So Much Do We Coarsen With The Passage Of Time
When I was young and innocent, I remember often being frustrated whenever officiating robbed student athletes of their rightful achievement. So after witnessing the officials last night refuse to make the correct call after video replay (objective proof of their intent), I was reminded of a quote from Orwell. And after reflection, I've realized how sad it is that I've just come to accept intentionally incorrect officiating as something that cannot be changed.
"WHEN I read of the goings-on in the House of Commons the week before last, I could not help being reminded of a little incident that I witnessed twenty years ago and more.
It was at a village cricket match. The captain of one side was the local squire who, besides being exceedingly rich, was a vain, childish man to whom the winning of this match seemed extremely important. Those playing on his side were all or nearly all his own tenants.
The squire’s side were batting, and he himself was out and was sitting in the pavilion. One of the batsmen accidentally hit his own wicket at about the same moment as the ball entered the wicketkeeper’s hands. ‘That’s not out,’ said the squire promptly, and went on talking to the person beside him. The umpire, however, gave a verdict of ‘out’, and the batsman was half-way back to the pavilion before the squire realized what was happening. Suddenly he caught sight of the returning batsman, and his face turned several shades redder.
‘What!’ he cried, ‘he’s given him out? Nonsense! Of course he’s not out!’ And then, standing up, he cupped his hands and shouted to the umpire: ‘Hi, what did you give that man out for? He wasn’t out at all!’
The batsman had halted. The umpire hesitated, then recalled the batsman to the wicket and the game went on.
I was only a boy at the time, and this incident seemed to me about the most shocking thing I had ever seen. Now, so much do we coarsen with the passage of time, my reaction would merely be to inquire whether the umpire was the squire’s tenant as well."
Why is everyone so upset about one call in a basketball game that Michigan didn't even play in?
People are upset because Coach K and Duke are widely reviled, and we think Wisconsin deserved better. Most of the viewing audience did not come into the game last night thinking "gee, I don't really care who wins - just curious to see how it works out". Most viewers and fans pick a side to root for.
Because, sports!
I guess. I just don't think it was so egregious to warrant this outpouring. It was a bad call at a key moment, but Wisconsin got a bad call in their favor that was just as critical in the Kentucky game (the shot clock violation). It happens. No one is trying to help one team win. Officiating is difficult.
If Duke wasn't a team that is widely perceived to get more than their share of calls, there would not be the focus. But Duke is perceived to have the refs' ears, in part because Coach K is constantly whinging to them, and in part because that perception is really hard to avoid in Cameron Hall.
But I agree that officiating is difficult, and they're not all Tim Donaghys out there.
Is it whining or is it Coach K doing his job? I think one of the things that makes a basketball coach good at his job is his ability to work the referees and get them to see things in a favorable light to his (or her) team. We've seen John Beilein lose his cool on more than one occasion with the refs, usually to good results. Nobody thinks that Harbaugh is going to be working the refs from the sidelines during games in the future?
Give me a break... if it had been Michigan instead of Wisconsin getting hosed by the refs against Duke last night, the entire MGoBlogosphere would have melted down, including the servers.
Of course we'd be pissed (and rightly so). But you look at the board threads and you'd think that this was a once-in-a-season bad call. And not only that, we have people saying that the call proves the "objective proof of their intent" to help one team. Please. We need to get a grip. In reality, these sorts of things happen often because officiating basketball is extremely difficult.
Given the circumstances of the game, it being the National Championship and all, it most certainly was a once-in-a-season bad call.
I think the Wisconsin-aiding shot clock violation was just as important, and that game was just about as big as this one. Not a peep from anyone around here. I think they're both equally bad calls, but there's a call like this in many, many games.
The big difference is they couldnt and didnt review the Wisconsin/Kentucky call and still get it wrong. Plus as someone else said, there were lots of terrible calls both ways at the end of the W/K game.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
I'm completely with LJ on this one. I hate Wisconsin sports, so I'm glad they lost, but even for those of you who were rooting for them (I don't understand why other than the hatred for Duke), it's really not a big deal at this point, especially since our team was not involved.
that really tainted that one--what had been, I thought, a pretty great game until then. We just won't ever know how it might have gone.
A few calls doesn't change the fact that Wisconsin completely choked down the stretch. They had their worst offensive efficiency over the last 12 games yesterday, and couldn't get a stop down the stretch on D. For a team who came up cluch in the last 5 minutes this tournament, they couldn't do anything.
And people forget that Wisconsin has gotten so many calls in their favor over the years. Did we forget their 3 fouls in 37 minutes against Michigan? If this was Izzo, no one would say anything about the officiating. Better team won the championship yesterday, end of story.
Why is everyone so upset about one call in a basketball game that Michigan didn't even play in?
Because it reminded us about that one call in a basketball game that Michigan did play in.
If you ever reach total enlightenment while you're drinking a beer, I bet it makes beer shoot out your nose.
I went to bed a half time and I dont care what happened.
Five minutes into that game you could see that Wisconsin was in trouble. Duke played with more energy and just seemed to want it more. Duke took that game from Wisconsin. Not the refs. If Wisconsin had played as hard as Duke they would've won.
When Wisconsin was up nine points in the second half, did you think Duke still "wanted it more"?
are a part of sports like it or not. Generally it evens out in the long haul. It's probably the most annoying in a title game certainly, but I agree with a previous comment that working the refs and getting your players to shut their mouths in games like this is extremely underrated as a part of successful coaching at this level. I expect Harbaugh to be adept at exploiting this part of the game.
A questionable call in the heat of the moment is one thing. Screwing it up even when you have access to repeated video replays in another. That should not be "part of the game."