game over just because a game was ugly or not well played.

What the hell is a "foul is a foul?" Fouls are subjective and always will be. And those that call them the way the bosses want will continue and those that don't will not.

Peace

I don't have a rule book in front of me, but there is a stipulation about a game getting out of control. I am at a conference right now, but always watching the forum :D

I don't want to get in a forum fight here, but I don't think you should let the "bosses" dictate how you officiate. Who are the bosses? Are the affiliated with the mob? Kidding of course, but I call a fair game and a foul in the first is a foul in the 4th, why wouldn't it be? M

And on the flip side, you may want to crack open a dictionary and review the definition of 'catch'..... ;)

That's rarely what is meant when someone says "a foul is a foul." What is usually meant is "he touched him, so you need to call a foul." It's more aptly described as "I think that's a foul, so these guys are idiots for not calling it."

If you're talking about a forfeit, that occurs if a team refuse to play after being instructed to, failing to comply with any technical foul penalty, repeated technical foul infractions or other acts that make a travesty of the game.

You can't just "call it over" because you don't like how they're playing. If it's that bad, just keep calling the fouls. It will eventually stop.

APG. I'll have to check my book at home, I thought I marked this after that game. Anyone else out there hear about this?

I'll say this...I've never heard of this. Now maybe this is a local thing there for JV games to make sure varsity games start on time, but as far as I can recall, there's nothing in the rule book as far as "calling" a game except for the reasons I stated earlier (that come from 5-4).

APG, I guess they were referring to a travesty. And that it was. I thought the coach soiled herself when she thought she was getting a call, but it definitely was a charge on her girl and not a block on the defender. Her team was playing with three by the end of the game

How about they are the folks who pay us to officiate games. They are the folks who select who will work games in a particular conference or for a particular association. They are the folks who decide who works various levels of play-off games.

Who do you think should be deciding who does or doesn't work games? :confused:

The magic objective committee of enlightened super people.

Perhaps this is a had to be there situation, but nothing in your description sounds like a travesty of the game.

What does asking you to explain what you mean have to do with getting into a fight? I hear this all the time and it is the most ambiguous point anyone can make, because fouls are subjective as the rules state they are to be judged. When the rules say a foul is only when a player's "normal movement" is affected, then that is going to be subjective.

Peace