Anecdotal evidence of refs' lack of ethics and professionalism
This just confirms what I've always thought about not only basketball refs, but especially Big Ten ones:
"It was going in, and I wanted the foul. It was going in," Sims said of his thoughts after the release. "The ref told me if it didn't go in it would have been a foul."*
*http://michigan.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1053176
*http://michigan.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1053176
February 17th, 2010 at 1:42 PM ^
That's absurd, and should be enough for a ref to at least need to pass some sort of test or review or something.
All my housemates (fans of other Big Ten teams... MSU x2, OSU, Wisconsin) usually give me crap for complaining about the Big Ten refs, but last night they started to realize what I've been bitching about lately.
February 17th, 2010 at 1:56 PM ^
your MSU buddies would understand how bad the refs are... from my experience MSU fans bitch just as much as anyone else about the refs...
February 17th, 2010 at 2:29 PM ^
I first heard of Ed Hightower while in East Lansing.
They hate him as much as we do.
February 17th, 2010 at 2:40 PM ^
MSU lost to george mason i was at a BW's watching the game and the amount of bitching about the refs from the state fans was amazing... you would have thought that GMU did nothing in that game to win it...
February 17th, 2010 at 1:48 PM ^
This is basketball, not hockey. A basket doesn't negate the foul. And-1 is a fundamental part of basketball and a big piece of why players drive the lane hard. Absurd. Who was the official?
February 17th, 2010 at 1:48 PM ^
It looked pretty obvious that he was fouled when I saw it live. And while I understand not calling it in that situation, you can't make the call based on whether the shot goes or not.
February 17th, 2010 at 1:53 PM ^
I guess the big question here is, what are refs taught? I'm sure there are plenty of people on the board who ref occasionally... Are you told that every call is a judgment call and you should try to preserve the energy of the game unless it's egregious, or are you told to always call anything regardless?
Is there a grey area where a foul is light enough that you wouldn't feel right giving a player a 4 point play for it, but you'd be willing to give them 3 shots?
February 18th, 2010 at 12:42 AM ^
If it's foul, you call it. If it's not a foul, you don't. As a ref, you can't allow yourself to get caught up in "the situation" or make calls based on the effect they will have on the game.
Of course, the only officiating experience I have is a few seasons of UM intramurals, so maybe they are taught differently at the higher levels.
February 18th, 2010 at 9:56 AM ^
They are taught differently at higher levels. I've been lucky enough to be taught and trained by D1, D2 college and even a little bit by NBA and WNBA officials.
The higher in officiating you go, the more you want to avoid and-1's. The reason is the concept of "advantage-disadvantage." If someone taps Dwight Howard on the elbow as he throws down a monster dunk, should we call a foul? No. If someone grabs his elbow as he goes up, preventing him from going up with two hands, and he still gets the dunk down, then we have an and-1.
It's a tough concept to get down and it's not just "every foul is a foul" because otherwise games wouldn't end. In basketball you can call a foul on every play. It is the officials' responsibility to determine (usually pre-game, but it changes depending on the flow of the game) how strict they need to be with contact fouls. It's not easy.
(Granted I'm talking mostly about plays in the paint. Also, FWIW: I did not see the foul in question)
Finally, a quick story referencing refs "taking tests." Refs at this high of level are evaluated constantly. How constantly? I was at a camp where the director of ACC officials spoke. In every ACC game, every single call or no-call is graded. Every one. Officials in the ACC are expected to get 90% of the calls correct and expected to be perfect in the final four minutes. Officiating is not nearly as unstructured as some would believe.
February 17th, 2010 at 1:55 PM ^
I didn't see the game (and I don't agree with the thought process that I am about to suggest), but maybe the ref was not sure if it was a foul, so when it went in, he assumed he wasn't fouled but couldn't call it after Sims requested the foul.
February 17th, 2010 at 2:36 PM ^
Then he should have said "i wasn't sure if it was a foul from my vantage point" A foul is a foul irrespective of whether or not it goes in. It's an illegal obstruction of someone (with or without the basketball.)
February 17th, 2010 at 2:34 PM ^
Upon first view of the final 3 point shot, i definitely thought Sims was fouled. Then again, I'm biased.
February 17th, 2010 at 3:13 PM ^
...if initially there was no call, the shot arced through the air then clanged off the rim, and THEN the whistle blew? Carver Hawkeye Arena would have blown up.
February 17th, 2010 at 4:22 PM ^
...if there were more than 600 people attending the game.
February 17th, 2010 at 6:38 PM ^
Baseketball refs are crooks, nothing new.
February 17th, 2010 at 9:51 PM ^
I'm a high school basketball official, I have worked with many officials that believe if a foul is borderline they will wait to see if the ball goes in or not to call a foul. If the ball goes in then they must not have been fouled hard enough. Yes, they actually say, "... fouled hard enough". I know it is only high school but still amazing that they think this way.
February 17th, 2010 at 11:53 PM ^
...when I say, tell them just call what you see and have some god-damned integrity. Also, tell them they suck for being such a chicken shit waiting to see if the ball went in. That is cowardice.
February 18th, 2010 at 1:11 AM ^
A foul is a foul, per the rulebook.
I can see not calling fouls where it didn't affect the shot, but the shot's success should have no bearing on the call itself whatsoever. They're mutually exclusive.