My Opinion on NCAA Basketball Officiating.

[lighthouse]

I've been thinking about this post for some time, but I wanted to wait until the season was over and we got our new coach.

I've been retired for several years, and what I watched this year was no where near what I was used to. It seems like over the last 5 years or so, officiating has taken achanged for the worse, and because it's a countrywide problem, I have to think the problem is at the top. Hank Nichols (The NCAA supervisor of officials) was a great referee, and he was someone a lot of officials looked up to, buthe has to shoulder the responsibility for the decline in calling the gameaccording to the rules. I've always been a believer in enforcing "The Intent" of the rule, but officials todaycompletely ignore plain and simple rules.

When I was in Catlanta, I watched a game in the Rathskiller. The teams were in aD2 or below division. The officials hustled their butts off, and although they wern't perfect, they worked hard to "Get it Right." These officials went home feeling very good about the job they did. Then, I went over to the SEC tournament, andwatched "Big Name" officials get beat on fast breaks, completely ignore walks, and allow coaches to do what ever they pleased along the sidelines. For the most part, the officials had a air of arrogancy about them. We all watched a lane violation called because the officials didn't have the "Guts" to sit the other coach on his butt and reset the shooter and players along the lane, even though the rules plain and simple say the ball was not at the disposal of the shooter when movement was detected.

After I got home, I continued to watch the NCAA tournament unfold, and although there were some really good officials on some of the games, for the most part things continued to stay pretty bad. I watched as a Memphis player screamed at an official and was ignored. Isaw walk after walk not called, andI could not believe the so called "winning shot" in the Georgetown game was allowed because the player changed his pivot foot and it was ignored. Georgetown did not win that game, the officials gave it to them. And let me be quick to say, officials miss calls, but they see most of the walks, and there has to be a reason they ignore them. And because I believe with all my heart that officials are honest and above board, I have to believe someoneis instructing them on how the games should be called.The change has to begin at the top.

For a change of pace, I watched some of the Women's NCAA games. Now there I was very pleased with the officials. Again, they wern't perfect, but they called the games right and took care of business. They actually called the walks, 3 seconds, and had the respect of the coaches. I didn't see one coach out on the floor making a fool out of themselves. The players played, the coaches coached, and the officials called the game per the rules. There is arguement that the women are not as strong as the men nor as fast, but they are very athletic and there's no doubt in my mind if they were allowed to palm the ball, and move their feet like the men do, their game would deteriorate like the men have.

I was taught to allow the game to happen, and call it as I saw it. In today's game, players have so many more moves than ever before, but the rules haven't changed and officials allow the players to break rules in situations where they think it doesn't have any affect on the game, but it does affect the game but in a negative way.

Also, TV and Radio announcers should at least have a rule book to read. Maybe then, they would have at least a small understanding of the game. Most of them have no idea what the rules are, and ours are no different.

Again, this is my opinion, but I sure would welcome the opportunity to talk to someone who can make a decision. Maybe I'm the one who needs straightening out.

[BamaCat86]

Lighthouse,

Thanks for your insight and thoughts on each of the games that you graded for us this past season. Your opinion is truly valued on this board.

Do you see any changes for next season to correct your concerns?

[lighthouse]

BamaCat86 wrote: Lighthouse,

Thanks for your insight and thoughts on each of the games that you graded for us this past season. Your opinion is truly valued on this board.

Do you see any changes for next season to correct your concerns?

I'm sorry to say, no.

[BigblueDrew]

lighthouse wrote: BamaCat86 wrote: Lighthouse,

Thanks for your insight and thoughts on each of the games that you graded for us this past season. Your opinion is truly valued on this board.

Do you see any changes for next season to correct your concerns?

I'm sorry to say, no.
What do you think is motivating Nichols to change the way games are called, TV, Conference Commissioners, the NCAA? I've noticed the same thing you have. Watching the "classic games" from the 90's the difference is striking, and the quality of play has DEFINATELY deteriorated as a result. What do you think it would take to get Nichols to look at this problem.

[DCWildcat]

Very interesting thread.

How about defining "points of emphasis?" Palming calls seemed totally at the whim of the ref this year, with some taking "emphasis" to mean a slightly stricter interpretation, and others taking it to mean a radical change to the rule itself.

[PitinoLooksBetterInRed]

When watching the games you have to make sure you have no bias when judging a call. I went to the 1st round games in Lexington and (with the Xavier-BYU game that i had no preference who won at all) at the end of the game both sides' fans complained about how many bad calls were made against their team, and vice versa. There were a few bad calls made, but in almost every game i'vegone to where i was neutral, i was satisfied with the refs.

One change i would like to see made though is to add another foul, making 6 fouls be the foul out limit in college basketball. I'd say in atleast 75% of Louisville games (l'ville only as an example b/c im a season ticket holder) a starter picks up two fouls and rides the bench the rest of the half. Its taking away from the game. In the 90's (or so, dont have a date) when they added a third ref to the college game, they should have considered adding another foul. Time after time every game the ref far out of position, the one that wouldnt be there with a 2-refcrew, calls a foul. Think about it, how many times do you see just 1 ref raise his fist to call a foul as opposed totwo or all 3 of them? More times than not it is just 1 ref making each call, so you can imagine how many extra fouls have been called with that extra ref. I heard Bill Walton make this argument last month and i couldnt agree more.

[MojoCat21]

I agree that the game needs to be expanded to 6 fouls. That said, it still doesn't help the miserable officiating (in fact, it probably justifies it). The game has become so fast and the players are so strong and quite frankly, the referees are not. They are 55-70 year old fat guys. The NCAA needs to look into injecting some young blood into the ranks of the officials. Half of the problem is that the referees can't keep up with the players and end up out of position and unable to make the call.

Two solutions besides the 6th foul come to mind to help these guys: 1) Add the charge arc like they have in the NBA. It's definitive enough to help take some of the subjectivity out of those close under the basket calls. 2) Add another ref. Football has a million refs out on the field and I would argue that while pass interference is a hit-or-miss call, football officials are more consistent than basketball, and part of it has to do with the number of referees that can confer on the field.

[poodoo]

Nice post, lighthouse, and thanks, as always, for sharing your thoughts. Too, I amcertainly FAR from knowing much about officiating, :lol:BUT I have noticed a decline in officiating in the college basketball I have watched lately, specifically someof the things you have mentioned. Again, thanks for the post.

[paul1938]

One thing that I would like to see started is that the refs be required to have press conferences after games just like coaches and players.One change I would like to see tried is giving the team that was fouled the option of taking the ball out of bounds after the 10th foul.

[lighthouse]

BigblueDrew wrote: lighthouse wrote: BamaCat86 wrote: Lighthouse,

Thanks for your insight and thoughts on each of the games that you graded for us this past season. Your opinion is truly valued on this board.

Do you see any changes for next season to correct your concerns?

I'm sorry to say, no.
What do you think is motivating Nichols to change the way games are called, TV, Conference Commissioners, the NCAA? I've noticed the same thing you have. Watching the "classic games" from the 90's the difference is striking, and the quality of play has DEFINATELY deteriorated as a result. What do you think it would take to get Nichols to look at this problem.I think a lot of it was to speed up the games, but long TV commercials took care of that. I think the NCAA is behind some of it. They insist they never want the games to be like the NBA, but it sure seems to be moving in that direction. I wonder how long they can leave the rules alone, and instruct officials to ignore them. Not long I hope. College basketball is becoming a money game almost as much as the Pros, and it's hurting the game.

[lighthouse]

Please allow me to respond to PLBIR, MC21, & paul1938 with the same post.

I don't think the 6th foul will ever be allowed by the NCAA. If it were, it would destroy the college game IMO.

What one of you described about only 1 of the officials making a call as opposed to more than 1, that's how it's supposed to be. Even though there are 3 officials, it's still basically a 2 man game depending on where the ball is. Each official has floor coverage responsibilities so there shouldn't be double whistles.

You can forget press conferences, that will never happen and it shouldn't. Believe me, the officials go through enough scrutiny through the league officies.

[Realist]

IMHO the NCAA officiating has become more like the NBA with traveling being allowed, more contact, and a "star" system in place. Palming is almost never called and when it is the calls aren't consistent. There is so much contact it looks like wrestling at times (case in point, Horford backing people down in the NCAA reminded me a bit of Shaq), and the blatantly missed non-calls against favorites (examples, Oden's foul against Xavier that SHOULD have been called intentional, Green's walk against Vandy).

For that matter, when I went to the Sweet 16 I was surprised at how much more like college the high school games were being called. There was a lot more contact being allowed than I remembered.

[lighthouse]

DCWildcat wrote: Very interesting thread.

How about defining "points of emphasis?" Palming calls seemed totally at the whim of the ref this year, with some taking "emphasis" to mean a slightly stricter interpretation, and others taking it to mean a radical change to the rule itself.

The Points of Emphasis are right there in the rule book FWIW. They're reviewed every year during the preseason meetings, so far not much has changed.

[POEKLM]

lighthouse, I got a question. And I don't want another Noah thread started...but have you ever t'd up someone for acting like that guy? I can't believe the antics he got by with. And did you see a few times when he or someone else should have been t'd up for that? ....I'll hang up now and listen......:D:Psorry couldn't resist.

[Realist]

Now that you mention Noah, I don't think I EVER saw him whistled for a moving screen and he was moving on about half of them. He's so hyper he'd just get in the general area of the screen.

[lighthouse]

POEKLM wrote: lighthouse, I got a question. And I don't want another Noah thread started...but have you ever t'd up someone for acting like that guy? I can't believe the antics he got by with. And did you see a few times when he or someone else should have been t'd up for that? ....I'll hang up now and listen......:D:Psorry couldn't resist.
Yes! Those antics were never allowed, and Thank God, most of the time were never attempted. He's not by himself, several coaches act like idiots too.

[catfeverintennessee]

Thanks lighthouse for your insight. I have learned alot from your posts and unfortunately at times during games, get even more confused about the calls because it is so inconsistent. Makes it harder to learn all the fouls and calls when it is this way.

Just a side note... During a tournamentgame (can't remember which one) there was a bad play with an obvious foul thatwas notcalled. I told my hubby that it should have been a foul and why. He just looked at me strange and said how do you know that? I said... Because Lighthouse said it was a foul!:ggrin:

Thanks for trying to keep us straight! I always look for your post after a game to see if I saw things the way you described.

Judy

[countrycat]

Lighthouse i f I were a ref i would take it as an insult to have so called points of emphasis. To me it means refs are letting things go to the point thatsomeone has to point it out, I am not doing my job. When a point guard or for that matter any one recieves the ball and he shuffels his feet to get space from the deffence, that is a walk.

I believe the charging call is missed more than not. Players today leave the floor so far away from the basket it is almost impossible to be completely set. If the deffence isn't set it should not be a chargeing foul.

Also the talking between coaches and refs needs to be eliminated not just cut back but eliminatedall together. I can understand explaining to the player the reason for a certain call but the coach needs to just coach.

Another thing this pointing to your goal every time the ball goes out of bounds is another beef of mine. I don't remember it being this bad in the past. Ifthere isnot a rule against this there should be IMHO.

Alot of things could be done to improve the game because in alot of ways what we have todaysimply is not bball.

Just had to vent a little.

[lighthouse]

In a sense, you're restatingwhat I said, especially about walks and the coaches. AndI agree.

Allow me to clarify "Points of Emphasis." This is a section in the back of the rule book that brings extra attention to rulesthe committee thinks officials were slack on in the past. For instance, palming was there this past season and officials paid attention to them early on and players made necessary changes. But like walking, officials were not consistant in calling it all season and it wasn't as effective as it should have been.

The block/charge is an easy call IF the official is in position.

Thanks for venting, that's one of the reasons for this thread.

[UFWildcat]

Lighthouse,

I have a question for ya. Would you have officiated Greg Oden any differently in the tournament? He seemed to be getting called for a lot of ticky tack fouls all the way up until the Championship game. Some of them I could not just understand. For him to get those 2 fouls in under 2 minutes, I thought was ridiculous. Same could actually be said for Hibbert.

Is it just a case that he is to hard to officiate fairly in the college game? Kind of like the way Shaq gets officiated.

Interested to hear your thoughts.

[countrycat]

I appreciate your reply I did not know about the part in the rule book about the point of emphasis. I guess my point is if they called the game the way it should be that rule would not be needed. It also causes confusion with the players because there is an adjustment to the difference in how the game is called from year to year.

Now let me pose this question. Do you think UK gets a raw deal in how the game are called because of there tradition. I watched duke and unc play several games and it seamed to me there key players were protected as far as fouls. And I hate the word good break and bad break as far as officiating is conserned. In other words do you think some refs skew games. I feel sometimes they do.

I also hate the phrase make up call. Did the ref just make up a violation to make up for what they fell was a bad call by another ref. Streighten me out if you can.

[bluesuede]

Lighthouse, thanks for the insight and I enjoyed your commentary during the season. When you spoke of officialswith an attitude you perfectly described Doug Shows and Ted Vallentine. They think we all pay the big bucks to watch their antics. The best officials are the ones who quietly do their job and you don't notice they are there. Don Rutledge, Paul Galvan, and John Clougherty were some of my favorites. :lol::lol::lol:

[lighthouse]

bluesuede wrote: Lighthouse, thanks for the insight and I enjoyed your commentary during the season. When you spoke of officialswith an attitude you perfectly described Doug Shows and Ted Vallentine. They think we all pay the big bucks to watch their antics. The best officials are the ones who quietly do their job and you don't notice they are there. Don Rutledge, Paul Galvan, and John Clougherty were some of my favorites. :lol::lol::lol:Wow! Thanks for the positive comments bluesuede. Those 3 were some of the best, and besides that, they are great people too. Both Doug and Ted are good officials, but as you said, they have an air of arrogancy about them.

[lighthouse]

countrycat wrote: Now let me pose this question. Do you think UK gets a raw deal in how the game are called because of there tradition. I watched duke and unc play several games and it seamed to me there key players were protected as far as fouls. And I hate the word good break and bad break as far as officiating is conserned. In other words do you think some refs skew games. I feel sometimes they do.

I also hate the phrase make up call. Did the ref just make up a violation to make up for what they fell was a bad call by another ref. Streighten me out if you can.


First question-NO! My comments on this thread are about college officiating on the whole. Now, when I watch certain conferences, sometimes I wonder why violations and fouls are passed on more frequently, but I will never believe players, coaches, or schools are protected. I have to believe it comes with the training officials receive from the conference officies.

I worked around 5000 games in my career, and I can honestly say I never made a make-up call. However, I can understand why fans and especially announcers believe they exist. Stuff happens, and there's no rhyme or reason for it.

And about that last request,calling a perfect game is impossible, and so is your request. :lol::lol:

[sardiscat]

Lighthouse: When did college refs start giving players the NBA continuation rule? Time after time during this year's tournament I saw players go to the foul line for two when the foul occurred way before theystarted their shooting motion. I'm not saying it's a bad thing, but that used to be a difference between how the NBA was called and how college games were called. Was this year the first time it has been called that way in college, or have I just not paid much attention for the past couple years? And, did the NCAA make an official change in the rule, or did college refs just take it upon themselves to change the interpretation of when a foul is a shooting foul?

[lighthouse]

sardiscat wrote: Lighthouse: When did college refs start giving players the NBA continuation rule? Time after time during this year's tournament I saw players go to the foul line for two when the foul occurred way before theystarted their shooting motion. I'm not saying it's a bad thing, but that used to be a difference between how the NBA was called and how college games were called. Was this year the first time it has been called that way in college, or have I just not paid much attention for the past couple years? And, did the NCAA make an official change in the rule, or did college refs just take it upon themselves to change the interpretation of when a foul is a shooting foul?
This is a great question, and thanks for asking. There's still a difference, but the gap is narrowing. Here's what the college rule book says.

Rule 4; Section 12; Article 1

Continuous motion applies to a try for field goal or free throw, but shall have no significance unless there is a foul by the defense during the interval that begins when the habitual throwing movement starts a try or with the touching on a tap and ends when the ball is clearly in flight.

Rule 4; Section 67; Article 2.

The try shall start when the player begins the motion that habitually precedes the release of the ball on a try. The ball does not need to leave the player's hand. The arm might be held so that the player cannot throw; however, he or she may be making an attempt.

Article 3.

A try shall end when the throw is successful, it is certain the throw is unsuccessful, when the ball touches the floor or when the ball becomes dead.

There is a lot of time between the start and end of an attempt. For instance, a player is going in for a layup, he picks up the ball takes 2 huge steps, jumps and releases and returns to the floor. If he or she is fouled at any point during that time, it's a shooting foul.

Hope this helps. I love these discussions.

[poodoo]

lighthouse wrote: bluesuede wrote: Lighthouse, thanks for the insight and I enjoyed your commentary during the season. When you spoke of officialswith an attitude you perfectly described Doug Shows and Ted Vallentine. They think we all pay the big bucks to watch their antics. The best officials are the ones who quietly do their job and you don't notice they are there. Don Rutledge, Paul Galvan, and John Clougherty were some of my favorites. :lol::lol::lol:Wow! Thanks for the positive comments bluesuede. Those 3 were some of the best, and besides that, they are great people too. Both Doug and Ted are good officials, but as you said, they have an air of arrogancy about them.

You know I felt about two of those, lighthouse. While many UK fans saw Rutledge and Clougherty as enemies of UK, I always saw them as two of the better officials. Yes, I would love to see those guys in their prime over quite a few we see today.

[lighthouse]

poodoo wrote: lighthouse wrote: bluesuede wrote: Lighthouse, thanks for the insight and I enjoyed your commentary during the season. When you spoke of officialswith an attitude you perfectly described Doug Shows and Ted Vallentine. They think we all pay the big bucks to watch their antics. The best officials are the ones who quietly do their job and you don't notice they are there. Don Rutledge, Paul Galvan, and John Clougherty were some of my favorites. :lol::lol::lol:Wow! Thanks for the positive comments bluesuede. Those 3 were some of the best, and besides that, they are great people too. Both Doug and Ted are good officials, but as you said, they have an air of arrogancy about them.

You know I felt about two of those, lighthouse. While many UK fans saw Rutledge and Clougherty as enemies of UK, I always saw them as two of the better officials. Yes, I would love to see those guys in their prime over quite a few we see today.
Me too, Tana, me too.