He is not a complainer, at least publicly. He did say it is hard to coach the players when there was such a difference in the officiating between the two halves.
I have never seen a flop called on a play like Paul’s three pointer.
Great win, but stop with the ref whining...
- Thread starter RU848789
- Start date
I have never seen a flop called on a play like Paul’s three pointer.
Big time conference should have competent officials.
When you have both feet off the ground, it does not take much for you to come down awkwardly.
How depressing, I'm jumping off a bridge now. Thanks.
The team has control over fouling less. So Pike or fans stating that the team has to foul less is at least a case of stating an achievable goal that, having been met, will benefit the team.
Conversely, there is no achievable goal to be found in whining about officiating. No possible benefit to the team.
So on one hand, we have discussion about stuff that can be done (just not by us). And on the other hand, we have discussion with no purpose at all but complaint.
I haven't read this thread, but I agree. This board is embarrassing with all its whining about the refs. Maybe if we drove the ball to the basket more we would get more calls. Our offense in the half court set is mostly post ups by cliff and outside shots. You want to get fouled, you need to be more aggressive in the half court sets. Maybe we would get to the line more and score over 70 if prioritized getting to the rim in the half court.
And I should have movie-star looks and more money than Elon Musk. Life ain't fair.
While I'm not convinced that the Big Ten officials aren't competent, and would guess that they're just as competent as NCAA game officials in any conference or sport, we can all certainly agree with your premise.
But even if they aren't competent, how does complaining about it an internet forum help to correct that? Fans have been complaining about officiating since the invention of officiating. Imagine all that time wasted when the fans could've instead been out making money. Like Elon Musk.
I actually see this as a valid criticism of Pike's teams the past few years.
All too often, we allow ourselves to be lured into taking 3 pointers or other low-percentage shots for long periods of the game. During those phases, we often let the other team dictate who takes those outside shots - which the opponents do by intentionally leaving one or two low-percentage 3 point shooters of ours open beyond the arc.
Those phases of our games are often correlated with our opponents going on scoring runs against us.
The players need to learn to assert our will on the opponent instead. Use more screens and picks, in more variety than we do today, and use more motion away from the ball to free up shooters and force the opponent to work much harder on D. Doing that forces the other team's players to help off their man, which eventually either leaves us open for a shorter range jumper, or an easier 3 by a player we want taking that shot, or else it creates lanes into which guards can drive and either get layups or dish the ball as the opposing center moves to help stop the layup.
Doing all that typically results in the other team fouling us, giving us free throws and ideally putting them into foul trouble. All of which helps to crush scoring runs by opponents.
It seems like that's what Pike wants, but it's obviously way easier said than done. But, hard as it may be, that's where this team needs to improve the most, IMO. Want to win championships? Then the team must assert it's will on the opponent while also recognizing and minimizing the efforts by the opponent to do that same thing to us.
Because we are finally good enough to be B1G championship worthy. RU fans have the right to vent and just maybe social media will allow our voices to be heard.And I should have movie-star looks and more money than Elon Musk. Life ain't fair.
While I'm not convinced that the Big Ten officials aren't competent, and would guess that they're just as competent as NCAA game officials in any conference or sport, we can all certainly agree with your premise.
But even if they aren't competent, how does complaining about it an internet forum help to correct that? Fans have been complaining about officiating since the invention of officiating. Imagine all that time wasted when the fans could've instead been out making money. Like Elon Musk.
A ref should never be permitted to tell a player to fix his shirt right before foul shots with the game on the line.
Squeaky wheel gets the grease.
And what exactly is a message board for!
RU fans DO have that right and nobody can take it away. Doesn't make the exercising of that right any less pointless.
Pretty sure it's a rule that the players must have their jersey tucked in. Cam should never have had it untucked in the first place. We have no say over when the ref enforces the rule. But Cam does have a say in keeping it tucked in so that never happens again. Right? You're pointing fingers at the wrong party here.
And an internet forum is like a squeaky wheel buried deep underground in an echo chamber. No amount of biased complaining by fans of any teams over largely subjective calls during games made in any internet forums will ever get any grease at all, because the folks with the grease will never even know about or hear about the squeaking. And even if they did hear it, they'd be hearing it from fans of all the teams almost all the time.
So they'd simply ignore it due to the boy who cried wolf principle.
Well that's not really true. Better officiating is an achievable goal. It's achievable by different people, but still achievable. And it would benefit everyone.
Yes, fan reaction to the Ohio State ending never escaped the echo chamber, lol
As had been said above, the argument that talking about this topic is "pointless" can be applied to almost every thread on this board every day. So, unless you plan on shutting down the board because it has no effect on the game, that one might need to be retired.
If fans were posting reasonable suggestions for how officiating could be improved, then that wouldn't be whining, it would be discussion. Which is great.
Statement: It's raining out.
Whining: It's raining out so now we're gonna get wet, dammit!
Suggestion: It's raining out so we should use umbrellas to avoid getting wet.
Conspiracist: It always rains out when I want to go somewhere and that only ever happens to us.
Nonsensical or useless suggestions
- It's raining out, someone should make it stop raining.
- It's raining out, someone should contact someone else to make it stop raining.
- It always rains on us, complain to God so he does something about it.
Who cares? Discuss, complain, go jerk off, whatever. None of it means anything, it's all just entertainment. You are not any better for making "constructive" posts (are you even? You are primarily engaging in meta-discussion as far as I can tell) than others are for making non-constructive ones.
If Paul Mulcahy walks out into the rain without an umbrella and someone says "wow it's raining on Paul Mulcahy's head that's so unfair" and you post "well you can't control the rain, but you can control whether you use an umbrella" you have both accomplished exactly the same thing: nothing. Or rather, entertaining yourselves for a couple seconds.
Whomever notified the league was not whining in an internet message forum, were they?
And what did that notification get us? Nothing.
If such valid notifications pile up, the league will hopefully alter the rules such that a review of that play is legal and the correct call can therefore be made.
I already explained the difference between discussion and whining in terms of pointlessness.
It’s a message board!! This is what it’s designed for.
Fan is short for fanatic. It’s about passion.
If you don’t think officiating is a proper subject to complain/vent especially when it keeps occurring and we are as good as anybody in the league than just maybe rather then whining about whining(Irony) you shouldn’t read the message boards.
Fan is short for fanatic. It’s about passion.
If you don’t think officiating is a proper subject to complain/vent especially when it keeps occurring and we are as good as anybody in the league than just maybe rather then whining about whining(Irony) you shouldn’t read the message boards.
Weather is a pretty good analogy. People talk about weather on this board all the time... how it makes travel difficult, or issues with flooding or clearing snow, or power outages, or any of the very real effects caused by poor weather.
Talking about Big Ten officiating is like talking about the climate. Talking about a single game's officiating is like talking about a storm.
I'd love to see bac or numbers breakdown officiating like they do a storm. What can we expect from the latest model runs (what are the trends of the officials in the game)? Is the storm overperforming or underperforming (are we seeing worse or better than average calls? Is the game being called more tightly or more loosely?) What does this sudden change in conditions mean for the rest of the storm (how will this call for or against us affect the rest of the game? Should we expect more of this type of call, and how might it affect the outcome?)
You can't change the weather, you just have to live with it and try your best to avoid its ill effects. But you can damn well analyze it and discuss those effects. Interestingly, though, the guys who spend the most time talking about the intricacies of the weather want no part of talking about the intricacies of officiating.
Talking about Big Ten officiating is like talking about the climate. Talking about a single game's officiating is like talking about a storm.
I'd love to see bac or numbers breakdown officiating like they do a storm. What can we expect from the latest model runs (what are the trends of the officials in the game)? Is the storm overperforming or underperforming (are we seeing worse or better than average calls? Is the game being called more tightly or more loosely?) What does this sudden change in conditions mean for the rest of the storm (how will this call for or against us affect the rest of the game? Should we expect more of this type of call, and how might it affect the outcome?)
You can't change the weather, you just have to live with it and try your best to avoid its ill effects. But you can damn well analyze it and discuss those effects. Interestingly, though, the guys who spend the most time talking about the intricacies of the weather want no part of talking about the intricacies of officiating.
And then talking about the same **** for 6 pages is equally tedious. One form of tedious is not better/worse than another form.Almost all whining about officiating is tedious. That was #s point.
I know, I know….it’s a message board.
I will stop whining when they don’t suck. That said I thought the whistle although inconsistent wasn’t terrible last night other than the 2nd flop and the shirt tuck in. The shirt thing was total bs. I think Paul did exaggerate the fall on the 3 btw but it was so slight just ridiculous to call there. Also in terms of consistency I see guys exaggerating contact in literally every game but nw and ru get called for it? Seems f’d up. Just be consistent.
So true.
I'm sorta getting used to the home team getting a break with the calls in this league.
It's why I was pretty sure we were gonna lose. Every drive to the hoop by Northwestern was gonna lead to a foul being called on the RU defender. I thought our only hope was that the Wildcat's center would get some of those trips to the line. He was actually worse than Myles Johnson.
The postgame show on BTN was full of comments about Northwestern's defense being remarkably similar to RU's. I guess not. They were in the bonus kinda early in the second half and RU was not.
Strange how that happens so much with the home team in this league.
One of my buds calls it the "refs gotta get to their cars after the game" factor.
I think we all expect home cooking. That’s part of the game
However,
We don’t expect 13-4 and Double Bonus to 4 fouls.
We don’t expect refs telling player to fix shirt before most important foul shots of game.
We don’t expect three flopping calls during a game and during three point shots when player actually hit.
We don’t expect Purdue shooting 17 more foul shots at the RAC.
We don’t expect refs missing player’s foot on the line.
We don’t expect refs missing rule that player can’t shoot from out of bounds.
We don’t expect refs running to locker room and no accountability.
However,
We don’t expect 13-4 and Double Bonus to 4 fouls.
We don’t expect refs telling player to fix shirt before most important foul shots of game.
We don’t expect three flopping calls during a game and during three point shots when player actually hit.
We don’t expect Purdue shooting 17 more foul shots at the RAC.
We don’t expect refs missing player’s foot on the line.
We don’t expect refs missing rule that player can’t shoot from out of bounds.
We don’t expect refs running to locker room and no accountability.
Why is that ?
It seems unfair and a sign of incompetence to me.
BTW, the 24-11 differential in the Purdue game was hilarious. And Rutgers still won.
Last edited:
The ref told him to tuck his shirt in during a stoppage in play. There is nothing wrong about that rule-wise.
+1A couple of the charge calls did indeed look bogus. But yeah, Pike needs to keep pounding it into the team that when the shots aren't falling, they need to move more and move the ball more and drive the lane, go up strong, and draw fouls (or else get easy points).
Even if we get a couple bogus charge calls.
I have to say, a lot (not all) of the charges we get called for are good calls. I can tell Pike's had the team work a bit at stopping short of the defender and taking a tear-drop shot from in the lane, when a clear path to the basket isn't there. We're doing that more lately (with mixed results).
We as posters cannot change anything by posting, that is Flu's point. So just like complaining about the reffing is pointless, so complaining about anything else regarding the game is pointless, since we have no power to change it. Maybe I will actually start reading the game thread if we can make that a rule.How depressing, I'm jumping off a bridge now. Thanks.
The team has control over fouling less. So Pike or fans stating that the team has to foul less is at least a case of stating an achievable goal that, having been met, will benefit the team.
Conversely, there is no achievable goal to be found in whining about officiating. No possible benefit to the team.
So on one hand, we have discussion about stuff that can be done (just not by us). And on the other hand, we have discussion with no purpose at all but complaint.
Might have been more appropriate for a 10 year old CYO game LOL.. Cam's shirt was not really far out of whack. For the ref to do this prior to two highly leveraged and pressure foul shots with less than 6 seconds remaining, game in the balance and Cam standing at the foul line getting ready to shoot was an innapropriate move IMO.
No.. that was all in the first half. They evened things up by halftime then killed us after halftime.
There were so many bad calls in that game.. 90% favoring NW that it is just inexplicable. It defied the law of averages.
They allowed NW to get very physical with over-the-top boards, moving picks, hand-checks on the ball-handler and shooter. And that's fine if they called it both ways like that.. even if it favors the more physical team.. the team most employing those tactics. But it must be loosely called that way BOTH WAYS.. and for 14 minutes.. they only called 4 fouls on NW and None on Rutgers and that included MAN Y no-calls both ways.. and even one missed call on an OOB in Rutgers favor... but they more than made up for that before halftime came. And they seemed to target the Rutgers players who were doing our scoring.. Mag and Spencer. Again.. BEFORE halftime they had evened things up.
So, after half-time.. there was no reason to punish Rutgers more to "even things up" because they had already done that.
As to your point in another message about Rutgers being able to control things by "fouling less".. it is like you didn't even watch the game.
No mater anyone's distaste for complaining about officiating and those who complain.. any reasonable person who actually watched the game should come away thinking Rutgers got screwed over on MANY calls. There is video evidence to support that and that is entirely independent of Rutgers ability to control things by fouling less. Your talking asymmetric warfare here when the other team can foul as much as they like and not get called.. but Rutgers must "foul less" rather than complain about the unfairness in calls.
I am so tired of refs demand that they "not get shown up" by players complaining about calls.. calls they got DEAD WRONG. What about FREE SPEECH on the basketball court? Maybe these refs with such demands should be forced to find other employment.
On your comment about ball movement and player movement on offense.. HELL YES.. you are 1000% correct.
Last edited:
I looked at some stats at the famous cbbanalytics site.
They have 5 shooting zones they track,
-at the rim
-in the paint
-mid-range 2s
-Above break 3s and
-Corner 3s
Rutgers took 20 shots at the rim, making 11 - NW took 12 making 6
Both teams took 5 shots in the paint.. NW made 2, Rutgers made ZERO
So.. the total, traditional, in the lane shots were 25 for Rutgers and 16 for NW
For outside shots.. Rutgers took 11 mid-range and 18 threes for 29 outside shots. NW took 39 outside shots.
UPDATE rest was from a box score WRONG GAME.. I will fix - FIX IS DONE
Rutgers was called for 15 fouls, NW 12
Rutgers took 10 FTs (last 4 for clock stoppage fouls so, really, that number is 6) and NW 18 FTs.
Now.. with all the common stories about foul differential being tied to shooting in the lane.. why wasn't NW called for many more fouls and why didn't Rutgers get many more FTs? For decades now when we had soft, outside shooting teams who would take more outside shots, the complaints about FT differential leaned on this "take more inside shots" excuse.
Rutgers is not the "physical" team that the broadcasters and opponent coaches claim. Rutgers defends passing lanes.. they get aggressive defending the SPACES between players. They tend to NOT attack players unless they are properly trapped. Despite being a defensive-oriented team.. they just don't actually foul as much as opponents who constantly attack the ball handler and the rebounders. If anything, our best rebounder plays SOFT.. too soft for my liking.. but it shouldn't generate MORE fouls than opponents pushing him around and going over-the-top on him. It is just crazy to think Rutgers deserves to be called for more fouls than our opponents because we are "physical". Just watch teh games... really watch them.. you'll see what I mean.
The ref crew in this game just did us WRONG. And I would like to say that's typical Big Ten home-cooking calls.. but we never BENEFIT from those home-cooking calls. No one can bring up stats like above and show that Rutgers ever got the benefit of home-cooking from Big Ten refs. I defy anyone to prove me wrong. If it did happen it was likely a one-off and as hard to find like a needle in the haystack.
They have 5 shooting zones they track,
-at the rim
-in the paint
-mid-range 2s
-Above break 3s and
-Corner 3s
Rutgers took 20 shots at the rim, making 11 - NW took 12 making 6
Both teams took 5 shots in the paint.. NW made 2, Rutgers made ZERO
So.. the total, traditional, in the lane shots were 25 for Rutgers and 16 for NW
For outside shots.. Rutgers took 11 mid-range and 18 threes for 29 outside shots. NW took 39 outside shots.
UPDATE rest was from a box score WRONG GAME.. I will fix - FIX IS DONE
Rutgers was called for 15 fouls, NW 12
Rutgers took 10 FTs (last 4 for clock stoppage fouls so, really, that number is 6) and NW 18 FTs.
Now.. with all the common stories about foul differential being tied to shooting in the lane.. why wasn't NW called for many more fouls and why didn't Rutgers get many more FTs? For decades now when we had soft, outside shooting teams who would take more outside shots, the complaints about FT differential leaned on this "take more inside shots" excuse.
Rutgers is not the "physical" team that the broadcasters and opponent coaches claim. Rutgers defends passing lanes.. they get aggressive defending the SPACES between players. They tend to NOT attack players unless they are properly trapped. Despite being a defensive-oriented team.. they just don't actually foul as much as opponents who constantly attack the ball handler and the rebounders. If anything, our best rebounder plays SOFT.. too soft for my liking.. but it shouldn't generate MORE fouls than opponents pushing him around and going over-the-top on him. It is just crazy to think Rutgers deserves to be called for more fouls than our opponents because we are "physical". Just watch teh games... really watch them.. you'll see what I mean.
The ref crew in this game just did us WRONG. And I would like to say that's typical Big Ten home-cooking calls.. but we never BENEFIT from those home-cooking calls. No one can bring up stats like above and show that Rutgers ever got the benefit of home-cooking from Big Ten refs. I defy anyone to prove me wrong. If it did happen it was likely a one-off and as hard to find like a needle in the haystack.
Last edited:
Regardless
It was such an awful job of officiating. It gets lost since we won but that should never happen again. I would send that videotape to Hdqrs. And if this is whining so be it.
So true.
Clearly you watched the same game that I did.
ANd his left shoulder was hit, spinning his body a bit while PM was PROPERLY trying to keep his shooting hand up in good form. Just an insanely bad flop call.
I think the NW sideline and fans were routinely calling for flop calls because there was one outside shot by Cam Spencer.. late.. the big shot.. where you can see NW's Audige watch it go through the hoop.. he does not even turn to see Cam on the floor.. and he starts calling for a flop call. That had to come from hearing others calling for a flop.. when, AGAIN.. Spencer was hit and went down to protect himself. BBALL players do this rather than put all their weight on an ankle trying to stay up.. it is common practice... it is not to get a call.. it is to protect their feet and ankles... let their asses take the impact.
And remember the shot where it should have been a 4-point play FT attempt? Just an awfully biased called game that goes well beyond the law of averages on bad calls.
Last edited:
Anyone who thinks that many officials don't have biases & partialities that are demonstrated during a game doesn't know athletics very well.
My brother just asked me how cbbanalytics handles shots in the paint that were called fouls. DO they count as a shot? I have no idea. We know they don't count in shooting percentage... I just don't know how to handle that other than to rewatched the game and look at every single shot and foul call.. and I just won't do that. It was clearly a very badly called game and strongly in NW's favor.
I was not angry at the refs or our team after the Iowa game. Iowa outplayed us so I can look past all the minutia. But this was a WIN and I am angry about it. that's how bad those refs called that game. And I had a nice 22 oz Kirin draft at lunch.. and thinking about those refs is total buzzkill... so I am done with it.
Nice deflect. The point has nothing to do with Cam's ability to handle pressure or not. The discussion is about the actions of the ref. Not appropriate forn a ref to interrupt a player a few seconds before critical game outcome free throws to tuck in his slightly unkempt shirt. It's weird that anyone would argue for this unless you are a just appearing non- Rutgers fan on this board.
Last edited: