Thought refs let nova hammer unc down low

[jgeorge322]

any one else have same impression?

 

[cspades99]

Anyone who watched and didn't go to Nova, I'm sure.

 

[bballbeadle]

My Carolina friends are screaming about it. I couldn't say.

 

[jgeorge322]

Anyone who watched and didn't go to Nova, I'm sure.

Lol, thats good.

 

[Syracuse44]

No doubt about it. The touch foul called in the last minute on Carolina was also laughable, when compared to the contact on every play that Nova was committing.

 

[dasher]

Game was very one sided with the reffing.

 

[Madbiker]

I saw Nova playing tough in the paint and not being bullied by UNC bigs. In fact the UNC bigs didn't do much. Great job by Nova.

 

[cspades99]

Honestly, I take more issue with the bullshit touch calls they saddled UNC with in stretches. But there were several drivers that got absolutely hammered by Nova with no call in the final 5-6 minutes.

I give Nova an immense amount of credit, they dug in and wouldn't back off. But I won't pretend that the officiating was good, or that it didn't benefit one team over the other.

 

[KellySyracuse]

maybe Roy shouldn't have whined about the refs on Saturday, he might have gotten more favorable calls

 

[cuseattle]

Cowtown ... What say you?

 

[Briancuse]

There were a couple of iffy calls, they should have called a jump ball instead of a foul, and the foul on Meeks when he was going for the loose ball was terrible.

 

[OrangeTarheel]

When I turned off the game in the first half it looked like Novas players were getting bounced around on both sides of the court. At one point three players hit the deck trying to get a defensive rebound. Seemed like enough rough stuff to go around.

 

[Ward]

Officials got bailed out by it ending the way it did because now that's the big lead in when talking about the game instead of the awful officiating.

I've said for a couple years now that Nova quietly gets a beneficial whistle most games more than all but a few schools in the country. They're undersized and play a real physical aggressive style. On defense they'll grab and reach and body guys but because they're smaller it typically isn't called or it's looked at as "scrappy". Then on the other end when their opponents match their physicality Nova is smaller and has guys flopping around or getting bailed out because a bigger guy is being physical so it's more noticeable.

Officiating last night was pretty bad. The last foul on Hicks when Booth got stuck was deplorable, Meeks diving for a loose ball and getting called for a foul (same as the Kansas one that changed that game for Nova), the inconsistency in what was whistled when Nova drove and UNC drove to the basket, many more examples. I didn't care who won because I'm not a fan of either school at all but if I'm UNC that one wouldn't sit well with me at all.

 

[stuckinbig11]

any one else have same impression?

Sure did. UNC was getting slapped nearly every time someone drove to the hoop, and then they were getting called for touch fouls.

 

[stuckinbig11]

No doubt about it. The touch foul called in the last minute on Carolina was also laughable, when compared to the contact on every play that Nova was committing.

Most laughable was in the first half when James (I think) touched the back of a V guy posting him up.

 

[Cheriehoop]

I often wonder if refs sometimes see an advantage on the court and try to equalize it with officiating. I hear many times the word "advantage" in officiating which to me (I maybe wrong) would seem that the letter of the law or rules can be subjectively judged in terms of who gains the most from breaking them. Are smaller teams given more leeway in physicality because their opponent's size is judged to give them an inherent advantage? Do teams that are known to compete by utilizing a pressing, physical bumping aggressive defense given that leeway because it's their known style and a foul for them is different than a foul for a more passive position based defense?

I've often wondered about it especially when refs wait to call a foul after seeing whether a basket is scored. I've seen officials hold back from calling a foul if the player scores despite the foul and conversely wait until they see when a player doesn't score to call the foul. Is the delay because of determining whether the foul gave the defender an advantage (preventing a basket) or not? Not being critical but just interested in the mindset when refs officiate plays like those. I think fans see fouls as black and white - someone was fouled or they weren't - seems that refs may judge fouls in terms of grey - whether it's a point of emphasis or whether the foul creates an overall advantage for the team committing it. Hope this makes sense.

 

[jordoo]

I often wonder if refs sometimes see an advantage on the court and try to equalize it by with officiating. I hear many times the word "advantage" in officiating which to me (I maybe wrong) would seem that the letter of the law or rules can be subjectively judged in terms of who gains the most from breaking them. Are smaller teams given more leeway in physicality because their opponent's size is judged to give them an inherent advantage? Do teams that are known to compete by utilizing a pressing, physical bumping aggressive defense given that leeway because it's their known style and a foul for them is different than a foul for a more passive position based defense?

I've often wondered about it especially when refs wait to call a foul after seeing whether a basket is scored. I've seen officials hold back from calling a foul if the player scores despite the foul conversely wait until they see that the player doesn't score to call a foul. Is the delay because of determining whether the foul gave the defender an advantage or not? Not being critical but just interested in the mindset when refs officiate plays like those.

I think there is a lot of truth to your wondering. The thing that gets me is the inequality of what is called on either end or when one team is rewarded for physical aggressive play while the other is getting whistled for trying to match it.

 

[Ringostar57]

Officiating was part of the upcoming penalties to be imposed. This was the first to be imposed. They the officials had no qualms about looking one sided.

 

[upperdeck]

9 fouls in a row in the first half against UNC was a little strange, my wife who was not really watching in another room even asked what was up with the refs. could have use that Sat night when SU was driving to the hoop with no calls much of the first half.

the non travel calls were also a little bizarre, multiple times Vill got away with pretty bad travels.

 

[Ringostar57]

Explain why on the last play ArchieD's pass off and then cutting off in front of the defenders is not a moving screen?

 

[patcuse]

Explain why on the last play ArchieD's pass off and then cutting off in front of the defenders is not a moving screen?

Because there was zero contact with the defender.

 

[patcuse]

Most laughable was in the first half when James (I think) touched the back of a V guy posting him up.

Two hands on the back of a posting player is automatic foul. Doesn't get easier than that.

 

[Dave85]

Game was very one sided with the reffing.

I hate it when we see reffing!

 

[Cowtown]

Cowtown ... What say you?

Dang you, after Saturday, I had said I was gonna try to stay out of "these threads."

I thought what I saw was inconsistent sometimes, but I don't think anyone was particularly favored. And TV doesn't always give you the "right" angle. There were a number of plays where I winced and said, "Ouch, I'd like to see that again." And upon actually seeing it again I had no problem with the call as it stood. Just IMHO, and only after being asked.

 

[Cowtown]

Explain why on the last play ArchieD's pass off and then cutting off in front of the defenders is not a moving screen?

In the first place, there has to be contact for there to be a foul. Second there has to be disadvantage created by the contact, and UNC's perimeter stood there and watched, making no real attempt to get to the shooter. And since there's no such thing as a "moving screen violation" there's no call there. Period. Honestly, and with no vitriol, the ref-bashers here - and there's lotsa - should get out and ref. And I don't mean a handful of games with 9-10 year olds. You'll discover a different game from what you think you're seeing, and how difficult it is to do it well. And you'll start watching games with your eyes instead of your heart.