How would you have officiated Duke/VaTech differently?

[feldspar]

I'm seeing an overwhelming amount of comments on the "awful," "inconsistent" and "horrible" nature of the officiating last night, so I'd invite those who had qualms with the officiating crew to step up and list, in detail, what you would have done differently had you laced up the sneaks and put on the stripes last night.

I'm not talking about general stuff ("I would have called it more consistent" or "I would have tightened things up"), I'm talking about specifics. What calls would you have or have not made.

I'll start us off. I would have called the goaltending in the second half that Len Elmore said didn't even have a chance of hitting the rim.

[TillyGalore]

I think the T on DeMarcus, which some have complained was too quick, was the right move. Yes, Washington deserved the jawing, and a little more, but things were getting intense at that point of the game and the refs HAD to bring things under control or there could have been bigger issues.

Sorry Feldspar, I know this isn't what you were looking for, but just had to add my $.02.

[feldspar]

Sorry Feldspar, I know this isn't what you were looking for, but just had to add my $.02.

Hey I'm not complaining! I'll take positive comments, too.

[Jeffrey]

Hi,

I think that right out of the gate there was a lot of physical play that needed to be shutdown. By not calling more fouls in the first 5 minutes, the zebras created an environment for bad blood to grow. Trying to regain control at the end by calling T's and more fouls would not have been my preferred approach.

Best regards,
Jeffrey

[CDu]

Hi,

I think that right out of the gate there was a lot of physical play that needed to be shutdown. By not calling more fouls in the first 5 minutes, the zebras created an environment for bad blood to grow. Trying to regain control at the end by calling T's and more fouls would not have been my preferred approach.

Best regards,
Jeffrey

The refs called a TON of fouls in the first five minutes. Both teams were in the bonus before the 10 minute mark of the first half.

[Jeffrey]

The refs called a TON of fouls in the first five minutes. Both teams were in the bonus before the 10 minute mark of the first half.

Hi,

IMO, it was a very physical game that was not strongly controlled by the zebras in the the opening minutes. IMO, if the zebra had set the tone in the early minutes that they would not tolerate an overly physical game, then the rest of the game would not have played out the way it did. Seldom do good things occur when you allow the kids to play that physically.

Best regards,
Jeffrey

[DevilCastDownfromDurham]

Agree with Jeffrey. The officials made what seems to be a conscious decision to "let them play" early on. The game quickly got out of hand and so they tried to regain control with a lot of late ticky-tack calls and some VERY quick T's. This (of course) frustrated the players and fans.

Instead, since we know VTech is a "physical" team the officials should have set an early tone. Call some grabbing, shoving, etc. early. I recognize that a lot of fouls were called early, but they all went for egregious contact AFTER 3-4 close calls were not blown. A quick T on Washington wouldn't have hurt (might even have forced him to be a little more under control throughout) or a warning as others have suggested. I think the entire game would have been cleaner, safer, and less frustrating for everyone involved.

[feldspar]

Agree with Jeffrey. The officials made what seems to be a conscious decision to "let them play" early on.

You are wrong.

There was a foul called in the first 5 seconds of the game. The first 5 seconds!!

There were 9 fouls in the first five minutes. That's almost two a minute.

I don't know how much basketball you watch, but that's a lot of fouls.

[dukeENG2003]

I would have warned Washington on the undercut move for sure, possibly given him a flagrant there. There was absolutely no reason for him to do that other than intent to injure. He was in better rebounding position had he stayed where he was.

I would have then given him a flagrant on the block/foul that happened later (not due to intent, but due to excessive contact).

I would have warned him explicitly about the flopping (that would have done him a favor, perhaps he would have actually played some defense instead).

I would have asked Greenberg to get his players whining under control, they complained after EVERY call, even obvious ones.

I would have called a charge when Paulus got LEVELED (yes, the player didn't have the ball at the time, but that doesn't matter by rule).

They didn't do a terrible job, they just gave Washington too long of a leash and put up with too much complaining.

[feldspar]

I would have warned Washington on the undercut move for sure, possibly given him a flagrant there. There was absolutely no reason for him to do that other than intent to injure. He was in better rebounding position had he stayed where he was.

I would have then given him a flagrant on the block/foul that happened later (not due to intent, but due to excessive contact).

I would have warned him explicitly about the flopping (that would have done him a favor, perhaps he would have actually played some defense instead).

I would have asked Greenberg to get his players whining under control, they complained after EVERY call, even obvious ones.

I would have called a charge when Paulus got LEVELED (yes, the player didn't have the ball at the time, but that doesn't matter by rule).

They didn't do a terrible job, they just gave Washington too long of a leash and put up with too much complaining.

I will point out that none of us has any idea what was said to whom by the officials during the course of the game, so much of what you said could have actually occurred. The officials talk to the players on a regular basis about this kind of stuff.

[dukeENG2003]

very true, although if he was indeed warned as I had suggested, it was clear it had little effect, so they should have done it MORE (or escalated it to the level of a T even if necessary).

About the flopping, perhaps they did, b/c they really didn't give him many calls near the end (and we DID get a charge call, which I rarely see in a blowout scenario), and the foul to get him out of the game was BS (but a good idea, it just wasn't a foul).

[Karl Beem]

I'd have T'd up Washington twice in the first minute.

[DevilCastDownfromDurham]

Would you say that the game was called closely? "A lot of fouls" is not the same as "called closely." I'm arguing that a concerted effort to call handchecks, bumps, pushoffs, etc in the first five minutes would have sent a message that the game was going to be clean. Players would have adjusted or (in Washington's case) fouled out in the first 5 minutes.

The officials weren't the story of this game, and I agree that too much time is being spent discussing them. Still, JCD the officials all you want, but this was a rough and ragged game and allowing guys like Washington to act as he did contributed to that.

[CDu]

Would you say that the game was called closely? "A lot of fouls" is not the same as "called closely." I'm arguing that a concerted effort to call handchecks, bumps, pushoffs, etc in the first five minutes would have sent a message that the game was going to be clean. Players would have adjusted or (in Washington's case) fouled out in the first 5 minutes.

The officials weren't the story of this game, and I agree that too much time is being spent discussing them. Still, JCD the officials all you want, but this was a rough and ragged game and allowing guys like Washington to act as he did contributed to that.

And I'd say that they DID make an effort to call these things, even early in the game, which was evidenced by the high number of fouls called.

[Cavlaw]

How about VT's "steal" that involved laying on the floor with the ball out of bounds near the end of the first half?

[Jeffrey]

And I'd say that they DID make an effort to call these things, even early in the game, which was evidenced by the high number of fouls called.

Hi,

IMO, the foul count was more a reflection of how physical the game was than how tightly the zebras were calling it. Some fouls cannot be ignored even if you want to.

CDu, on a scale of 1 to 10, how physical do you think the game was?

Best regards,
Jeffrey

[Johnny B]

It was a difficult game to officiate. However, it did seem as though it was only a spark away from a punch up at times. Calling fouls is not the only way to control things. I think the refs could have spoken more to certain players (washington, for one) to encourage better control.

Of course, the coaches should also be doing that and I don't know what Coach Greenberg said to his players.

[SoCalDukeFan]

After watching the Duke/Va Tech game I watched UCLA play Oregon. It was almost like watching two different sports. There was much less contact in the UCLA game and it was called much closer.

I did not tape the Duke game and don't have the time to go back and analyze every call. The one specific is that Washington should have been t'ed up when he tried to go into the Duke huddle. He was trying to provoke something and should have been set down.

I think if you had Pac 10 refs at the Duke game then both teams would have either changed their style of play or we have seen the walk ons after the scholarship players had fouled out.


While I loved seeing Duke win, I more enjoyed the style of the UCLA/Oregon game.

SoCal

[devildeac]

1. A T for washington when he took a swing at Kyle in the 1st half after tripping him.
2. A flagrant foul for undercutting Markie on the lay-up/dunk.
3. A flagrant foul on one of the vt players(I thought it was washington) for the foul with excessive force on Markie(maybe the same play as above). This looked a lot like the foul GH committed on TH when he broke his nose last year and was ridiculously called fighting(hmm, same karl hess character...).

[darthur]

This looked a lot like the foul GH committed on TH when he broke his nose last year and was ridiculously called fighting(hmm, same karl hess character...).

But the end result was very different. And stupidly enough, that's what really matters in officiating these things. GH did injure TH, and got called for fighting. Washington did not injure Nelson, so nothing was made of it. If Nelson had been hurt, I guarantee Washington would have been suspended.