The Officiating Last Night (Wiscy Kentucky)

[Medill90]

Full disclosure and no surprise, I was rooting for Wisconsin. But not crazy-like, just hoping they pull the upset and get into the final so the Big Ten has a shot at the championship.

And there was a call or two missed that favored Wiscy. One was a clear two points on a weird put back (missed rim and/or block) right after the shot clock expired. That was in the last five minutes.

But there were a couple amazing calls/no calls that took points off the board for Wiscy. I'm talking about swinging the entire arm, punching your opponent in the face....a video review....and no call. Amazing. That should have been a four or five point play for Wiscy.

And the called charge after the pass that led to the three pointer....took three off the board. It wasn't a charge.

The refs called two different games last night. Thought it was as bad as I saw all year.

 

[beetlemania74]

Originally posted by Medill90:

The refs called two different games last night. Thought it was as bad as I saw all year.

Are you saying the calls in general favored Kentucky? For a stretch of the game there, I would have agreed, but then Wisconsin was on the good end of a string of bad calls as well. All in all, it was just a shockingly bad game for the refs.

As you mentioned, there should have been a flagrant 1 (at least) on the punch to the face, and the charge which negated the 3-pointer was really just a flop by the Kentucky defender. But Wisconsin got 2 points off of that layup after the shot clock had expired, and they benefited from a bad foul call on one of the Harrison twins near the end too (appeared to be very little contact on the play), which gave them free throws. There were some ticky-tack calls earlier in the game which hurt both teams - calls that shouldn't have been made.

I was rooting for Wisconsin as well and would have been if they had lost in part due to the poor officiating, but in the end, the calls went against both teams and basically evened things out.

 

[Medill90]

I did think on balance the calls favored Kentucky. I don't think that officials ever consciously favor one team over another, they just do not do that. But they are human and whatever was going on subconsciously they called a very uneven game. And made a few terrible, terrible calls which could have changed the game.

All season we listened to announcers say "Wisconsin doesn't foul" which is also b.s. But last night I though that Kentucky was more physical...reaching and grabbing and checking with hands and arms...and it wasn't called consistently.

There's a problem in the NCAA with consistency....from out of conference....to conference....to tournament. The kids are so fast now and so strong which makes it difficult.

 

[CoralSpringsCat]

The non-call on the blow to the head/face still has me scratching my head.

 

[NURoseBowl]

Originally posted by beetlemania74:

Originally posted by Medill90:

The refs called two different games last night. Thought it was as bad as I saw all year.

Are you saying the calls in general favored Kentucky? For a stretch of the game there, I would have agreed, but then Wisconsin was on the good end of a string of bad calls as well. All in all, it was just a shockingly bad game for the refs.

As you mentioned, there should have been a flagrant 1 (at least) on the punch to the face, and the charge which negated the 3-pointer was really just a flop by the Kentucky defender. But Wisconsin got 2 points off of that layup after the shot clock had expired, and they benefited from a bad foul call on one of the Harrison twins near the end too (appeared to be very little contact on the play), which gave them free throws. There were some ticky-tack calls earlier in the game which hurt both teams - calls that shouldn't have been made.

I was rooting for Wisconsin as well and would have been if they had lost in part due to the poor officiating, but in the end, the calls went against both teams and basically evened things out.

If fans could set their biases aside - which, admittedly, is darn near impossible to actually do - they'd find that this is the case in the overwhelming majority of games; in any sport, at any level. Problem is, as fans, it's the easiest and most comforting crutch to lean on when our teams aren't successful. Setting aside the rarest of exceptions, teams don't lose games because of officials.

 

[olshin]

I think what I'm saying is ... wow there were a lot of missed calls. And Wisconsin executed significantly better in a tie game down the stretch.

 

[beetlemania74]

Originally posted by olshin:
I think what I'm saying is ... wow there were a lot of missed calls. And Wisconsin executed significantly better in a tie game down the stretch.

Yep. Wisconsin made more shots down the stretch than Kentucky did, and that's what ultimately decided the outcome of the game. Dekker's step-back three was a thing of beauty - and just such a clutch shot. Kentucky went nearly six minutes at the end of the game without scoring a point. They had 60 points at the 6:37 minute mark, and they finished with 64. That's what did them in.

What a great game, though. Lots of fun to watch, and I'm really happy for the kids from Wisconsin. They seem like a good group of guys.


This post was edited on 4/5 10:04 AM by beetlemania74

 

[LeftyLarry]

As a Badger fan, allow me to say the officiating was the most "pro" Wisconsin we've ever had in the NCAA tourney.

In other words it was probably almost fair.

 

[benoitdenizetl]

I thought the officiating was actually quite good until the last 5 minutes. This was a tough game to officiate, so I don't envy them.

 

[NorCalCat]

There's been a guy all over the Washington Post game story's comment section, insisting he is not a fan of either team, but that the officiating was so one-sided for Wisky that it single-handedly changed the score 20 points in Wisconsin's favor. And that he thought there should be a federal investigation into the obvious conspiracy by the refs, and he wondered how much they were paid.

The whining and butt-hurt from Kentucky is just incredible. Boo-hoo-hoo. Go set more fires and riot around your campus, that'll show everyone how much you deserved to win.

 

[catcrazy]

Wisconsin deserved to win that game and when things didn't go Kentuckys way they whine and some of their true colors come out( see Andrew Harrison). It's good to see the guys from wisconsin hand it to the prima don as from Kentucky. As far as I'm concerned they were bailed out by as questionable blocking call in the ND game

 

[hdhntr1]

In the end, about the best you can hope is that the calls sort of even out. he officials for the most part were letting KY play the game that they wanted with a lot of reaching that was not called. Then there was the flagrant that was definitely missed. But there was the put back that was missed. On the replay, however, I was looking for the board to light up but I guess it was not set up that way and it may have been too noisy for them to heat the buzzer. I felt that the missed flagrant and that pretty much evened out.

 

[Palindrome]

Most likely the knucklehead has a brother-in-law in Oshkosh who held out for 13 points to take the Badgers. Now he resorts to pinning the blame on the reffs.

Originally posted by NorCalCat: There's been a guy all over the Washington Post game story's comment section, insisting he is not a fan of either team, but that the officiating was so one-sided for Wisky that it single-handedly changed the score 20 points in Wisconsin's favor.

 

[NURoseBowl]

Originally posted by hdhntr1:
In the end, about the best you can hope is that the calls sort of even out. he officials for the most part were letting KY play the game that they wanted with a lot of reaching that was not called. Then there was the flagrant that was definitely missed. But there was the put back that was missed. On the replay, however, I was looking for the board to light up but I guess it was not set up that way and it may have been too noisy for them to heat the buzzer. I felt that the missed flagrant and that pretty much evened out.

This is what I don't get, hdhntr; maybe you can explain it to me. That flagrant foul (and I can't conceive of how it'd be viewed as anything else) was looked at on replay by the officials at the scorer's table, so it wasn't missed, per se. They saw it, all right, but they somehow decided that it wasn't a flagrant foul. Now, I'll buy that it wasn't so bad as to warrant a Flagrant 2 ... but no flagrant call at all? How does anybody look at that and judge it to be nothing but a common foul?

 

[PurpleHaze525]

If you really wanted to stretch the limits of giving a guy the benefit of the doubt, you could probably make an argument that the Kentucky player's arm swung around and made unintentional contact as he was trying to turn. It did look like Gasser exaggerated the impact a little bit. I certainly wouldn't agree that it was unintentional but that's the only possible justification I can come up with. The refs were probably looking for any reason to avoid making a potential game changing call that late. And for the record, unless I missed something it wasn't even a common foul. No call at all, although that's not reviewable so it's understandable if they missed it live.

 

[hdhntr1]

That is not really supposed to matter because they are intent on preventing injuries. At least it seems to generally be called that way. It was after the play was over so there would be no common foul so once they decided to not call the flagrant, and WIS had the ball, it was over.

 

[Kelly_32]

Except they didn't even call the common foul.

Lyles didn't appreciate the way Gasser blocked him out and reacted to it. In my opinion, it should have been a Flagrant 2.

In hindsight, I'm glad Lyles got to stick around for the end.

 

[hdhntr1]

But it was at a stoppage in play. So there would be no foul called unless it was a technical or flagrant. Once they decided it wasn't either of those could not call a foul

 

[NJCat83588]

It was a flagrant 1. Refs blew the replay. All 3 announcers agree it should be a 1.