The reffing was a hit job [says one guy getting ripped in his own comments]
Not excusing the lazy post-ups by Hunter, the overwrought hero ball by Wagner, the all-too-expected Smith turnovers, the frickin missed free throws .... BUT
The reffing was an absolute hit job. Juzang got to shoot three FTs on a reach-in. At least two offensive fouls by U-M were fictitious. There was a BS travelling call on Wagner, too. Even a couple call reversals (I think when Johns was forced out of bounds) showed where the officials' instincts were. Screw U-M, ask questions later. Plus, half of those O-rebs by UCLA were over the back of an M guy.
Honestly, if Michigan makes a few shots or Jozang misses a few, none of this matters. BUT also, if the refs aren't in the tank for UCLA, the outcome would also be different. Not mutually exclusive.
Just cause it's the theme song doesn't make it not true.
March 31st, 2021 at 12:48 PM ^
Yeah. Let’s not do the ref blaming game.
While officiating is not the reason for last night's loss, I will say that the game-to-game inconsistency of officiating in this tournament has been extremely frustrating to watch as a fan. I can only imagine how frustrating that must be for the players.
In some of these tournament games it seems that you can't breathe on another guy without getting some ticky-tack foul called, and then you have key guys sitting on the bench for key minutes due to foul trouble.
In other games, such as the game we saw last night, you have players pushing each other out of bounds or to the floor while the refs swallow their whistles.
Between different officiating crews, night to night, it's almost like you are watching a different sport entirely, and I do imagine it's frustrating to try to get into your rhythm as a player when there is that much variation in how the game can be called.
But again, there's no excuse for the poor offensive showing last night. It boggles the mind to try to count how many opportunities we had to accumulate more points and we very easily could have won by double digit points, but instead we failed to capitalize on those opportunities over and over again, botching execution of basic basketball skills with a consistency that was painful to watch.
No doubt it’s inconsistent. Different refs, different players, different teams, different strategy, etc. the human element will always produce inconsistencies. That being said I’m still astounded at some of the plays players make when you know it’s going to be called a foul. The exaggerated swiped at the ball, jumping into the 3pt shooter when you’re late getting there, getting fooled by shot fakes under the basket, etc.
March 31st, 2021 at 12:48 PM ^
It was a travel.
March 31st, 2021 at 12:49 PM ^
OK, what about the three FTs for Juzang? If those do not happen, the score is 49-48 UM.
March 31st, 2021 at 12:52 PM ^
Or how about Michigan doesn't miss all of its own free throws?
March 31st, 2021 at 12:54 PM ^
Again, not mutually exclusive. Just because you play shamefully badly doesn't mean you aren't entitled to fair officiating.
I agree that Michigan could have overcome the refs by playing better basketball, I said that in my post. The point is that you shouldn't have to.
March 31st, 2021 at 12:55 PM ^
It was one bad call. Find me a game that doesn't have multiple bad calls and I'll tell you you aren't watching basketball.
The team lost because they missed their last 8 shots and played like crap all night.
"shamefully" badly is all i need to see to know what you're not worth paying attention to.
Pretty sure it's a correct use of an adverb but I apologize for not taking the SAT 'cause I work with my hands and that is beneath some UM fans.
Matty got offended.
People (myself included) saying they played shitty is perfectly fine, but somehow shamefully draws his ire.
i'll say one thing - you're definitely "doing a lot of work with your hands."
well, one of them, anyway.
Baffin, your OP is baffling, take your lumps buddy, there might have been some bad calls here or there but that wasn't the problem last night.
We played like dog shit, plain and simple, that's why we lost, we didn't get beat, we beat ourselves.
When you play that badly and only lose by 2, you beat yourself.
We had a great and fun season, I appreciate what the coaches and players accomplished and feel fortunate to have them, Go Blue!
Grow the fuck up - every game has bad calls and there were maybe 2 bad ones that went against us last night. We lost because we couldn’t score. Stop being a baby
I would agree. And the inconsistent nature of the calls appeared to have BOTH sides playing tentatively.
Reach in one play = foul
Shove practically to the floor = no call
Tough to play like that.
Shocking that the guy who’s wrong about everything agrees with the idiotic, whiny OP. Shouldn’t you go back to shitposting about hoaxes and big brother and conspiracies.
LOL. Apparently you are a whiny baby yourself.
Too funny.
Enjoy your mom's basement.
I’m not whining about anything - just pointing out how stupid your takes consistently are. And ‘mom’s basement’ is consistent with your rcmb-level intellect. Just keep being you, jackass
You're the one who started the name-calling, jackass. Lol.
Keep being a whiny baby when it suits you...oh...like in the fall.
#Hypocrite
#CryBaby
#DetroitBlueWhiner
Remind me again who got kicked off the blog for being a know nothing conspiracy theorist troll? Oh yeah, that’s you. Good luck with fighting those deep state conspiracies, you fucking loser.
LOL - you are too funny you whiny little baby boy.
I got kicked off for way less than what you're doing right now, so keep up the personal attacks "buddy".
Keep coming back for more. :)
And from your posting history - you might want to check yourself about bitching about officiating.
Or we can wait til football season for your whiny nature to come out.
Either way, you are a hypocrite. :)
Officiating: the only profession where you're expected to be perfect and then improve on your performance.
Officials aren't perfect. Players aren't perfect. Coaches aren't perfect. It's part of life. Get over it
March 31st, 2021 at 12:57 PM ^
Did you actually edit my post title? Does anything about my post violate your rules? I get that it's a semi-benevolent dictatorship around here, but honestly editorializing in my post title is pretty low. Just lock the post if you don't like it. Don't edit my words for laffs.
It's a business, and a bad look for us if we have a message board thread bitching about the officiating. I didn't want to take down your thread because it's a fair conversation, but I edited the title to be more representative of its contents.
Locking is for when the OP is important but discussion is certain to go off the rails. This post was the opposite: good conversation in the comments started by a pretty bad OP.
Don't all college basketball message boards have threads bitching about officiating after losses?
Is the internet going to recognize that and be understanding? We're a blog with a message board, not the other way around. Most media these days have either gotten rid of their message boards or put them in a separate, often paywalled spot on the site so it won't be confused for content.
We let our readers add content as diaries or message board posts that are displayed on the front page. In course they become reflective of our work, and subject to some of the same editorial scrutiny we adhere to. I think it's a fair trade. Greater power/greater responsibility and all.
This should be reread with appreciation.
"It's a business." LOL
Trashing recruits is one thing, complaining about objectively bad officiating is another.
You even acknowledged it's a "fair conversation" and yet you claim the need the need to protect "the business" from "fair conversation". On a fan blog.
Good work.
It's a fair conversation in that it doesn't violate any rules. That doesn't mean it wasn't a horrible take.
It's a fair conversation in that it doesn't violate any rules. That doesn't mean it wasn't a horrible take.
You don't seem to want to actually understand, just bitch some more. Cool, cool.
Just know that it makes you look... uncouth. And petty. Overall, the game was called fairly. I bitch endlessly (to myself and/or my wife) about refs, but I acknowledged that the last two games were called fairly. Some calls will be bad, that's just how it goes, but on balance it evens out.
You can apply this short sighted cherry picking to any game that finishes within a score, going back to black and white tv. It would be very dumb, but you could do it.
Scoring 49 points and missing free throws ultimately is the real problem.
That said, the officiating was bad. No doubt.
So now we are in an MgoWorld where those with a bit of power can cavalierly change us commoners' post's?
Please tell me you're not serious.
With great power comes great responsibility.....as it were.
Go Blue.
Did you just quote yourself?
Honestly. You were the last person I would have thought had done such a thing.
The shock increases.
This is a strange thread title to change. It’s a reader message board and not a reflection on any invested party of the website unless the chime in. It’s also a blog that caters to M fans.
It wasn’t a great game of officiating but it wasn’t the worst. Their center got a bunch of bs (technically a foul but not really call worthy type thing) called on him too.
in summary, why edit this but not the millions of hot take threads that complain about a million different things (including officiating on 13 Saturdays a year)
Because that's what the "snowflake" threads are for.
I get the concerns about the ability of the mods to change one's words but quite frankly, if a poster is too fucking stupid or arrogant to not put something like this in a snowflake thread, they're opening themselves up to such ramifications.
Eh, not that anyone would care what I think, but:
1) If a website is going to edit user content, they should be clearer about it. In this case, there doesn't seem to be any indication a mod edited the title until you drill down into the comments (personally, I was really confused by the title, made it sound like OP was bashing the ref whiners).
2) If it's being modded because it belongs in a snowflake thread, it should either be deleted and a snowflake thread created, or the title should be edited to call it a snowflake thread.
3) Editorializing "weak" takes is something that's better done more democratically, the way Reddit sorts submissions by upvotes and buries dumb takes into oblivion. Instead of having mods exercise unfeterred discretion in editing the titles of posts for opinions they deem unworthy, there should just be a black and white rule that says if a mod sees a submission with a certain number of negative votes, it gets "[THUMBS DOWN]" edited to the beginning of the title with no additional editorialization. Or just upgrade the board as a whole to sort by an algorithm automatically based on thumbs up, like Reddit.
If it shows up on MGoBlog, it is attributed to MGoBlog. It is the same reason your boss would fire you if you got into a flame war on FB and were listed as an employee. Bad Gas Travels Fast.
Totally, but again, it’s weird to target one officiating thread when it happens after every single loss we’ve ever had.
but yes, end of the day it’s seth/brain/ace/ etc pigs/their farm. Complaining that they can’t do what they want is dumb
Compared to some other non-editorialized titles, I think this one was pretty tame and unnecessarily edited.
Always told not to shit on the players, but this was ok:
https://mgoblog.com/mgoboard/deserved-lose-historically-horrible-game
OP comment: 49 points is high school stuff.
Oh, and let's not forget the Look-a-like posts:
https://mgoblog.com/mgoboard/ucla-look-alike-posti-go-first
Interesting choices, but your statement is the truth. Their pigs/their farm, whatever.
I wrote the post you seem to be unable to understand.
I am sorry if you weren’t taught the meaning of words, but I’m here to help.
To flame players, one would have to name them. Their names tend to be proper nouns and begin with a capital letter. No proper nouns appeared in the post you have such issues with.
As far as the second point you miss you aren’t clear about whether you are having issues with the word “historically” or the word “bad,” but again I’m here to help.
Historically means something that happened recently that is remarkable when compared to a long string of events.
Michigan has played 93 NCAA tournament games since 1948. They (we) scored 43 in the first game. This was in the pre shot clock era and pre 3 point shot era.
In the next 92 games, we have failed to score 50 points only one other time. We scored 44 against Texas Tech in 2017. That Texas Tech team played for the National Championship and was a historically (there’s that word again) great defensive team.
So, on a percentile basis last night’s output was 3. I would say that qualifies as historically bad.
Next time, understand what you are reading. Less embarrassing.
It’s not. At all. None of us are mgoblog employees. It’s equivalent to two customers yelling at each other in your waiting room. Not a good look and totally in your right to clean up. But this hypothetical yelling (officials) happens all the time with no step in from the business. And again, a business can do what it wants whenever so I have no issue with the edit, I was commenting thst its curious this was the thread to edit when there’s a lot of precedent for allowing these
March 31st, 2021 at 12:50 PM ^
Good lord we can be whiny after a loss.
Here's the thing - don't go 6/11 from the FT or 13/25 at the rim or turn the ball over double-digit times, and this isn't an issue. Were there some bad calls yesterday? Sure. But honestly the only egregious thing I saw was the couple of non-flop calls.
This wasn't a "hit job" - it was a bad performance and a loss. It happens.
UCLA beat us at their game. They managed to do the things they wanted to do, and they did them slightly better than we did. Only very slightly.
This is why it's March Madness and not March Where The Better Team Wins Every Time.
This about sums it up.
March 31st, 2021 at 12:50 PM ^
To me, this post falls under the heading of "Calling a spade, a spade" and not blaming the refs for the L. The refs were, objectively speaking, one-sided and awful. Some of the called charges were especially bad--the call on Smith in particular.