Big Ten Officiating - Bad

Do other conferences have good refs?

Where I come from all officiating is done by SKYNET.

This is correct.

Yeah, replies are broken after the server move this morning.

My understanding is that pretty much all reffing sucks because it's a really hard job but from a fan's perspective it seems simple. It is a little crazy to me that a conference like the B1G, or the NCAA as a whole, doesn't have full-time refs. There's so much money flying around and we can't pay some folks a living wage to focus on it full time?

Also seems like managing the emotions of a game is probably more of an art than a science, and it really shouldn't be the ref's job to keep things from getting chippy, etc. although it does fall on them a lot of the time.

Big Ten refs have been notoriously bad for years. This is the ONE thing I can agree with Bobby Knight, who sparred with them for years. Until I read the book back in the 1980s Season on the Brink, I didn't realize just how bad and vin-DICK-ive the refs were, not all but some the league puts on a pedestal. Nothing has changed.

It's one thing to not know how to call a game, it's another to let your like/dislike of a coach (whinner or not) influence the calls.

I officiated high school for a bit. I also played and coached high school so I know the sport fairly well. Basketball is one of, if not the, hardest sport to referee. The game is fast and minute actions can have a significant impact on a play. Knowing the game helps A LOT; the refs that I worked with that had not played at a decently high level would make some questionable calls because they simply do not understand what is probable. In some cases, the definitions of rules don't make things easier; the block/charge rule is very hard to officiate - legal guarding position can look very different in a variety of circumstances. On top of all this, players have become very good at manipulating referees.

Professionalizing the referees would help. Recruiting former players would help even more, but that would require that we pay them a decent wage - something that the sport can afford but has chosen not to in the past. Finally, increasing the respect for referees and clamping down on abuse might help attract and retain officiating talent. I am not saying I was any good but I stopped because the abuse was not worth the meager paycheck. 

As someone who is an official at a high school level, I will say there is a lot of politics that involve getting to officiate at the college level.  I have officiated with some very good officials over the years that do lower level college.  What I gather from them, is there is a lot of good ole boy, butt-kissing, and other stuff that goes into getting to the D1 level.  I do think there are better officials that are out there, but are not given the chance due to politics. 

Good Q's.  You're right: it has been an issue and it has gotten a lot of talk on here. And the last few years, it seems to be getting worse.  My friends who are Iowa fans also recognize how bad B1G officiating is and I think across the board every team hates conference officials (although Wisconsin and State have no right to ever complain). 

I'll be honest, these refs make perplexing calls: Right before WI on their huge run yesterday, M was down 5 and Jones drove the lane, made slight contact with a defender, made a bucket but got whistled for a charge. Announcer thought it was a block but I thought it should have absolutely been a no-call.  Just a few minutes later Davis goes in on Hutchinson in what is exactly the same play and he gets an and-1. Ugggh. A few weeks ago Rutgers and Iowa played an extremely physical game that didn't get out of the 40s, no whistles all game...until they called a phantom touch foul on Keegan Murray with 3 seconds left. Rutgers sunk two foul shots and won. Awful way to end a game. 

I remember seeing a (quasi-scientific) study of how real home-court advantage is in basketball and how bad it is in the B1G. If home teams have that significant of a statistical advantage, something is wrong. They have to figure this out because it's bad for the sport and bad for the conference. 

Not sure what was going on with the charging calls yesterday. Pretty much, if you made contact with the defenders chest, it was a charge. Didn't matter if the defender had established position or was jumping in front of the player with the ball. Chest contact = charge. It went both ways too, so not trying to bitch about stuff going against us, just sloppy officiating. There was also at least 2 instances of one official giggling while Gard was whispering in his ear, which was probably nothing, but not a good look. 

I'm pretty sure its easier to officiate from the stands and the recliner than it is from the court.  I would agree that most officials are trying to do their best and they all are going to miss a call, they're human. 

There are a few who either don't pay close enough attention, or they aren't able to process what they see and react to it in a timely manner, they should not be officiating beyond high school JV level.  

Nice first OP and a very legitimate gripe IMO. The officiating was bad yesterday, more so for us. I do believe it causes coaches to have festering feelings. 

For example, Wisconsin players would try to drive, stop dribbling and slide a couple of feet and no traveling calls, or hack us and no fouls called, it's infuriating to watch. 

Big Ten refs are atrocious.  That being said, we make shots our team is celebrating this morning.  How many wide open good looks did they miss badly?  It was extremely frustrating to watch.  I'm sure that has a lot to do with Howard's frustration level compounded by the officiating then the end of game coaching "issues."  No justification for his actions but I can see where his frustration was building.  

My buddy's dad was a top HS official and did NAIA and some Pac 12 basketball games.  He later got on as an evaluator for the Pac 12 and NAIA conferences to grade officials.  He said the things that made a ref bad were ego and inconsistency.  If you can't handle coaches getting mad at you, or hold grudges, then you can't be good.  And if you can't make the same call consistently throughout the season and especially in a game, then you can't be good.  The issue I have with the Big 10 isn't the ego because I don't think these guys are too bad in that regard, but the inconsistency of calls in a game is unreal. Every game a foul in the first half is never called in the second.  The offensive call against Moussa where he put his shoulder into the guys chest might be the right call.  But then Wisconsin should have had it called 2-3 times later on.  Same with Liddell in the OSU game.  And Wisconsin got totally hosed by some inconsistent calls that Michigan got the benefit of.  I understand that certain refs may call things differently but you can't vary your calls during a game.  That is my biggest issue with Big 10 refs.

officiating is very difficult, and the higher up you go, the faster the bodies and the harder it gets.  

i ref'd some hockey back when i was playing and it made me a lot more tolerant of officiating/refs.  

i grade out hoops as the single hardest sport to ref well, then football, then hockey, then baseball.   

not able to reply to replies for some reason this morning. So thought I'd add a post in reference to the Trey Burke block missed call. 

was at a business dinner in boston several years ago. guy next to me was an investor/board member of our medical device start up, I was just a sales guy. he tells me he went to Louisville, I told him I went to michigan and was at the finals game in 2013. I made some comment that it's too bad that great game was mostly decided on a terrible call at the end. he was confused, I explained it to him. he told me it was a good call and I thought he was joking, he wasn't. I pulled up the still of the perfect block and he told me that burke's body impeded the louisville player's path to the basket. I told him that I played bball for years and that was a perfect block. he replied, "stick to asparagus or whatever it is you know about up in Michigan". I wanted to rip his head off, didn't.

A few years later I was no longer with the company. Louisville had to vacate their title, so I saw a great oppotunity to fuck with this guy. I had this coffee mug made and sent it to him anonymously to his office in Boston with a note that simply read, "ouch".

Replying to ClaudeTee: I appreciate your input but simply refuse to believe the refs didn’t intentionally influence the Game in 2016. 

Nice cup, but you may be pregnant. (You missed two periods (after the Is))

Many vocations in our country lack enough competent help. Sports officiating is no exception. It’s basically a thankless job. You rarely hear about great calls being made (yes, they do occur). That being said, I think everyone who hammers officials should try it. It’s a different perspective on the floor looking through fast moving, most taller bodies. A lot different than the multiple elevated cameras fans on TV.

I also wonder if today’s athletes are bigger and faster than they used to be and human brains aren’t.

ha, well I wasn't the one that came up with that design of the FBI bracket, just borrowed it from somewhere online. I have some OCD when it comes to stuff like that so I also noticed it.

second point, haven't heard from that asshole. Now that I think about it I think I also wrote, "go cats" on the note to try to throw him off, make him think I was some UK acquaintance. I also shipped it from a trip I was on so the return address wasn't from where I lived.

The refs are terrible.  It seems like the only way they know how to officiate evenly is call every contact seen and put both teams in the double bonus with 10 mins to play.  
 

Is there a review body that monitors and replays games and grades officials performance?  Giving them a report card?

It has always been this bad, if not worse. And yeah, they should definitely do something about it.  It's crazy how common it is to have games where the margin of victory is like 6 points and the refs made a 10 point difference one way or the other.  Just ridiculous in something that generates millions of dollars, has millions of people that care passionately about the outcome, has people's livelihoods depending on it, etc.

I missed the MSU - Illinois game but I'm happy to hear MSU got screwed.

Here is how the stats shake out for the conference games officiated as far as fouls and free throws on the road and at home. 
 

Michigan at home 106 fouls called. Opponents 94 fouls called. Michigan on the road 141 fouls and opponents 151 fouls called. 
 

Michigan at home 91 free throws and opponents 92 free throws. Michigan on the road 148 free throws and opponents 145 free throws. 

totals for Michigan: free throws 239

                               Fouls called 247

totals for opponents: free throws 237

                                Fouls called 245

I know officials can dictate style of play and curb or enhance momentum at times and saddle certain key players with early foul trouble and these can all factor into the games but I’d be lying if I had said I thought the above stats would be that close. Perhaps my fandom does play in here more than I thought on the Michigan gets screwed idea. Biggest thing I can say about the conference officiating is that I think for the last decade it was very rough in conference and then teams couldn’t adjust in the tourney (Beilein’s teams were made for it).Now, I feel like the conference may have completely reversed that and calling games way too tightly

The answer is yes big10 refs have gotten worse. We benefit sometimes and sometimes we don't. Too many inconsistencies in calls ( and then too obvious make up calls that are even worse), the charge/block inconsistent calls head scratching at best, and the foul calls from the refs who have the furthest/worst view seems to be making more and more calls, while the official 5 feet away doesn't make the call.

Too many TV Ted Valentines. It's a hard job especially with the physical Big10 play. Have been watching a few west coast games and the level of officiating seems much better. BTW  Arizona is scary good and very long /tall. Would love to see them play Purdue or Illinois in the tournament.

The Bigten refs are so on the take or betting on games, they're not even disguising it now.  Read Tim Donaghy's confessions, it's so easy for them to control the outcome.

Test.  Seeing if I can post.

First, Big Ten refs are bad.  But, MSU wasn't jobbed in any way, shape, or form vs Illinois. The only thing that happened was that the refs didn't give Izzo the home cooking which he nearly always gets. Poor calls went both ways and if anything, after the first 5min when Illinois was about to run away with it, the refs pulled a classic NBA-style "entertainment management" and called 3 quick whistles on Illinois (one legit and two horrible) and swallowed the whistle on MSU for obvious hacks (at least one of should've been an and-1). And what do you know, suddenly the game was tied.

let's automate it. AI, etc. MAKE IT HAPPEN NERDS

First, let me say that I once was asked to officiate a youth basketball game--4th or 5th graders IIRC. I sucked, there's no better way to describe it. I apologized to both coaches and my friend who talked me into it, and promised them and myself to never, ever do it again. I was much better at youth softball--more my speed--except that I hated having to deal with the parents. 

Second, I agree with many of the commenters here that the inconsistancy, not so much for one team or the other but over the course of the game, is what irritates me the most about basketball officiating. If you call it one way in the first half, call it the same way in the second. A baseball umpire should not change his or her strike zone just because it is the ninth inning, and a basketball official shouldn't use his or her whistle differently in the last five minutes or from one half to the other.

Finally, a comment/question on yesterday's game officials. Why did Johnny Davis get to take three full steps after picking up his dribble when attempting a layup? It happened at least twice. Yeah, I know in the NBA you sometimes get three or more depending on who you are, but I don't usually notice it in the college game. 

Rule change proposal:

1. Change all foul calls in all games to decided by a team in a central location.

2. Call no foils during game play. None.

3. Identify all fouls acquired during play at the end of each half.

4. Administer foul shots all at once at the end of each half.   No foul outs.

Timeouts stay the same, and all OOB plays are decided on the spot by AI.  Also, if you slab a guys hand and the ball flies out of bounds, it's out on you and they keep the ball.

I think the refs are generally fine -- it's an incredibly fast game played by impossibly large/fast human beings, refs have different perspectives at different times, and they need to blow that whistle quickly, not wait for replay. No doubt there's "inconsistency," but it's baked in. It's like criticizing a pitcher in baseball for not being able to replicate a curve ball that ticks the bottom of the strike zone on his next pitch: Why's he so inconsistent?!

But there are some elements of officiating -- of the rules -- that I think are bizarre. First, I will never understand the "and 1" rule. Why is basketball the only sport that says that even though the foul obviously didn't keep the offensive player from scoring, he gets extra points for it? Can you imagine, in football, a flag for defensive interference on a touchdown allowing the offense a chance to kick an extra field goal, for a 10-point score? Or in hockey or soccer, a delayed penalty call on an eventual goal allows for an extra penalty kick?

It's bizarre. The defensive player would still get the foul call, adding to his foul total -- there's still disincentive to foul. And you could still obviously call intentional or flagrant fouls. 

Speaking of which, in what other sport is committing fouls/penalties a legitimate strategy at the end of the game? Can you imagine in football if a team losing had incentive to commit repeated intentional roughing penalties to get back in it? It's bizarre. The offensive team should have -- especially in the last two minutes, but frankly ALL game -- the option of inbounding the ball, free of harassment, from the back-court.

Finally, call intentional fouls at the end of the game! The refs know the defense is trying to foul. Every announcer knows the defense "needs to foul here." Every single person watching knows the defense is trying to foul. That's the damn definition of an intentional foul! I get playing aggressive (and sometimes reckless) defense when you need the ball back, but this idea that defenses should be allowed to purposefully foul to get back in a game is strange.

Having played and then officiated up through the small college level-I found both playing and officiating to be very enjoyable. Knowing the game well surely facilitates officiating well. I did get stuck with plenty of guys who  had never played significantly and, pretty much, only knew what was in the book-lord have mercy!  My experience pushes me toward playing being a prerequisite to officiating-the nuances are so deep and wide in this game. 

Now, XM, usually I am with you on your points and opinions regarding athletic competition but I do not agree that, with basketball, the  game gets harder to officiate as the level of play increases. In basketball, the play separates out and is better spaced as the skill increases and you actually have a much better view of the action. Here, officiating a college game is a piece of cake relative to a junior high game-and this is a no-doubter...10 kids within a 5 foot radius of the basketball-OMG! Sure, at the college level the athletes are quicker, smarter and all and you have to move and anticipate at a higher level but there is otherwise seldom any excuse for being out of position and to make the correct call. 

For many years my youngest brother has officiated and continues to officiate a ton of HS and small college basketball in the north half of Indiana and Southern Michigan. Though he is highly rated and gets many of the top games to work he is not fond of the politics of officiating that is in place. 

Yeah, willard-A, I know "a rule is a rule." My point is that this one is actually counter-competitive. It damages the game, by increasing the harm a bad officiating call can do beyond what happens in any other sports. With this rule, a bad call actually gives points to the other team -- 50% more than the score itself.

You say comparing it to other sports isn't useful. Agree to disagree, I guess. I don't know of any other sport where a bad call on a scoring play increases that score by 50%. That's a bad rule (and an unnecessary one), is my point.