Huh? Are you claiming they only had 4 fouls called on them? Not following what you’re saying.
Great win, but stop with the ref whining...
- Thread starter RU848789
- Start date
That’s a fair criticism. But it took RU forever to realize it and adjust. Which was what we could control.
Was at the game 3rd row just to the mid court side of the RU bench, so right in front of us, I didn’t think that was a flop, the other yes.
Imagine understanding basketball so little that you can't comprehend this is horrible reffing that had a huge impact on the game... its hard to even have a discussion about the game with people who don't get it how much this matters
Sorry - I was only looking at the fouls that had shots the first time.
They had 7 total fouls in the 2nd half, 5 of which were clumped together from 13:30-10:06.... and the last two came in the final minute. They didn't suddenly start fouling more... until the final minute they had the same number of fouls in the 2nd half as they did in the 1st half.
Agreed - he was more annoyed with his players for fouling, IMO.
The one offensive on Spencer was legit, he cleared out with his forearm, that was the right call
Like most games, I saw way more callable fouls than were called. On both teams. In the second half, I thought they were mostly playing clean for a while, although did have some contact fouls that didn’t get called. Then later in the half, they played less clean, fouled more, and got called for it more.
Which seems to be what your numbers are saying too.
And maybe a little at the inconsistency in how the refs called it first to second half. He said something about it being tough to tell the players how to play, which I believe was about the refs tightening up so much as compared to the first half.
But that’s just guesswork. We’ll never really know.
Plenty went uncalled. But NW had a fairly even whistle throughout. 4 (+1 tech) in the first half, 6 in the second until they had to foul a 7th time to stop the clock. Rutgers didn't have nearly as even of a whistle.... 3 (+1 tech) in the first half, 12 (+1 tech) in the second.
The second flop on Paul was BS. Look at his left foot on the replay when he was coming down. It clearly slipped as it was hitting the floor and he went down.
The first flop was called on NW. What's to figure out? Making any adjustments isn't that hard if one can read the game. If you can sort out your offensive and defensive sets on the fly, why can't you change your behavior on the fly. Do you really need an announcement the refs are tightening up the game?
15-12 is very close to the 17-15 B1G game average for the season. Sure it was a bit inconsistent (few fouls in the first half, many more in the 2nd), but the foul disparity was pretty much in line with what we've seen this season in the B1G, hence my thread based on the overreactions from so many fans.
I was talking about more than this one game - I think you're original comment was in response to coaches talking to the conference about officiating. If you spend the season with one officiating style, it can be hard to adjust if you hit a tournament game where the style is very different. It's not as easy as just flipping a switch.
This game saw that in microcosm.
Just looking at totals in a box score, though, doesn't really tell the story. If a team is down 15 points most of a game and cuts it to 2 with a flurry before the final whistle.... that doesn't mean it was a close game, just because the final numbers were close.
So too with officiating, as we often see refs attempt to even things out late in games when there is a big discrepancy (not in today's case). Tonight, the timing of the calls (and equally important, non-calls) in the final quarter of the game gave an advantage to NW at the free throw line.
or a teams response by getting flustered on the offensive end and stepping on the end line or the sideline or chucking up an ill advised shot. Northwestern scored on 11 straight possessions, those were not all aided on bad foul calls.
the inconsistency of the halves was what sticks out.
The thing I object to the most in all this is the sheer futility of whining about officiating.
Good teams are good at leveraging the officiating. Always finding ways to turn it to their advantage. Figuring out where the line is and playing right up to it without going over.
Winners find a way.
Good teams are good at leveraging the officiating. Always finding ways to turn it to their advantage. Figuring out where the line is and playing right up to it without going over.
Winners find a way.
FWIW, the short bald ref was pretty fair.. the other 2 were bad, or biased, or both.. and looked similar, with one seemingly taller with better hair.. he had it in for Mag for some reason and was generally the worst of the three. The way these two nodded their heads strongly in agreement with the other.. always on calls against Rutgers.. was very strange.
But NW only had 4 fouls called to RU's zero in those 14 minutes.. and by halftime, IIRC, it was tied in fouls with the "makeup" calls often resulting in a turnover. And for the game.. not counting the final 4 FTs given to us for clock reasons.. FTs were something like 16 to 6. Despite us being very active in the lane.
And NW was, by far, the more "physical" team despite how many times announcers and opposing coaches call Rutgers "physical". Rutgers is a finesse team.. especially on offense. On D we are active.. but not "physical".. we get pushed around and I would not be surprised if that is the "book" on Rutgers.. push them around and you'll win. Go over teh top on boards because you cannot allow Rutgers height and quickness to out-board you.
So.. when we see very few fouls called and the other team pushing us around and not getting called.. you have to wonder if that choice by the refs was to help the other team.
Your whole OP was whining about people making rightful observations about refs. So quit yer whining before complaining about others.
Every case I cited bad calls was correct because I look carefully at each call before I'd say anything.
I do not blame losses on refs unless it was the difference. like@OSU. Iowa for example.. refs helped Iowa.. but they beat us even without the bad calls.
I still think we get treated by Big Ten refs... because that is what I see. Big Ten usually has some home-cooking for teams.. but Rutgers does not yet get that benefit of membership. Maybe one game a season we get some calls... more than our foe. That's crazy unbalanced if it is just a case of mistakes being made equally on all sides and it will average out in the end.
If the reffing against Rutgers will average out across many years.. we are already due some full seasons where we get every damn call.
The rule is what it is.Paul probably flopped 2 of the three calls.What is worse when Paul complains and loses his composure.I believe this lessens focus and influences play of the team in general.His reputation precedes him and he will not be given the benefit of a doubt.
Paul is our leader & when he loses it things come apart.Technicals almost cost us the game.Be aggressive,but Paul has to play squeaky clean from here on in.He has a bullseye on his back
The rulebook provides a good baseline for what is acceptable in a game. All the players and coaches should know it thoroughly. Bring in refs for practice before the tournament. Have them call the plays tight.
Sorry, but if you’re annoyed at the game threads, that’s on you. They are infantile and beyond unreadable.
Nice try, but the warped thinking that infects the ref hunters is incurable. They’ll never change, and they only like threads like this to continue to whine. It’s one of the reasons I rarely look at game threads. The guys who are better coaches than our coaches is another reason. I’m sure that there’s a big overlap between those two groups.
Last edited:
It was a huge impact …especially in the last few minutes . Hyatt fouk away from the ball was one of the worse calls I’ve seen this year …they called that after 34/36 minute into a game …???
The inaiconatenxy is the issues …While NW was just as physical bumping our guys off under when running off the screens without any fear of a call…and it totally impacted out ability to run our sets and what NW could do to keep our timing off
It was the same as the Iowa game , but in a different way,, where the refs , in that game , had refused to call a three seconds …(and there was four blatant three seconds calls whixh lead to baskets that were not called) ,which allowed Iowa to continue to set screens IN THE PAINT, then post in the paint , which made a huge difference in their capability of them getting the floor spacing needed to attempt 27 threes …if three seconds are called, they have to set those screens outside the paint and the spacing is much further away from the basket or much tighter
You have to look at the impact on how the game is or isn’t being called on what it allows teams to do to run their offense and defense
And in both games , the refs had a huge impact on the away from the ball whistle , in different ways , that a consistent officiated crew would not have allowed
That’s what people have to realize. Although we play good solid D, we also do foul more than the average team.
The point is if the conference wants to be consistently competitive in the tournament, then the conference needs to make efforts to have regular season officiating mirror tournament officiating as closely as possible so that teams will be acclimated to it.
The Big Ten has had a rough go in the tournament now for several years, and officiating style has been mentioned as a contributing factor fairly regularly.
It is what it is. For whatever reason, every conference game seems to have a ref bias towards the home team when it matters. We didn’t capitalize on this vs. Iowa but it was true for us too.
In this case - the refs suddenly started calling heat check touch fouls on us early in the second half that weren’t called in the first half. We adjusted eventually, but the count was already at a point where we’d be putting NW at the line with lots of time remaining in the game. The string of fouls starting at the 7:23 mark were brutal for us - and prevented us from taking over the game. Starting with the one ruled a loose ball foul rather than an offensive on Cam. The off ball foul on Hyatt underneath the basket a few possessions later put a very good FT shooter at the line. And of course, the flop FT. We probably win this game by double digits if they were not in the bonus at that point. It was only 4 points but putting them at the line helped get them going offensively and then they got hot.
In this case - the refs suddenly started calling heat check touch fouls on us early in the second half that weren’t called in the first half. We adjusted eventually, but the count was already at a point where we’d be putting NW at the line with lots of time remaining in the game. The string of fouls starting at the 7:23 mark were brutal for us - and prevented us from taking over the game. Starting with the one ruled a loose ball foul rather than an offensive on Cam. The off ball foul on Hyatt underneath the basket a few possessions later put a very good FT shooter at the line. And of course, the flop FT. We probably win this game by double digits if they were not in the bonus at that point. It was only 4 points but putting them at the line helped get them going offensively and then they got hot.
Last edited:
This!!!! Double bonus kept them in the game. I’ve never seen a flop on a three point shot. Paul was hit. Fouls on Cam were questionable. My favorite was Caleb getting hand checked and pushed out of bounds and out on RU.
That’s not whining. It’s legit criticism. We are a good team. We should’t have to beat the refs. We shouldn’t have to beat our own fans who start threads like this. SMH!
Love Pike telling the league we cant defend the foul line and his classic classy criticism with his smirk which spoke volumes.
RU Choppin’s above post might be the best post of the year. Such a huge factor in the game. That ain’t whining! Threads complaining about legit criticism are ironically the ones who are whining. For shame!!!
Last edited:
NW had ~10 straight possessions at the end where they scored. Refs didn't make shots NW did. We didn't get a stop until that last possession. Like the calls or not, NW played good D & made their shots down the street to almost pull out the W.
See RU Choppin’s post above as you stick your head in the sand. Refs let NW back into the game.
Knowing they were going to the line for every foul definitely impacted our defense.
Not reading this entire thread this morning but will say that I think the refs called a total of 7 fouls in the first half. The second half they started blowing the whistle incessantly right from the beginning and pretty much all of them were on us with most on the defensive end and away from the basket. I did not see a difference in how we were playing and the fouls were not obvious for sure. Yes at the end of the game the disparity was not great but Northwestern lost this game at the foul line. If the big guy's meditation trick works better we lose. I wonder how some would have felt if that was the case. All teams ask for is a consistent whistle. I don't think that was the case.
No issue on the first flop and the replay showed limited if any contact on the second. Paul's screen while solid was not a flagrant and that review should have taken 2 seconds. He needs to realize he has a bit a reputation with certain refs.
No issue on the first flop and the replay showed limited if any contact on the second. Paul's screen while solid was not a flagrant and that review should have taken 2 seconds. He needs to realize he has a bit a reputation with certain refs.
I never complain about refs..The purdue game I was actually fine with because my eyes told me we were clearly much more aggressive defensively thus more fouls.
Foul disparity is a lazy way to analyze these things. Last night the gripe was the ticky tack fouls and bogus out of bounds calls.. most which occurred during that 10 point swing in a apan of like 2 minutes. At least two or three of those were really bad calls—the refs were really feeling themselves and it was obvious the snowball effect it had on the scoreline and team. Hell of a job to win in spite of that.
