Wisconsin vs. Duke - National Championship - Master Thread

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by parrot

Yeah, there's no way that two out of bounds calls going the wrong way down the stretch of a 5 point game had any impact on the game.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Are you suggesting that Wisc. should not have even been in the game?

Originally Posted by parrot

No.

If UW (or its fans or coaches) is going to complain that a missed OOB call or two cost them the game, they should be arguing that a missed shot clock violation and a missed OOB that didn't just change possession but added a total 4 points to UW's score (2 of the points with just over 2 minutes to go in the critical part of the game) cost UK the semi-final game and that UK should have been in the game in their place.

[Mregor]

Originally Posted by Kansas Ref

*You pretty much see the same types of "missed calls" (e.g., missing the oob on duke) and "suspect calls" (e.g., calling a block against LGP’d defensive player) made by refs who officiate 8th grade girls games as you do in these primo games. Despite those refs being regarded as “top level”, they are prone to the same lapses in judgment, erroneous calls, and missed calls that inhere with all refs.

Welcome to the avocation of officiating! The only job where you are expected to be perfect the first time out and get better from there on.

The shocking thing to me was the lack of travel calls. Both sides did it but there were lots. First was Decker, then several duke player, then Kaminski, then Allen I think near the end on one of his key made baskets at the end. I'm not talking nit picking travels either. Of course, I've never missed one from the stands. Verne Harris said travels were his worst call and that's the way he wanted it. It's now NBA'esque in regards to travelling. I need to adapt next season. I've always called less than my partners but thought I was just weak on the call. Turns out I was just ahead of my time.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

That's a failure of the system and DVsports should lose the contract over that.
Huge item revealed by Adams that he saw the definitive replay in time to go to the table and summon the officials back to view that before restarting play, but elected not to get involved. I can see merit in both positions--for the coordinator to get involved or not. Personally, I would have held up play and had the guys come look at every replay available, especially if I knew that there was an important one which they hadn't seen. I would have done so because of the intense scrutiny that these officials receive in the media and from the spectating public. I would feel that it is my duty to protect my guys by giving them every possible opportunity to get a very important play right and avoid some of the criticism. I don't agree with sitting back and doing nothing while knowing that your guys are going to get ripped for something when you can prevent it and eliminate the coming public outcry. When weighing whether to intervene or not, I think that the leader of NCAA officiating should take the side of getting the correct decision for the integrity of the game. He wouldn't be actually making the call, just providing the opportunity for the crew to see/have more/necessary information.

To each his own. If the officials didn't see the right replay, it's not on them at all, but rather it's on whoever set up the replay system. So, people may criticize all they want, but...... Also, I'm a little vague about where he would have/could have taken the officials to see another better replay, but wherever it was, I don't think it would be proper for Adams to personally inject himself into the contest itself in any way while it is going on. jmo

[SAJ]

Originally Posted by jpgc99

Without giving credence to other comments that have been made, a bad call late in the game does have more of an impact than one that occurs early in the game. The theory is that teams have more ability to overcome that mistake with more time. This diminishes as the clock winds down.

Don't interpret my comments to mean that I agree with parrot. I don't; and I don't think the officiating impacted this game.

pretty much word for word from the guy on the floor

https://youtu.be/NX8krVUM_7I?t=5m15s

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

That's coach-talk.

Not even close to the same. Pull up both videos side-by-side and you will see that.

Same in that both plays were late in close games and incorrectly called blocks. Given John Adams apparent love for blocking fouls to encourage scoring and driving into the lane, and the limited knowledge the general public has in regards to LGP I think DeRosa correctly figured in both cases that calling a block would be more palatable.

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Great post! Thanks.
Honest answers by John Adams.
He confirms that the game officials did not see the definitive replay which we got watching on TV. That's a failure of the system and DVsports should lose the contract over that.
Huge item revealed by Adams that he saw the definitive replay in time to go to the table and summon the officials back to view that before restarting play, but elected not to get involved. I can see merit in both positions--for the coordinator to get involved or not. Personally, I would have held up play and had the guys come look at every replay available, especially if I knew that there was an important one which they hadn't seen. I would have done so because of the intense scrutiny that these officials receive in the media and from the spectating public. I would feel that it is my duty to protect my guys by giving them every possible opportunity to get a very important play right and avoid some of the criticism. I don't agree with sitting back and doing nothing while knowing that your guys are going to get ripped for something when you can prevent it and eliminate the coming public outcry. When weighing whether to intervene or not, I think that the leader of NCAA officiating should take the side of getting the correct decision for the integrity of the game. He wouldn't be actually making the call, just providing the opportunity for the crew to see/have more/necessary information.

He was left with a bad choice of getting it right the wrong way or getting it wrong the right way. There is no good choice choice there but I think he would have opened a can of worms on the order of that one US/USSR Olympic game had he intervened with no rules authority to do so .

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

He was left with a bad choice of getting it right the wrong way or getting it wrong the right way. There is no good choice choice there but I think he would have opened a can of worms on the order of that one US/USSR Olympic game had he intervened with no rules authority to do so .

I agree with this sentiment. Once someone does it that first time, all major TV sports will then have that expectation, and it will trickle down. There is an alternate sitting at the table, he should be the one reviewing all the broadcast angles the announcers are viewing while the on-court crew is reviewing at their monitor.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by AremRed

Same in that both plays were late in close games and incorrectly called blocks. ....

Where did you come up with notion that the UK/ND call was incorrect? You took a poll of conference supervisors, or just Indiana residents?

That's was the easiest block of any of the plays I've seen discussed in the forum this season.

[ballgame99]

Originally Posted by AremRed

Same in that both plays were late in close games and incorrectly called blocks. Given John Adams apparent love for blocking fouls to encourage scoring and driving into the lane, and the limited knowledge the general public has in regards to LGP I think DeRosa correctly figured in both cases that calling a block would be more palatable.

Actually I think the fact that this play got called a block just further reinforces the lack of knowledge the public has of LGP and what is a block and what is not. If that is called a charge I don't think anyone outside of Durham NC would have a problem with it.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by AremRed

Same in that both plays were late in close games and incorrectly called blocks. Given John Adams apparent love for blocking fouls to encourage scoring and driving into the lane, and the limited knowledge the general public has in regards to LGP I think DeRosa correctly figured in both cases that calling a block would be more palatable.

Originally Posted by Eastshire

He was left with a bad choice of getting it right the wrong way or getting it wrong the right way. There is no good choice choice there but I think he would have opened a can of worms on the order of that one US/USSR Olympic game had he intervened with no rules authority to do so .

You are both correct.

MTD, Sr.

[parrot]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

If UW (or its fans or coaches) is going to complain that a missed OOB call or two cost them the game, they should be arguing that a missed shot clock violation and a missed OOB that didn't just change possession but added a total 4 points to UW's score (2 of the points with just over 2 minutes to go in the critical part of the game) cost UK the semi-final game and that UK should have been in the game in their place.

Officiating had nothing to do with this game.

That's the statement I was replying to. Full stop.

I'm not sure what arguing how other missed calls impacted a previous game has to do with that. I'm not a UW fan, and I never claimed anything "cost" them the game. Duke was playing better at that point and probably wins anyway - so the original poster may have been a little hyperbolic saying the game came down to officiating - but if those calls go the way they should have gone it definitely affects how the game plays out, if not the final result.

[BlueDevilRef]

Anyone who actually believes that call was anything other than a defender sticking his nose into a shooter needs his/her head examined. That's just crap to think that is anything other than a standard basketball play

[Rich]

Originally Posted by BlueDevilRef

Anyone who actually believes that call was anything other than a defender sticking his nose into a shooter needs his/her head examined. That's just crap to think that is anything other than a standard basketball play

I agree with you 100% and I'm a Badgers fan.

[parrot]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

The problem with this line of thinking is that you're dismissing the other 37 minutes of the game, as if they don't matter.

It's a pet peeve of mine that people make a bigger deal out of a play just because it happened with a minute left in the game. Scoring, or preventing the other team to score, is just as important in the first minute of the game as the last minute.

You're presuming a whole with that first statement, but I'll let it go.

Is it also a "pet peeve" that they have replay in the last two minutes? What's so important about the last two minutes?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by parrot

That's the statement I was replying to. Full stop.

I'm not sure what arguing how other missed calls impacted a previous game has to do with that. I'm not a UW fan, and I never claimed anything "cost" them the game. Duke was playing better at that point and probably wins anyway - so the original poster may have been a little hyperbolic saying the game came down to officiating - but if those calls go the way they should have gone it definitely affects how the game plays out, if not the final result.

If the very first questionable calls goes the other way, none of the other plays would have happened. The entire game events change. An entirely new sequence of events would have happened.

Where are Carl Sagan and Neil deGrasse Tyson when you need a space/time continuum to be altered?