landing spot. will be interesting to see how he does.
Yeah I'm puttin that one on top, if only for the call on the best block I've ever seen by Burke. I will maintain for the rest of my life that if the ref didn't fuck us on that call we would have won the game. That is the definition of a momentum changing play.
Admitted it was clean.
EDIT: this was a reply to a post that seemingly got deleted
I really tried getting into MBB last year but after that and the games (not just UM) this year I'm content with not watching it in the future. Soooo many games decided on the free throw line. I'm surprised they even consider tracking "defensive" stats.
Watched a hell of a Wings Leafs game tonight. At least bad officiating can usually be played through with good penalty kills. Imagine if hockey used a free shot line, ugh.
Fans visiting threads about one sport for the express purpose of telling the world that they don't care for said sport are obnoxious.
Great, you don't follow basketball. I don't really follow Michigan hockey, and I don't give a rat's ass about the NHL - but you don't see me visiting the hockey threads to inform you about how much I don't care.
It's my opinion from watching the sport up to tonight. It's my university but I can't comment on their roundball team because I think the fouls are a huge issue for the sport, which is actually relevant to this thread?
I guess my hockey comment wasn't necessary but shit there's an angry bunch on this board. Your absurd anger towards my non personal comments is unjustified.
AGREE OR LEAVE
I think they call them shootouts.
Admittedly, penalty shots are an even closer corollary, but they're obviously much rarer.
The worst part about the Burke block is because it was so high profile, everyone thinks that was the only bad call, and are quick to make the argument that it didn't cost Michigan the game, ignoring that the entire rest of the game was horribly officiated in Louisville's favor. Hancock with the foul that was inexplicably switched off of him (and would have fouled him out), the over the back that pushed Caris out of bounds on that last rebound (we would have had the ball down 3 on the last possessoin), the other bazillion calls that were missed on Hancock, bleh.
At some point I charted out the whole game as objectively as I could, marking down ever foul called and not called, and it wasn't even remotely close. It easily resulted in a 10+ point swing. Fuck everything about the refs that game.
Thank you for pointing this out!! I've felt exactly the same. I'm pretty certain the Ware factor caused so much Louisville sympathy the refs were swing by it. Silva played terrible but he was allowed to drive in out of control and get a touch foul, but Burke would get hammered but stay strong and never get a call
I am not interested in reliving every bad call in the NC game or any game for that matter. Not only do we ignore the calls from which we benefited, but at some point it just sounds whiney.
That said, the reason the Burke block will remain memorable forever is not simply because it was "high profile" or wrong, but because it was so effing beautiful---like on the level of Woodson's INT against MSU. I could watch it daily.
Why would you put me through this misery all over again?
I don't see why everyone is so upset. That's CLEARLY a foul. The ball is part of the hand and Burke got all ball so by definition he got all hand.
okay, not really, but damn, one of the prettiest blocks ever and the ref is right there and blows it. Dammit.
was the greatest athletic move I've ever seen. Everybody gets screwed when they play at Duke, so I don't think this game was the worst. We got mugged big time at Duke, just in the first half more than last nite.
Worst ever? No. But it was painful.
Still, a win over a team like that (just won @UCONN) without McGary and without being able to play post defense without a whistle blowing is a good win.
I haven't followed too closely, is McGary expected back within the next 5-10 games?
He played for a stretch up to this (?) game, so I assume he'll be okay soon. Hopefully by big ten play
I can't remember a worse one although I'm only 20. The Louisville one was pretty bad though.
This really shines a light on the attitude and positions you post with.
FSU beat #22 UMASS tonight as well. So that's good, right?!
It felt like an NBA game where play is stopped every time down the court due to touch fouls.
really bad - no advantage had been gained, there was no change in the course of play - definition of bad foul calls.
The fouls on the guards and when we failed badly in stopping the ball, I think you had to call those.
I was constantly angry at the inconsistency on the touch fouls at each end. Could be from my drunkeness, but what do I know.
I can't figure out what's going on in these games, but it seems like we get called for way more touch fouls than any of our opponents, particularly in the last minutes of each game. I don't know if we're just getting sloppy at the end of the game, or we're doing weird things, or what. At the end of this game it seemed like there was a ton of contact on the Stanford side of the court, which was okay, but on our side even the most inccidental contact was getting called.
To be honest, I really doubt they're calling the game differently on each end. I think we're just not doing a good job of understanding what kind of contact each ref is allowing, and what kind of contact they always call.
although, in fairness to the officials, Randle was blowing by guys causing fouls, and most of those were pretty darn legit.
I'll just put this here:
Our 3 bigs (Morgan, Horford, Bielfeldt) combined for an almost miraculous statline. They had 18 COMBINED rebounds and points next to 14 fouls. Once again: our bigs almost had more fouls than points and rebounds together.
Please never leave, Mitch.
That's unfair. I thought all of the bigs played pretty well despite having to deal with a really, really tough whistle.
They all played hard tonight and I appreciate the effort. I wish Morgan would make harder challenges on defense, though, and Max, damn, the kid tries so hard, but you've got to find the bottom of the bucket once in a while. He's cold death from point blank range and tough to watch at the foul line. He plays his butt off, though, so I'm hoping that can improve the more he gets used to being out on the court.
On Morgan, keep in mind that foul trouble often forced him to play passively on defense. Before that, he was doing a nice job fronting his man and getting in the passing lanes.
I'd say that in fairness to Morgan, no one on this team closes out with any sort of intentions. The perfunctory challenges just don't cut it. But yeah, foul trouble is definitely a factor. I just wish he'd at least close out right on the vertical (which should never be a foul). Of course, I can see these refs blowing the whistle on that.
You have low standards for "pretty good."
Not just me. Morgan was named the Player of the Game on the radio.
They also played defense, against a larger front-court in which they were overmatched, and held it in check. Taking fouls is part of defense. They also committed zero turnovers, drew at least one charge, drew other fouls on Nastic and Powell, and Morgan in particular had several hustle plays that led to possessions or points.
Points and rebounds against fouls is an extremely simplistic way to evaluate their contribution.
In all fairness to Mitch, he should've left last year. For him, not us.
Especially next year. If Donnal were up to the task he wouldn't be red shirting. Doyle looks like Donnal part 2. Biefeldt will never contribute much. Next year could be a disaster down low.
Some fantastic logic here. If you aren't an immediate superstar, we might as well write you off.
I watched a few games today and thought they were all poorly done. I am not a referee abuser, but I think with the new rules interpretations, it's going to take the officials time to evaluate the judgements being made in this early part of the season.
I think when tourney times rolls around, the games will be managed differently by officials.
Michigan has a typically low foul rate under Beilein in recent years and these refs were calling shit that didn't even happen. Fuck them. Let the players play.
@Indiana and Louisville last season.... Duke this season was pretty bad too
I'll never be over the officiating at the end of the Indiana game - by all rights, there should be a Big Ten banner in the rafters from last year.
You could place any at Indiana for at least the past 30 years at or near the top of this list.
It's as criminal as Cameron, but the failure to call an intentional on Watford was a straight up abdication of responsibility. When the guy committing the foul is visibly shocked it's not an intentional, you blew the call. It was somehow comforting to learn that Mrs. B was as frustrated about that decision as I was.
Yea. Most of them were away from the basket touch fouls. Initially, I thought that the new foul rule would prevent guys like Bo Ryan and Tom Izzo from mugging the shit out of players and disrupting the flow of the game but it has gotten extreme.
BTW, you need to update your signature - we have 910 wins in football.
Tough to compare dogshit to dogshit. I will still go with Burke's block/foul call as making that game the worst ever even if it's just one call because it cost us a legit chance at a championship.
That said I nominate the worst call of the night when the Stanford player tripped on the halfcourt line and landed on Horton's hip for his 5th foul. Horton's 3rd foul was his only legit foul IMO.
Who is Horton? You mean horford?
They called a foul every time he heard a Who
They called a foul on Daniel Horton in that game too. Or so it seemed.
yes I did, been drinking bell's entire brewery all day. my bad. go blue.
I will admit that Morgan's 5th was legit.
Jordan's been here way too long to foul in that situation.
In other scary news, Charlotte only beat USC - nope, USC Upstate 81-76. That loss is looking rough.
On the bright side, FSU just beat UMass (who was 10-0 and #1 in the RPI coming in), which is good for us. I think the FSU win will look nice on our final resume, as will tonight's.
but it seems like our resume is okay assuming we hold serve in the B1G.
Good Wins: FSU, Stanford
Ok Losses: @Iowa St, Arizona, @Duke
Bad Losses: Charlotte
Not too good, not too bad
and I'm hoping Stanford can have a good season - it's easy to like the size they put on the floor every night, although the Pac 10 looks pretty nasty.
Still, though, obviously it comes down to us being a better than average Big Ten team. And you've got to worry about our ability to defend Big Ten point guards if Walton can't earn more time, and our ability to hold up against the frontlines around the league if Mitch doesn't do some serious healing.
If I'm being honest, what I'm seeing on the floor seems like it could really struggle in the Big Ten, but the team can always keep improving (I think they need to).
This win was great, though - finally, something positive, and, one hopes, a decent OOC scalp. That nervewracking last minute could save our bacon on Selection Sunday.
one of the worst. Same refs in the Duke and Charlotte losses too!
@umhoops tweeted that these refs did our Charlotte and Duke games
Same refs that did the Duke game? Probably the worst crew in basketball right now then.
911 one week from today
They were calling too much 50/50 (non-hand check) contact in favor of the offense. I thought Horford's 5th was a bad call and a total bailout. The call against Irvin at the end was an easy hand check call, even if it was weak. I don't have a problem with that one.
It was bad in the sense that they were WAY favoring the offense, but I didn't think they were inconsistant.
I agree that for most of the night, they clearly gave the offense the advantage, at both ends of the court. Still, I don't understand how they swallowed their whistle on GR3's drive with 14 seconds left, only to call a foul at the other end on far less contact.
Irvin's foul was so clear, though, on the replay (just saying). That failure to stop the ball transition defense = tears of frustration for me. They have got to find some way to at least challenge the initial dribbler in transition. They haven't all year.
I highly doubt it was the worst, but it certainly wasn't the best or anything close to good.
in the top 100 worst officiated games. Not even close.
If we get these refs again and they make the same sort of moronic calls, I think we should be exempt from them ever being able to ref for an M game in the future.
And looking at the box score, I still can't figure out how we won, except that Stauskas had ice-water at the line, and Irvin could finally shoot. Heck, he was about the only one that could.
I WAS surprised to see that spike only had 5 points and 2 assists. It seemed like he did a lot more. I guess a three from the parking lot will do that.
I mean, I was watching the game at the bar so my attention wasn't completely on point like it often is during games, but at no point did the officiating even cross my mind. Ok, after second thought, there was one foul call me and my friends questioned. But only one among the four of us.
I respect your (your being a generally you, not directed at anyone specifically) right to your opinion on the officials, but this was literally the last thread I expected to see about the game on MGoBlog.
It was called pretty equally both ways for the most part - towards whichever offense. The problem was that it was called too much. Every little thing.
That's more fair. I hate the hyperbolic "worst officiating Michigan basketball game EVAAARR" because it is such a talk-radio level discourse.
However, if we want to talk about "over officiating" then that's cool. As long as we aren't conspiracy theorizing about refs having imagined vendettas against Michigan.
All that said, I hope this "over officiating" continues and it forces players to play defense properly, which should result in a more open game. It won't be pretty at first and we'll have a lot of FT shooting contests, but that's a sacrifice I'd be willing to take.
I'm sorry for making the mistake of trying to be objective with regards to officials and provide, what I thought, was a well-reasoned alternative viewpoint. My b, yo.
Here's Brent Petway's "Michigan #1" for your entertainment.
I don't think you're remembering the 2005 outback bowl
I don't think that falls under the category of "Michigan basketball game."
Tell that to Matt Shegos, who, I swear to god, once called 2mins for "clipping" and subsequently awarded Anson Carter 2 free throws.
There actually is accountability. Much more than people realize. Officials are graded on every game they work and their future assignments depend on how well they do.
and yet there is Teddy V gooning it up night after night, Eddie Hightower screwing us, and Jim Burr showing up again and again to just murder the game.
Look, I'm not saying everyone is perfect, but there is accountability. For every Jim Burr who people perceive as being terrible, there are several dozen officials who are turned away, "sent down" to lower conferences/divisions/levels after short stints, and given less important games as age catches up to them.
I've spoken to many, many basketball officials - I've spoken to division 1 officials. I've spoken to division 1 officials coordinators. There is accountability. I don't like how Ted Valentine makes a show of himself. But he is better than a lot of people, believe it or not. Get out and watch some HS or NAIA or Division 3 basketball and you'd be very surprised at how ugly things can get.
As far as Hightower - look at what Tom Izzo (of all people) did last week.
And for every Hightower, who somehow has been deemed "terrible" by every fanbase, there's a Gene Saratore who is, by everyone's account, excellent (and a NFL head referee).
I don't care if I am unjustly negged - I continue to believe MGoBlog is a place where we can discuss anything - even sports officiating - at a level higher than that of RCMB and since I have a fairly unique insight on this matter (being a former college basketball ref), I will continue to try to offer my perspective.
I don't think Valentine is glaringly awful or anything - I *do* think Burr is just that bad. I also don't think he can keep up with the game.
Drawing on your perpsective, btw, what is your take on the failure to call an intentional foul on Watford at Indiana last year? I thought it wasn't quite as shameful as Spartan Bob, but I thought it was still a way more than run of the mill outrage.
I was at that game about 5 rows from the top and I coincidentally just deleted it off my DVR a few weeks ago.
I'd really need to see it again. At the game I was screaming for it - but I was far from being objective and I was 100 yards from the play. It's certainly possible it should have been a flagrant/intentional.
The thing is, it's a tough call and it's not nearly as obvious as people will argue or remember. Indiana fans will say that he was going for the ball, clearly, so you can't call a intentional. I've scoured the Internet trying to find video and can't. UMHoops doesn't even mention the call in their game recap nor their "5 key plays" which makes me start to think it wasn't an egregious miscall.
Either way, it's the toughest call in sports to make. What is excessive and what isn't? Well, that question has to be answered in the context of the game and what contact has been allowed and hasn't - so even if someone finds video, I would be making an opinion on less than all of the information.
Did they review it? If so, then I have to believe they got it right. Contrary to popular belief, all the refs I talk to really like review because they don't want to make a big mistake late in a game anymore than anyone else.
I think your perspective is a valuable one - and during my summers at camp, the counselor who reffed all our bkb games was a big time cbb ref during the actual season (his knowledge of the game was impressively comprehensive) - and I know you're saying you have to review the play, but if you review the play and don't call it out, I don't know man. I think you're moving from "offering a different perspective" to "being completely unwilling to criticize" territory.
This statement, in particular: "Did they review it? If so, then I have to believe they got it right."
No, just no. Regular, non-college referees can still tell when something is ridiculous.
Michigan had called the perfect play. Robinson was streaking to the bucket for a game sealing dunk. There was no thought on Watford's part of "gee, I think I can make a play to stop this from happening" (which really should be where you draw the line). Prime Michael Jordan couldn't have stopped Glenn there. Prime Alvin Robertson couldn't have. Superman, maybe. Plasticman, definitely. Outside of the superheroes, no, not possible.
But the clincher was Watford's direct push from behind, in the back, pushing Robinson under the bucket and making it impossible to score, which, iirc from reading the rule book, fits one of the very definitions of an intentional foul.
Refs get it wrong in real time, and sometimes even get it wrong on replay. Part of this is the whole being human thing. Part of this is that some of them are grossly incompetent, and part of this is that some of them are no longer capable of doing their jobs (too old/too fat/too nearsighted). I think at a certain point, you're moving from offering a perspective or an opinion and retreating to a mindset if you're going to absolve certain egregious ref hatchet-jobs.
You clearly remember the play better than me. Perhaps you're right. I'm not saying that facetiously.
of things I am wrong about.
I am right about this one. I will take my certainty that we got screwed out of a Big Ten chip to the grave!
It's great to have your perspective, MGoBender. It helps the discussion no end.
But do you think enforcing current rules more strictly will be enough to stop the trend toward hard fouls? It may be too soon to tell, but it seems to me that kids are colliding just as often, no less hard, and possibly more off balance.
The Broadstreet Bullies era in hockey didn't really end until the rules were changed.
Only only if they stick to it, which is unlikely.
The reason I'm done reffing is because my day job didn't really allow for it anymore and I've since begun coaching. It's very, very frustrating to have the team that is faster, quicker, and better basketball players be disadvantaged because of a bunch of handchecking, armbarring and hip checking that goes uncalled. As a coach, I hate it. As a fan of beautiful basketball, I hate it. And as a fan of Michigan basketball and Beilein's approach to the game, I hate it.
So I hope that the crackdown on all the contact works. I worry that it won't.
Sorry. I haven't quite gotten the hang of this tablet.
I didn't think it was bad. I mean that's how games are being called now. No hand checking or touch fouls. Yeah it stinks, but hopefully it will change. I've seen too many games with too many fouls this year.
but it sure did seem like every single time Stanford went down the court the refs knew what was going to happen. It felt like 50% of Stanford's second half possessions ended at the line
I only watched the last 10 minutes of the 2nd half, but it was a terribly slow game with all the fouls.
Players' mistakes on the refs.
This was an interesting thread to pop up. It never crossed my mind that UM was getting shafted or anything during the game. Stanford had a few skilled big guys who got great position and were good players. Fouling them wasn't unexpected. At the end of the game, that guy kept blowing by everyone and getting legitimately fouled.
I thought there were some odd calls here and there (looked like Robinson took a lot of contact on that drive at the end of the game, should have been an and one) but I didn't think the refs were too much of a factor.
I didn't get to watch any of the game, admittedly, but it seems like every game we play, or even most any college basketball game in general, is bogged down by supposed "horrid officiating." According to the common fan, anyway.
At what point do we accept this officiating as just part of the game, learn how to deal with it within our game-plan, and move on? I'm not calling anyone on the board out who says the refs were bad. Maybe the refs really were bad. But it seems like a very common complaint these days. At what point do we just sit there and say its going to be a poorly called game no matter what happens?
Guess it was worse in person. Two fouls on our two bigs in first minute. Couple touch fouls after the play. Ton of ticket tack fouls again and again. It was odd. A travel call on Walton about 5 seconds after it happen. Seemingly unbalanced in first half.
That said, the fifth foul on Nastic was karma. That, to the eye, seemed like it was clearly on Powell and they gave a fifth to Nastic who was killing us. That would have been merely four on Powell.
After fouling out our whole front line, DQ'ing Nastic was the least they could do. It seemed only fair.
Until Horford fouled out in the most pathetic way...after he got boxed out he inexplicably fouled the guy while his four teammates had basically vacated to the other end (eg it was a nearly perfect bad foul for him to make).
The refs seemed way to involved to me but I don't think they were the worst ever. That said, no one in the big ten will have half a roster come halftime in the regular season if this clown crew officiates a big ten battle.
Oh, if this blog was only around in 1977..we began and ended the season ranked #1..only to lose a disaster of a game to Charlotte in the elite 8. It was poorly played,yes, but the officiating was atrocious! The team was soooo rootable, too..Steve Grote and Phil Hubbard would have been MGoBlog legends.
Lack of mgostatus must keep Hubbard awake at night.
Who cares? We won!!
I think people are mainly bothered about the officials not also calling several touch fouls against Stanford that they called against us, seemed like at least 3 times in second half , contact was only called on one side. The replay did clearly show Glenn getting pushed in the back on his final drive, should have been an and one.
But the bigger issue is making foul shots. For all the discipline Beileim has the players, missed foul shots just seem the norm. Am i the only one who wonders about this paradox?
Or just base this on a few misses you remember. Outside of Mitch the starters are fine except maybe a few on crunch time. Nik was money at the stripe yesterday,
Btw trey is 90% in the NBA
I was sitting pretty close to the court with a pretty good angle to see contact around the baskets. There were a few bewildering calls. But there usually are.
What bothered me were the 2 calls against in the 2nd half where (forget which player) their Guard-Like-Substance just sprinted full speed, lowered his shoulder into a Michigan player & drew fouls both times. Those were absolutely horseshit. Not only that, those kinds of plays are unnecessarily dangerous for both players. It went beyond drawing contact and more into "punt return blocking."
Too many fouls. We were shooting double bonus with like 11 to go in the first half (curiously once we got there the fouls stopped coming) and Stanford was shooting it nearly as early in the 2nd half.
Can't complain too hard. Looked like we got the benefit of a clearly wrong shot clock reset on an offensive board. Looked clear it should've been a violation; their coach was real heated about it.
Also there was a seemingly insane OOB call on the baseline that went against us. It looked like there was a significant (more than half a foot) bit of space. Friends agreed, so, wasn't just hallucinating.
It's funny how the announcers (or lack thereof) can color your perception of the game itself. I watched virtually all of it sound off as my mother-in-law was over to celebrate her 83rd birthday so the game was on for me to watch when i could. And while it was clear there were a LOT of fouls called it seemed to me like it was pretty even both ways. And I didnt see any really horrible calls go against us so to my eyes, no, this wasnt even CLOSE to the "worst officiated game ever". What I noticed was Stanford making free throws (a-la Arizona) and us missing them. That's what bugged me.
You want to watch the tape of the "worst officiated game ever?" That's easy - just run any Michigan v Indiana game played in Bloomington for the past 40 years. I don't care which year you pick as long as it's played at Indiana and you'll see call after call after call that will make you think the refs are all parents of the Hoosier players.
...stakes weren't high enough to be the worst officiated game ever. I know I know, one shouldn't have anything to do with the other, but I would argue that the phantom foul on Burke's block at the end of the Nat'l Championship game automatically made that a "worse" officiated game because it mattered so much more.
The national title game was one of the worst officiated games I've ever seen. It gets my vote.