Officiating Question

[BAMARICH]

Is it improper to suggest that officials may be officiating in ways which promote a particular game?

An example is last night. It’s doesn’t benefit either the tournament or the advertising of the game for it to be a lopsided win. Other than the fans of UA/Rutgers, who wants to watch an easy win? Close games translates to more eyeballs which translates to better advertising recruitment. Add to that, when there’s a ton of fouls called, the game will last longer - allowing more advertising to be done.

The officiating last night was egregiously one-sided and this was in the absence of a “home court advantage” (the norm). When you look at it from the overall view, there’s unfortunately a lot of incentive for officials to call games in certain ways. 🤔

 

[Coach D]

Is it improper to suggest that officials may be officiating in ways which promote a particular game?

An example is last night. It’s doesn’t benefit either the tournament or the advertising of the game for it to be a lopsided win. Other than the fans of UA/Rutgers, who wants to watch an easy win? Close games translates to more eyeballs which translates to better advertising recruitment. Add to that, when there’s a ton of fouls called, the game will last longer - allowing more advertising to be done.

The officiating last night was egregiously one-sided and this was in the absence of a “home court advantage” (the norm). When you look at it from the overall view, there’s unfortunately a lot of incentive for officials to call games in certain ways. 🤔

Think far majority of time refs are just bad. Maybe need to add another and have one stand baseline of each end and others run. Idk. But last night was definitely not egregiously one sided. Fouls about same and FT attempts. If bama shot FTs better game would not have been as close. Towards end players on ground I think Grant had ball but was obviously out of bounds but not called and bama ended up with ball. Just as example of bad vs biased.

 

[BAMARICH]

Think far majority of time refs are just bad. Maybe need to add another and have one stand baseline of each end and others run. Idk. But last night was definitely not egregiously one sided. Fouls about same and FT attempts. If bama shot FTs better game would not have been as close. Towards end players on ground I think Grant had ball but was obviously out of bounds but not called and bama ended up with ball. Just as example of bad vs biased.

IMO, this is where stats are misleading. At the end of the game, UA had 29 personals and Rutgers had 26. However, three of the Rutgers’ PF’s were called in the last 18 seconds of the game and it was clear the two Rutgers’ freshmen received calls the entire game that didn’t go the other way.

Literally everyone on the game thread was commenting about it late in the second half last night. Agree there’s bad… but when you look at it from the overall picture, there’s a very good reason why officials could be pressure to call games in certain ways. I don’t really want to think that exists, but $ talks today more than ever.

Different, but related topic is why tourney organizers pitted UA/UH in the first round rather than have them possibly match up in the second round. Could it be that they felt the winner of the UA/UH matchup would be so beat up the second round game would be much more competitive? Or did they just want the guaranteed matchup?

 

[AUDub]

As a whole NCAAB refs are wildly inconsistent and sometimes downright bad. Like Teddy or Pat Adams or Doug Shows who have developed reputations. Developing a reputation as a ref is very bad. No fans should know who the name of any ref.

Aside from that, I don’t think refs are on the take but sometimes refs can “take a few liberties” as it were. Take, for example, when there's an egregious flagrant foul. You’ll see the whistles tighten up incredibly following that as they try to keep things from getting out of hand. A good ref will know when to let people go 60 in a 55 rather than call every little thing that would make game unwatchable. Like imagine if they suddenly started calling palming by the letter of the law lol. The main thing is that they need to be consistent and even handed.

 

[dtgreg]

As a whole NCAAB refs are wildly inconsistent and sometimes downright bad. Like Teddy or Pat Adams or Doug Shows who have developed reputations. Developing a reputation as a ref is very bad. No fans should know who the name of any ref.

Aside from that, I don’t think refs are on the take but sometimes refs can “take a few liberties” as it were. Take, for example, when there's an egregious flagrant foul. You’ll see the whistles tighten up incredibly following that as they try to keep things from getting out of hand. A good ref will know when to let people go 60 in a 55 rather than call every little thing that would make game unwatchable. Like imagine if they suddenly started calling palming by the letter of the law lol. The main thing is that they need to be consistent and even handed.

Hanlon's Razor.

 

[AUDub]

Hanlon's Razor.

Correct. It’s (generally) not malice. Though with some refs, especially tv teddy, it can certainly come off that way given how petty they often are.

If I’m watching a game and certain kind of marginal contact under the basket isn’t being called on our offensive end, that’s perfectly fine as long it’s being called the same way on our defensive end. If things start getting too chippy, it’s fine if they tighten it up as long as it’s done the same way on both ends of the court.

If they start applying different standards to the teams though that will get me up in arms lol.

 

[TIDE-HSV]

I think some are corrupt. It would be amazing if there absolutely none. However, much more frequently, there's an unconscious bias to lean towards the underdog or the team which is behind, probably sometimes just the team with colors they prefer. There are a thousand perfectly human reasons for having a bias in one direction or the other...

 

[B1GTide]

I think some are corrupt. It would be amazing if there absolutely none. However, much more frequently, there's an unconscious bias to lean towards the underdog or the team which is behind, probably sometimes just the team with colors they prefer. There are a thousand perfectly human reasons for having a bias in one direction or the other...

I also think that there is some sort of unconscious bias which aids home teams.

 

[AUDub]

I also think that there is some sort of unconscious bias which aids home teams.

some home cooking is generally baked it. Part of why it’s stupid hard to win on the road against good teams.

 

[TIDE-HSV]

I also think that there is some sort of unconscious bias which aids home teams.

I wish someone would actually gather the stats on that, if it's not been done before...

 

[AlistarWills]

I’m curious as to how the rotation of the officials through positions on the floor results in the appearance of fouls called on one end and not the other

 

[Coach D]

IMO, this is where stats are misleading. At the end of the game, UA had 29 personals and Rutgers had 26. However, three of the Rutgers’ PF’s were called in the last 18 seconds of the game and it was clear the two Rutgers’ freshmen received calls the entire game that didn’t go the other way.

Literally everyone on the game thread was commenting about it late in the second half last night. Agree there’s bad… but when you look at it from the overall picture, there’s a very good reason why officials could be pressure to call games in certain ways. I don’t really want to think that exists, but $ talks today more than ever.

Different, but related topic is why tourney organizers pitted UA/UH in the first round rather than have them possibly match up in the second round. Could it be that they felt the winner of the UA/UH matchup would be so beat up the second round game would be much more competitive? Or did they just want the guaranteed matchup?

I wouldn’t use a game thread with fans complaining about refs as evidence. lol since CNO has been here the threads have been very heavy on ref complaints through crimson classes. Not to say some games haven’t been atrocious by refs and I get caught up in it at the time.

this past game was not that bad. The fresh got some calls but in guessing Rutgers fans think Sears got a ton of calls too. Which he did.

Others alive answering your questions and I agree some subconscious bias always happens along with just bad officials. Some are very suspicious and can it one way but bad people in every job.

 

[day-day]

I also think that there is some sort of unconscious bias which aids home teams.

I wish someone would actually gather the stats on that, if it's not been done before...

Years ago, I listened to a guest on a talk radio station who claimed to have studied what gives home teams advantages. It sounded like a very detailed analysis of data with isolation of variables. It was very convincing to me. He determined that the number one factor that impacted the games in favor of the home team was officiating. He also said this was more prevalent in soccer than any other sport.

I just did a quick search and found this article which states the same thing and I'm pretty sure this was from the same study that I listened to on the radio and the guy must have been one of the authors:

Home Field Advantage: The Facts and the Fiction | Chicago Booth Review

This is the book from 2011:

Scorecasting: The Hidden Influences Behind How Sports Are Played and Games Are Won by Tobias J. Moskowitz | Goodreads

I have not read it but I may take a look. My library doesn't carry it and I'm a cheapskate, so we'll see...

 

[ROCKEE]

What irks me more than anything is officials that don’t or want “show up” one that makes a bad call. This has been this way for a long time. If I make a mistake, tell me. At least I can try to correct it and learn from it.

 

[JDCrimson]

I think in basketball they will sometimes put the scale for the undermatched team in the first half then start calling it more traditional which usually benefits the superior team in the second half.

I think officials are aware of the spread and some officiate to it.

Honestly, I really dont know what is a foul in basketball anymore. I dont think the offensive player who initiates contact should not be rewarded with a foul on the defensive player.

 

[AlistarWills]

I think in basketball they will sometimes put the scale for the undermatched team in the first half then start calling it more traditional which usually benefits the superior team in the second half.

I think officials are aware of the spread and some officiate to it.

Honestly, I really dont know what is a foul in basketball anymore. I dont think the offensive player who initiates contact should not be rewarded with a foul on the defensive player.

Agreed. It’s not fair to the defensive player to have position and the offensive player initiate the contact and be rewarded for it.

 

[CaliforniaTide]

I think in the college and pro sports (at least ones that are constantly moving or almost-always constantly) need more refs on the field of play - the athletes are getting much faster than the refs to be able to keep up.

 

[DzynKingRTR]

We need mandatory eye exams because some clearly need glasses

 

[AUDub]

The fresh got some calls but in guessing Rutgers fans think Sears got a ton of calls too. Which he did.

I dont think the offensive player who initiates contact should not be rewarded with a foul on the defensive player.

Honestly Sears is one of the best players in D1 about cutting and drawing contact. He’s a frustrating player to play against lol.

 

[BamaNation]

Is it improper to suggest that officials may be officiating in ways which promote a particular game?

An example is last night. It’s doesn’t benefit either the tournament or the advertising of the game for it to be a lopsided win. Other than the fans of UA/Rutgers, who wants to watch an easy win? Close games translates to more eyeballs which translates to better advertising recruitment. Add to that, when there’s a ton of fouls called, the game will last longer - allowing more advertising to be done.

The officiating last night was egregiously one-sided and this was in the absence of a “home court advantage” (the norm). When you look at it from the overall view, there’s unfortunately a lot of incentive for officials to call games in certain ways. 🤔

Until and unless the zebras are held to account for their egregious errors, and with the conference making no comments on any of these horrendous calls, and with the copious amounts of moolah that are being thrown at coaches and athletes these days, the stripes want their cut, too, and we know that some officials have taken payments from bookies. So, I'll let those with more influence decide whether the game (or at least parts of it) are being corrupted by outside forces on officiating, but if I was a Commish and not just a measly benevolent dictator, I would be concerned. JMHO.