Home Officiating Bias

During the early stages of the game it appeared that Stauskas drew a charge from Thomas (Kellogg also said it looked like a charge during the broadcast).  It was called a bloking foul crowd went nuts and OSU got a 3 point play.  

Not long after this it appeared that Thomas was sliding under one of our players and a fould was called.  This was more clear cut than the first call mentioned above so I was sure it would be a blocking foul.  It was instead called a charge (once again Kellogg said during the broadcast that he thought this was a bad call). Another 3 point swing.

This scenario could have easily (and according to the announcers) ended with us up 6 more points and Thomas out of the game.

These 50/50 calls (charges and blocking fouls) seem to be harder to call and the refs like to dramatically call them.

I wonder if you look at just the 50/50 calls and not all fouls if they even more favor the home team?

But the proximity of the crowd to the court, mixed with the highly judgmental nature of the calls is what creates the problem. In the NFL, for example, the crowds get loud but they are not right on top of the playing surface the way they are in a smaller venue like a college basketball court. As for the officials being professionals, I don't know.....basketball refs are awful. To me, they're like wrestling referees minus the steel chair.

Ordered.  Appreciate the recommedation from both of you.

true, but i do think the reason we had such a slow start was because ohio hand checked literally everytime someone tried to make a move and we weren't used to playing against a defense like that and not getting those calls

I know it IS determined by emotion, but should it be?  Was that horrendous no-call on the THJ slap worth the benefit that we get from emotion?  Admittedly, I am one emotionless bastard aside from rage at Michigan losing, but I don't see the need for it in officiating.

I meant to specify 50/50 charge/block calls.

Just because "every" close call went to OSU doesn't mean they were wrong. You have to analyze each call seperately. Perhaps one or two was wrong. Maybe none. There were probably one or two calls we got.

I'll break down the Stauskas charge here. Unfortunately there's no video to embed - I'm breaking this down from my DVR:

At 18:28 of the first half Stauskas committs a charge.  The common misconception is that if the defender is sliding, then it is a block. This is not true. A player must gain legal guarding position at the time the offensive player leaves the floor for his shot in order to earn a charge. Legal guarding position is defined as: being inbounds, having two feet on the floor, facing the defender, and in front of the defender. Once you gain legal guarding position, you may move sideways and backwards to maintain to so long as you are not moving into the offensive player (i.e. beat them to the spot).

For Stauskas' charge, while it's clear that Thomas' left foot was still sliding, it is also clear that at the point of Stauskas leaving the floor, Thomas was able to gain legal guarding position, took the hit to the chest and drew the charge. The fact that his feet were sliding is irrelevent to the rule.

I'd love to break down more of the calls, but seeing as my post was marked as flamebait, it would appear that some of our Maize and Blue glasses still haven't come off and we haven't returned to being able to discuss something objectively.

I genuinely would like to know how these studies were conducted.

I think it is pretty accurate to say that players play better at home - it's a legitimate question that needs to be addressed if you're going to look at this issue scientifically and objectively.

But whatever, feel free to flame me for trying to be objective and argue a reasonable viewpoint.

Thanks for the feedback.  Through all of my writing there really was a question in there and you gave a good answer; again, I was curious if it was just me and my perception of the game nowadays or if there was something to the evolution (worsening?) of officiating.  The notion of Bobby Knight and Assembly Hall in the late 70's and 80's was actually a comparison I was envisioning, that and say, Cameron Indoor in the 90's.  Saying that it's actually easier these days is an interesting and probable thought.

As far as MJ and travelling, I guess I've never thought of him in that regard -as getting extra steps.  For me was Patrick Ewing was the epitome of "extra steps" (I can picture him now taking 3 1/2 steps across the lane for a mini hook-type shot).