Only in sports can we accept incompetency and think it's ok. For $3500 a game. By the way, it's not just UK fans that think officiating is bad, its a lot of the national media and former head of officials.
Can Anyone Decode This? TIA.
- Thread starter Random UK Fan
- Start date
Only in sports can we accept incompetency and think it's ok. For $3500 a game. By the way, it's not just UK fans that think officiating is bad, its a lot of the national media and former head of officials.
....funny how this is coming from a fan whose home board had a PowerPoint presentation of still pics posted after an NCAA tournament game against UK that bitched about all the calls/no-calls.
UK was in foul trouble the entire game. Some of those fouls were touch fouls while going after rebounds. In order to stay in the game, they had to avoid touching anyone in an Auburn jersey.When you out-rebound the other team by about 15 or so
We only go 8 deep now (I know how that sounds), so foul trouble is always a concern.
I'll be interested to see how the game in Rupp is called and if these two teams meet up in the SECT, that should be interesting as well.
I really think the officials are heavily influenced by the home crowd.
Issue for UK is, the people that get the good seats, aren't wild and crazy kids, they're 85 year olds that hate noise.
But either way, I bet Auburn doesn’t get anywhere near 44 free throws in Rupp or on a neutral floor.
Something tells me Borden is about to get beetlejuiced.
We will probably play like we did last year in Rupp for sure....
SEC refs are the worst..
Naaah. I have fought the battle. Officiating is what it is. Its not as bad as some think---Not as good as some think. Could it be better? Sure. It could also be worse. I have said this a 1000X's---Officiating today is no worse, and probably better, than it was 10 years ago---20, 30 or 40 years ago. Social media, ESPN, instant replay, 400 camera's , with 300 angles--So on and so on, have brought more attention to bad calls. Believe it or not, bad calls existed in the 70's, 80's and 90's. They just wasn't as visible as they are today.
Fans bitch about the home team shooting 44 free throws. Yet they are silent when they shoot 42-----at home. Yeah UK fans, I am talking to you. But its just not UK fans; though, well I mean----Well, you know. Anyways...Officiating will always be scrutiny. That will never change. So, ya know---Well, is what it is.
My advice for those who hate it....thinks it sucks?
Go do it. Go do it at the elementary level...MS level...HS level. Your perception will change.
I see what you did there.
You guys got hot… red hot right at the start of the SEC tournament. If UK didn’t stub their toe against UT, it would have been an epic SECT final.
I just wish they would call the obvious fouls and not touch fouls.
Watching BIG10 games, I get jealous. Those guys kick the crap out of each other, but they only blow the whistle on obvious fouls and the flow of the game is really good.
Watching the UNC/FSU game last night, I loved it. I thought the refs did a great job. Lots of no calls that are fouls in SEC games.
Again, I thought the refs in the UK/Texas Tech game were great. I would take that officiating every time, but these touch fouls have to go. Guys are going to touch each other while going for a rebound, does there really HAVE to be a whistle when no advantage was gained? So many times, the guy grabs the rebound after getting position and is about to outlet the ball, but there's a whistle and the guy that didn' get the rebound, gets called for a foul. Why? The contact was minimal. Let it go… .. not in the SEC, gotta get their quota.
I can agree with SOME of this. I had a HS game the other night. Three times coach yacks at me---"he's holding him". I said, yep---But coach, if I had called a foul, I would've cost you a lay-up. Point being---I let it go simply b/c the defender was beaten, and his kid had an easy path to the rim. BTW, all 3 times, kid scored---One leading to a 3 point play. IMO, calling a foul in that situation, is actually benefiting the defense. So, well, I let it go.
NOW....with that being said. Sometimes, that luxury doesn't exist. More so in the scenario you gave: A Rebound. Many of time I have seen a dude clearly secure a rebound, there be some minimal contact---no whistle, and then bang!! He loses his footing. Now here I come with a whistle---But its late. Now I'm hearing about that. So....I mean, that can be tough. If you don't call it, and for some reason that happens? I mean, you're ****ed. If you do call it---well, you're ****ed. B/C now people are yelling---The contact didn't impact the play. Yeah, but..................
Its tough man.
I would much rather have the refs take the opposite approach and swallow the whistle. Let the players play and call the obvious/blatant fouls. It ruins the game when they whistle everything.
Tell that to the coaches.....they are the ones who asked for rule changes, i.e. freedom of movement.
UK gets whistles for 8 more FOULS a game on the road. 15.5 at home and 23.5 on the road. They shoot virtually the same amount of FT at home and away, around 24 per game.
Based on the record it would seem more like Louisville is UK's biggest cupcake.
That's a cool story. Kentucky fans still complain about calls too much.
Think we had the same number of offensive rebounds again tonight.
It seems to be our MO moving forward this year.
And it probably would’ve changed both our seedings so we both could’ve gotten in the Final 4 like we should’ve.
Miss St player just called for a foul, because Richards ran into his shoulder...I mean, He literally ran right into dudes shoulder.
I’ve done it at the HS level. It’s not as hard as you make it out to be
This is exactly what’s wrong with officiating. As an official you shouldn’t get to decide that an obvious foul isn’t called for any reason.
HS level---No. College level? Yes. I've worked D1 basketball for almost 10 years.
Well, chief, the fact that you passed on an obvious foul or three says a lot about D1 officiating.
No,no....It says more about your inability to understand what I am saying. And your inability to manage a game---instead of just officiating the game. But carry on.
No I understand perfectly. “I saw a foul (3 times) but I didn’t call it because...”. It’s really not that hard.
I never said you literally had to talk to them. Just telling you, coaches play a role.
Sure, boss. I would explain it---but well, I did. Apparently you stopped reading. I dunno. Maybe go back a read it again---Reals, sloooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooow.
I think it might come to you.
You let shit go based on a defender being beaten and it benefitted the defense. That’s not your job. Your job is to call the game as it happens. Not decide who gets to benefit from a call/no call. What if the kid fouled on purpose because he was beaten?
Is this a real question? You obviously don't understand the scenario---Or how to manage a game. So you probably should sit this one out there skipper.
Well you’re making the decision who gets the benefit of your whistle, regardless of the validity of the call/no call. So it’s no more outrageous than the scenario you just admitted to
I disagree. Why should we allow teams to foul other teams just because we don't want games stopped? We should force teams to actually play with skill and ability instead of just grabbing and fouling. If not, foul them out until the coaches adjust.
Sure it is. If he "done so on purpose", don't you think that changes things? If its a blatant grab---don't you think that changes things? You have no idea what I am talking about. None. Zero. Nadda. I mean, with such obvious ignorance to what we are discussing, I seriously questioned the level of basketball you have worked. Or the level of training you have....or the level of the officials you work with. Again, it is 100% obvious you have no idea when to blow your whistle, and when to hold it. That you simply think every contact made, deserves a whistle. It tells me you don't process the play. You're not officiating---you are reacting. You are watching the game---Not officiating it.
No big deal.
First of all Naismith, it doesn’t have to be blatant grabbing to be an “intentional foul.” A bump, a slap serve the same purpose. Secondly, you basically admitted to cheating for the offensive team because you refused to call a foul on the defense because it “benefitted” them. So don’t peach to me about what is a foul or not a foul. You admitted to passing on fouls. And I am absolutely confident in my knowledge that not all contact is a foul. But YOU said in YOUR POST that you agreed the offensive player was getting fouled and “passed” on it. That’s akin to cheating. You don’t get to decide on which calls to make or not make based on who you think it might benefit. Tells me you’re a shitty ref. The kind that gets scratched by high school coaches. Oh, I gave it up years ago and started coaching some instead. So I’ve got experience with brokedick officials too.
I kinda of stopped at the first sentence---Paused. Then decided to read on. Kind of glad I did. I don't know why I've decided to have this conversation with you. Maybe I feel I can make you a better official---I dunno. As for being scratched by HS coaches? Umm, yeah---no. If you like, I can you send a PM, with contacts of about 40 HS coaches in Indiana. Athletic directors as well. You can simply tell them you are a coach, you were thinkking of hiring me-------Let me know what they tell you. MOF, contact Kirk Manns. Yeah,same Kirk Manns that played at MSU....I'll give you my name. Let me know what he tells you. But enough about me.
You are simply not understanding what I am saying. And I get that. And that's ok. I think in your head you are picturing one thing----and that picture is the exact opposite of what I said. Again---it's ok. I get it.
As for the "broke-dick official" comment. Meh---not that funny. But I've also dealt with coaches who gave up officiating, to coach. So I have some experience as well with broke dick coaches.
It almost becomes impossible to guard anybody if you can’t touch them at all. You have to be realistic about it.
Simple question: did you pass on fouls THREE times because it would have benefitted the defense?
And if the answer is yes, how many points did the offense score on those three possessions?
Last edited:
