Did you know that Solomon would have made a lousy referee?

[SWC75]

(Sorry, I've seen too many Geico ads)

I've been watching TV and listening to the radio fro two days and one thing that keeps coming up is "It should have been a no-call: let the players decide the game! This is nonsense. You can't have two sets of rules: one for the first 39 minutes of the game and another for the last minute. Deciding not to do something, (blow the whistle) is a decision that impacts the game. If you allow players to break the rules , you aren't letting them decide the game: you are deciding the game by choosing not to enforce the rules.

I also have heard that the referees have a heard job and shouldn't be judged by what replays show when they had to call it live. And I've heard: "Do you think you could do better?" Being a surgeon is a tough job and I couldn't do it. That doesn't mean it's OK to botch a surgery or that we shouldn't conclude that it was botched.

There was contact. It was a foul on somebody. And that somebody was Rodney Hood.

 

[BuffOrange]

(Sorry, I've seen too many Geico ads)

I've been watching TV and listening to the radio fro two days and one thing that keeps coming up is "It should have been a no-call: let the players decide the game! This is nonsense. You can't have two sets of rules: one for the first 39 minutes of the game and another for the last minute. Deciding not to do something, (blow the whistle) is a decision that impacts the game. If you allow players to break the rules , you aren't letting them decide the game: you are deciding the game by choosing not to enforce the rules.

I also have heard that the referees have a heard job and shouldn't be judged by what replays show when they had to call it live. And I've heard: "Do you think you could do better?" Being a surgeon is a tough job and I couldn't do it. That doesn't mean it's OK to botch a surgery or that we shouldn't conclude that it was botched.

There was contact. It was a foul on somebody. And that somebody was Rodney Hood.

I pretty much agree with you, especially the bolded. It's always stupid when someone says "it's a hard job" or "you couldn't do better". Wouldn't we all love to have no accountability at our jobs and tell someone who works in a completely different field "you couldn't do any better".

A couple counterpoints though:
- They were letting a lot of contact go around the rim - on both ends really - of course I noticed the muggings on Grant the most. So I don't think a no-call would've necessarily been unprecedented compared to the first 39 minutes.
- It's pretty much accepted by most coaches that there are different rules at the end, whether we like it or not. This is a big reason 98% of game winners are jumpers of the Russ Smith on Saturday variety. His chances of getting a foul on a drive down 1 (especially on the road) are pretty freaking slim. Our favorite Golden Boy Aaron Craft tried it @Michigan last year and got crickets from the refs (with much less controversy than Hood did in the Dome). Of course nobody in their right mind on Cincy would try to take a charge on a drive there either because that's never called either in that situation. Well, almost never.

 

[stuckinbig11]

The problem was consistency. If Fair was called for a charge, why not the same call on Parker earlier? Everyone is talking about the wrong call.