Anyone else disgusted by officiating in NCAA final tonight?

Some of you are missing the point. Calling 5 fouls in 6 possessions against the best team in college basketball at not fouling was not so Duke could win. It was done to even up the score and not let Wisconsin pull away even more.

The officials are given strict guidelines of how to call games. When millions of dollars (in ad revenue) are on the line, it's not surprising that one of those guidelines is to keep the game close. Advertisers don't care who wins, only that the most people are seeing their ad and they haven't turned the channel because Wisconsin was beating Duke by 20.

mellow seeds wrote:

foo wrote:

Yes, all of the blown calls clearly changed the outcome of this game.

The out-of-bounds play that TV seemed to hide was when Okafor was driving to the basket. He stepped on the end line right in front of the ref, then got fouled by Kaminsky, while making the shot. A very quick replay showed Okafor clearly stepped out of bounds, but the TV announcers didn't seem to want to discuss it.

Also, the foul where the Duke player steamrolled Kiminsky, who was just standing there. That was ridiculous.

The NCAA needs to get refs who call unbiased games regardless of who is coaching.

How about the third foul on okafor which was clearly all ball. Duke being without its best player for a huge chunk of the second half didn't impact the game at all?

Okafor was schooled when he was in there. Wisco was +17 with him on the floor. So actually no it didn't impact the game in a negative way for Duke. "You must be one of those tournament types"

mellow seeds wrote:

foo wrote:

Yes, all of the blown calls clearly changed the outcome of this game.

The out-of-bounds play that TV seemed to hide was when Okafor was driving to the basket. He stepped on the end line right in front of the ref, then got fouled by Kaminsky, while making the shot. A very quick replay showed Okafor clearly stepped out of bounds, but the TV announcers didn't seem to want to discuss it.

Also, the foul where the Duke player steamrolled Kiminsky, who was just standing there. That was ridiculous.

The NCAA needs to get refs who call unbiased games regardless of who is coaching.

How about the third foul on okafor which was clearly all ball. Duke being without its best player for a huge chunk of the second half didn't impact the game at all?

Okafor was schooled when he was in there. Wisco was +17 with him on the floor. So actually no it didn't impact the game in a negative way for Duke. "You must be one of those tournament types"

Polly P wrote:

Why do you idiots focus solely on the second half? The calls all went Wisconsin's way in the first half, but you conveniently forget that.

Feel free to point out the missed calls that went against Duke in the first half. Hint: you can't. Don't just look at a stat line and spout ignorance if you don't know enough about the game or the teams to know their style of play.

Too bad for the Badgers that Okafor still came up with two buckets when it really mattered..

Dial it up wrote:

Polly P wrote:

Why do you idiots focus solely on the second half? The calls all went Wisconsin's way in the first half, but you conveniently forget that.

Feel free to point out the missed calls that went against Duke in the first half. Hint: you can't. Don't just look at a stat line and spout ignorance if you don't know enough about the game or the teams to know their style of play.

You libs always try to win your arguments by twisting words. If you're not a libtard, then you're a retard since you obviously suck at reading comprehension. Have someone with an IQ of 70 or above explain my post to you, then try again moran.

Read this report. On the critical out of bounds play which went to Duke, the refs admitted that they didn't see the angle we all saw on the TV. The chief of the refs saw it, but didn't think it was his duty to overrule the refs on the floor.

http://deadspin.com/ncaa-officiating-head-refs-never-saw-best-angle-of-con-1696299612

Loved the officiating but I'm a Duke grad.

Dial it up wrote:

Just so you know bud, they played Duke once already this year with Dekker injured and didnt foul.

You know they had 17 fouls the last time they met, right? Oops, doesn't support the thesis.

They actually landed darned near their average. That they can't handle quick guards was evident early. Duke exploited it just as the Badgers took advantage of Okafor.

bhilden wrote:

Read this report. On the critical out of bounds play which went to Duke, the refs admitted that they didn't see the angle we all saw on the TV. The chief of the refs saw it, but didn't think it was his duty to overrule the refs on the floor.

http://deadspin.com/ncaa-officiating-head-refs-never-saw-best-angle-of-con-1696299612

That is exactly why they should DO AWAY WITH ALL REVIEWS.

The video review has been a total failure in all the sports. The first problem is that it takes too much time and creates too many stoppages of the game. The second problem is that some plays are reviewable and others aren't. How does it help if 4 plays are called wrong in the middle of the second half but they spend 4 minutes to see who a ball went off of with 1:29 left in a game. The third problem is that common sense calls that have been made for 50 years are now being changed because of the video review. An example would be a player going for a rebound. A player from the other team goes over his back and hits his hand which causes the ball to go out of bounds. It's an obvious foul but if the foul wasn't called and they review it to see who touched it last, it would be the player who got fouled. They can't review it to see if there was a foul that occurred. The team that committed the foul that wasn't called would then be awarded the ball. That is just ignorant but now happens.

The fourth problem is that even with the video replay, calls are made wrong and some bogus excuse is made like not having the same replay as the tv audience. I've heard that one a lot.

It is his flawed notion of probability theory that is the problem. If the average is 12.5 and there are fewer in the first half, the expectation is 6.25 per half; you DO NOT add the deficit to the second half. In fact, a Bayesian perspective would indicate that the prior expectations of 12.5 fouls should be dropped some, to say 10, or 5 per half, so the expected number for the game is 7.5. There are nuances, but at a high level, the thinking is what keeps Las Vegas full of idiots giving them money.

I was more outraged than disgusted.

26mi235 wrote:

usoundstupid wrote:

The odds are actually quite good. Given a per game average of 12.5 and only 2 entering the second half, there was a significant likelihood of a sustantial increase in the second half. One must also consider that Duke is a significantly better team than Wisonsin's average opponent which also suggests the game average would be above 12.5.

It is his flawed notion of probability theory that is the problem. If the average is 12.5 and there are fewer in the first half, the expectation is 6.25 per half; you DO NOT add the deficit to the second half. In fact, a Bayesian perspective would indicate that the prior expectations of 12.5 fouls should be dropped some, to say 10, or 5 per half, so the expected number for the game is 7.5. There are nuances, but at a high level, the thinking is what keeps Las Vegas full of idiots giving them money.

Wrong. The average is 12.5 per GAME, not 6.25 per half. They are not equivalent. Any fan knows that the number of fouls is highest later in the game due to fatigue and end-game strategy.

I agree with you to a point. I don't know if they're told what to do but in almost every meaningful game you will see officials swing momentum when games get in that 5-10 point range, I also agree it wasn't so much "so Duke could win the game". But I don't know if they're instructed to do so. The most blatant game for this I saw in the tourney was Arizona/Wisc, if the officials had let that go it would have been a 20 point game. Wisc couldn't miss.

worse fraud than B Madoff wrote:

Some of you are missing the point. Calling 5 fouls in 6 possessions against the best team in college basketball at not fouling was not so Duke could win. It was done to even up the score and not let Wisconsin pull away even more.

The officials are given strict guidelines of how to call games. When millions of dollars (in ad revenue) are on the line, it's not surprising that one of those guidelines is to keep the game close. Advertisers don't care who wins, only that the most people are seeing their ad and they haven't turned the channel because Wisconsin was beating Duke by 20.

The short answer is No. Longer, did Wisconsin shoot 16 foul shots to 3 for Duke in the first half? No. It was 7-4, does that look the same to you? In general the refs let the teams play in the first half. Of Duke's fouls in the first half 4 were on high profile players, that's why a big deal was made of it.

Polly P wrote:

Why do you idiots focus solely on the second half? The calls all went Wisconsin's way in the first half, but you conveniently forget that.

Including one after Winston stepped out of bounds right in front of the referee. Thanks for giving me the opportunity to bring that up again.I'm dominating this thread like the officials dominated Wisconsin.

B. Hurley wrote:

Too bad for the Badgers that Okafor still came up with two buckets when it really mattered..

Referees are never perfect, but they are usually pretty damn good as they were in this game. But you'll always find a few disgruntled fanboys who will pick the two or three questionable calls and use them to fuel their nutjob conspiracies.

By the way, one team having more fouls than the other is not a reasonable cause for complaint.

Hoopsters wrote:

Referees are never perfect, but they are usually pretty damn good as they were in this game. But you'll always find a few disgruntled fanboys who will pick the two or three questionable calls and use them to fuel their nutjob conspiracies.

By the way, one team having more fouls than the other is not a reasonable cause for complaint.

Nope they are never perfect. But typically they aren't this bad. If you disagree then ask yourself why there are so many threads about it just on this one running related website. It's a shame because it puts an ugly mark on a great tournament

Nope, the officials did not effect the outcome. One coach made adjustments to how the game was being called and the other didn't. Similar to how the Packers were out coached against the Seahawks. Both resulted in the same whiny fans. The fans of Wisconsin have a funny way of making me a fan of their opponents. By the way, nice opener for the Brewers.