Who deserved it and who didn't

How about the NC player with 26 points in 30 minutes of play getting ejected on a questionable flagrant 2 call. Almost nobody agreed with that call. I don’t know what to make of it though because NC is a blueblood but Baylor was a number 1 seed and the defending national champ. I suspect that was just a bad call. If the guy doesn’t get ejected NC wins comfortably. As it was they just squeaked it out in OT.

BYU still holds the record for the biggest comeback in a NCAA tournament game when they came back from 25 down against Iona in 2012. Baylor erased a 25 point lead but couldn’t win it in OT. When it went to OT I thought they had it based on how the game ended in regulation.

Yeah, sometimes it is just a bad call. Interestingly I have seen what I perceive to be obvious calls on flagrant fouls go the opposite way I thought they would go, somewhat like you described.

One thing I mentioned to Hopper was that I think people nowadays just make poor decisions about a variety of things, so why would a basketball game be any different than a lot of other things going on.

The ravages of the Covid pandemic, and everything associated with it, will be around for awhile that is for sure.

Been thinking about your comments on Officiating lately.

I will say this “We see what we want to see” and the fact that you officiated basketball, you have a different view than most people.

Having said that, I have been kind of thinking “big picture” on why the officiating is as “good” or “bad” as it is.

Of the three major sports (Football, Basketball, Baseball) basketball is the one that is more subjective in making calls. Because of the speed of the game at the different levels, sometimes “phantom” calls are made.

In Jim analysis of the games, he has pointed out some very valid points, when one team seems to “get the calls”. I watch like ten minutes of the women’s tournament game between Texas and Utah. I watched where their big oversized center stumbled into the Ute’s center and the Ute got called for the contact, then on the other end, the Texas PG man handled the Ute PG to the point she lost control and “No Call” was made. That is simply BS.

I have come to the conclusion that the officiating on any sport is as good as the management of the officiating group. You have weak leaders, you have poor officiating.

When I was the President of the local officiating group, I knew there were people in my group that had no passion for the game, it was simply a revenue check for them. They administered the rules in totally unprofessional way where the did not level the playing field, but gave advantage to a team. I introduced some training videos and PowerPoint presentations to set what our board called “standards of excellence”. We told these officials that wanted just a paycheck, that they had a choose. Do better or leave! We wanted our organization to be considered the best. Most of them stayed and our work as a board made us one of the best in the state.

Why did I bring this up? the Organization saw a problem and wanted to fix it and we did. In the NCAA we have so many conferences that apply the rules so differently that it is hard for players to know how to play the game.

Do you guys remember back in the Lavell glory days when they played back east and would get called for holding all the time? Why? because back then most of those conference teams still played the power run game, watching a team throw the ball was new to them.

So after being long winded, my final point is this: The NCAA should move all the officials under their umbrella and tell them how to officiate the game across the board. That way a PAC-12 game can not be “homered” for their team when BYU plays them in Football. because the officials work for the NCAA not the conferences.

Jim, I think you have a pretty good eye for “fairness” and I do appreciate your view because you officiated basketball (which I never have or will).

You spent a bit of time here describing some of the issues that are definitely present. I believe that corruption, based in the love of money, is a major factor. As long as conferences like the Big 10 are getting 9 teams into the tournament, why would they want to change anything? Only when the revenue from playing games starts to go down will they look for ways to change the way things are done, one of which is how a game is officiated.

I don’t see any of it changing in the future, at least in a positive, balanced way. It is how society is moving forward, trending downward and becoming more corrupt, if that is possible. It is disappointing but I won’t stop discussing it or pointing it out. Apathy and silence is consent.

Does anyone else care?

See what has happened as a result of the plandemic? Small businesses ruined, free money (more taxpayer burdens) was given out, prices on everything went up, inflation is rampant now and just living life has become more difficult. It is all part of the ruling class’ plan to control, manipulate and oppress. Those who succumb to Satan’s enticings will continue to perpetuate the evil.

Backs to the topic, what does getting 9 teams into the Dance and bad officiating?

Really? You can’t connect the dots or do the simple math?

Do the words bias or favoritism mean anything to you?

What favoritism with officials if 9 out of 10 teams get in? This is a problem with the committee.

I’m done…

I don’t have the energy and it isn’t worth my time. :roll_eyes:

I don’t blame you. Let the trout take the bait of grasshopper

I knew you couldn’t answer it once you saw the irony of your statement. :sunglasses:

Real quick because I replied on other threads too.

I don’t need to explain, you misunderstood as always.

Done.