Sorry...refs again
- Thread starter ImBadRU
- Start date
Bad whistle yes. But we smoked that game with bad turnovers and our youth / inexperience on shining display down the stretch. Vet portal pickups not up to the task
The end of game foul on Martini when it sure looked like he walled up and then the non call on Dylan when the kid hacked him was total BS. Changed the game.
The refs completely changed the trajectory of that game..Martini doesn’t see the floor if properly called
two things can be true, we turned it over too much down the stretch and the refs stunk and called the game two different ways . Just look at the last two plays for example z
Well we overcame the rebounding concerns but no way we overcome a 16 point differential in points from the foul line 🤬
How about our three point percentage. A three pointer is like a turnover for us. And we were supposed to have 4-5 guys who could light it up
For most of the game, I didn't any issue with the refs - they were letting a lot go, and we were committing more fouls than the Aggies were. They weren't calling cheap fouls, ticky tack stuff, or phantom fouls and were largely "letting them play" - which worked more toward the Aggies' style of play than ours.
Then it felt like the tone shifted late. The phantom on Ogbole was a big departure from what they'd called throughout the game, and there were more questionable calls leading up to the phantom 5th on Sommerville (who shouldn't have put himself in that situation, to be fair, but can't call what you only think you see either).
Still, we gave this game away with a handful of bonehead plays more than a handful of bad calls.
Then it felt like the tone shifted late. The phantom on Ogbole was a big departure from what they'd called throughout the game, and there were more questionable calls leading up to the phantom 5th on Sommerville (who shouldn't have put himself in that situation, to be fair, but can't call what you only think you see either).
Still, we gave this game away with a handful of bonehead plays more than a handful of bad calls.
Yeah, how about that … A&M shot 13% and we shot 23% from the 3 pt line … what’s your point? The CLEAR biggest differential in this game was A&M went to the line 42 times vs 17 for us. We won the 3 pt battle 18-6.
Fun fact: it’s been 1,582,473 consecutive games of terrible and biased refs between HS, college and the NBA.
The Bama game on Wednesday was embarrassing. Not saying that’s why we loss because we got some favorable calls, but that game started a little after 10 and didn’t end until after 12:30. Brutal to watch. Looked like today was rough, too
It’s not a battle. We knew going in an and m couldn’t shoot the three. Because they suck is no excuse for us sucking. We were supposed to be awesome at shooting 3. In case you don’t know 23% SUCKS, and it’s sucked for a few games.
Sure does… but we lost this game due to FT differential, pretty clear.
And if we shot even 8/26 for 30% from three, still not a point per shot Even, would we still have lost??
Better get the ice pack out. You’ll be in concussion protocol hitting your head on the wall about our poor 3 point shooting as the reason we lost … in a game where our opponent was much worse than us. I get it if we shot better from 3 we would have won. Consider if A&M sucked at the same rate we did on 3 pointers they would have won by 16, while still sucking from 3.
Now for arguments sake if we went to the foul line 25 more times (yes the FT attempt differential was +25) we may have actually won 😉
I can't even take this loss seriously given the horrendous officiating. R 15-17 FTs. Ta&m 31-42 FTs. Next.
It’s not just this game we shot poorly from 3. That and defense are two big red flags as we head into B1G play. The first we were supposed to have solved thru the portal and the second Pike is supposed to be a master at coaching
🙄 I see what you did there, you took the long winding road to get in a dig at Pike, whatever, maybe it’s deserved. IN THIS GAME, the opponent attempted +25 Free Throws… we have averaged only 28 total attempts per game all season and only 17 tonight. That my friend, regardless of your anti-Pike stance was tonight’s difference. Good night 😉.
Officiating was terrible. The charge are JD was not a charge as the defender ran into him. So many calls with guys hands straight up and not moving and the offensive player ran into their hands.
The JD charge call was atrocious. The defender practically head-beaded dercack. Absurd call
We need to get bigger and stronger and learn to play through contact. I didn’t like the officiating, but we get bounced around too easily. Physically, men versus boys. We get pushed around and dunked on and opponents snatch rebounds surehandedly that should be our’s.
When Texas A&M gets 42 attempts at the line…
RU gets 17….
It’s a ridiculous joke.
RU gets 17….
It’s a ridiculous joke.
100%. The refs were determined to see us lose today. It’s egregious. It’s getting to be insulting to the senses.
Every block by Tamu - clean. Every block by us - foul. Every offense rebound? Same exact deal. They can rape us and we can’t touch them. It’s … very odd
Sometimes fouls are legitimately committed more by the team that doesn’t move their feet to play d and uses their hands. Or leaves their feet to swap at layups. You know, laziness or foolishness. Also, how many of our prior game FTs were from Dylan driving to the rim and getting to the line. Tonight the better coach used a zone to slow Dylan down and take those attempts away. Guess what when the team is preforming well Pike gets credit. When they underachieve the buck still stops with Pike. But by all means keep shielding Pike because at least we’re losing closely.
Rutgers took 35 foul shots against Alabama and still loss the game.The point being each game has different referees. In this game Rutgers lacked the open lanes to drive to the basket and get fouled.
They’re part of a group that meets tri-annually at a mountain retreat in Colorado called the Meadows. There, they are joined by representatives of the top Swiss banks, Colonel Sanders with his wee beady eyes, and the five people who run the world, generally referred to as the Pentaverate. You can’t prove any of this. But it’s true.
Yep and Alabama attempted 36, for a difference of +1. In the A&M game that difference was +25! Regardless of why that difference occurred or whether the difference was warranted by style of play or different refs, that +25 yielded 16 more points from the line for A&M.
Simple point here, that much of a difference is hard to overcome in any game. Not hard to understand, right? But thanks for the Captain Obvious insight about each game having different refs.
Does Tim Higgins organize the get-together? Was it a celebration of Tim Higgins retirement?
FTA discrepancy isn't generally a good gauge for officiating quality - and I don't think it was in this game, specifically.
The game started out with a loose whistle - a lot of contact that absolutely would have gotten whistled in Wednesday's game was let go in the early minutes, which set a tone for the game that there would be much more physicality allowed. TAMU was well suited to this style, as it fit with their usual brand of defense. We started pushing that boundary early and got rung up for some over-aggressive contact.
I commented in the game thread that I was curious if that loose whistle would last the game - and it did throughout the first half and most of the second. TAMU was much better in that environment than we were - it suited their offense and defense much better than it did us.
Their zone was well executed and frustrated what we wanted to do. We didn't get many drives to the lane - and we certainly didn't have the "barrel into the lane at full speed for a hammer dunk" energy that Washington/Cortez did for TAMU. They were big bodies that weren't going to be stopped by even hard contact, and they were daring us to try to defend. Several of those should not have been contested - but we contested them and got whistled. We need to learn to let some of those go - Sommerville, Bailey, and Ogbole all picked up some fouls contesting things they had no hope in contesting cleanly.
Instead, we settled in for a lot of jumpers 10-25ft from the basket - and those generally don't get foul calls. We were doing exactly what Buzz Williams wanted us to do - probe along the outside, take jumpers in gaps in the zone, and stay out of the lane and away from the rim. Harper, who drove the lane and dominated in the first two games of the tournament, was mostly kept at more of a distance - which limited his FTA and protected the TAMU bigs.
And we kept fouling - like, not ticky tack stuff, but "why on earth are you grabbing his arm like that?" and "on what earth did you think you'd get away with that?" fouls. By the end of the first half, there was a big disparity - but it was very much due to style of play and a consistently loose whistle.
Plenty of people have said Pike should have gone to a zone to shield his players... but we aren't a good zone team. Pike generally isn't a zone defense coach, and this team hasn't had much time to practice his base defense let alone a zone. On the flip side, Williams' team was heavy-zone and were very good at it... which protected them from fouls.
Toward the end of the game, the refs frustratingly changed course a bit and started calling some phantom/ticky-tack fouls on us. Possibly because we set the tone as "a team who fouls a lot" and they imagined more contact than was actually there - but the last 5-6 min definitely seemed to be swimming upstream against the whistle at times. Not having a serviceable 3rd center compounded those troubles.
A lot was let go in this game, though. If they called fouls the way a game is normally called, we'd have been suiting up student managers by the end. But those aren't "missed calls", imo - they were just calls that didn't rise to the definition of foul in this particular game. TAMU adapted better to that than we did.
The game started out with a loose whistle - a lot of contact that absolutely would have gotten whistled in Wednesday's game was let go in the early minutes, which set a tone for the game that there would be much more physicality allowed. TAMU was well suited to this style, as it fit with their usual brand of defense. We started pushing that boundary early and got rung up for some over-aggressive contact.
I commented in the game thread that I was curious if that loose whistle would last the game - and it did throughout the first half and most of the second. TAMU was much better in that environment than we were - it suited their offense and defense much better than it did us.
Their zone was well executed and frustrated what we wanted to do. We didn't get many drives to the lane - and we certainly didn't have the "barrel into the lane at full speed for a hammer dunk" energy that Washington/Cortez did for TAMU. They were big bodies that weren't going to be stopped by even hard contact, and they were daring us to try to defend. Several of those should not have been contested - but we contested them and got whistled. We need to learn to let some of those go - Sommerville, Bailey, and Ogbole all picked up some fouls contesting things they had no hope in contesting cleanly.
Instead, we settled in for a lot of jumpers 10-25ft from the basket - and those generally don't get foul calls. We were doing exactly what Buzz Williams wanted us to do - probe along the outside, take jumpers in gaps in the zone, and stay out of the lane and away from the rim. Harper, who drove the lane and dominated in the first two games of the tournament, was mostly kept at more of a distance - which limited his FTA and protected the TAMU bigs.
And we kept fouling - like, not ticky tack stuff, but "why on earth are you grabbing his arm like that?" and "on what earth did you think you'd get away with that?" fouls. By the end of the first half, there was a big disparity - but it was very much due to style of play and a consistently loose whistle.
Plenty of people have said Pike should have gone to a zone to shield his players... but we aren't a good zone team. Pike generally isn't a zone defense coach, and this team hasn't had much time to practice his base defense let alone a zone. On the flip side, Williams' team was heavy-zone and were very good at it... which protected them from fouls.
Toward the end of the game, the refs frustratingly changed course a bit and started calling some phantom/ticky-tack fouls on us. Possibly because we set the tone as "a team who fouls a lot" and they imagined more contact than was actually there - but the last 5-6 min definitely seemed to be swimming upstream against the whistle at times. Not having a serviceable 3rd center compounded those troubles.
A lot was let go in this game, though. If they called fouls the way a game is normally called, we'd have been suiting up student managers by the end. But those aren't "missed calls", imo - they were just calls that didn't rise to the definition of foul in this particular game. TAMU adapted better to that than we did.
It will be interesting to hear the talking heads on the Big Ten Network discuss the foul totals disparity when they discuss our Texas A&M loss.
Jeffrey Anderson - The Big Ten got him last season, as he did the majority of work in our conference (previously, he was more of a Big East/ACC guy). He's regarded as one of the top few refs in the country (he's done 2 of the last 3 National Title games)...though fans mostly recognize him for his akward running style.
Jerry Heater - He's an East Coast guy...does a mix of ACC/A10/Big South games. He's a guy you'll see get a game on the first two days of the NCAAs, but nothing more to this point.
Chuck Jones - He's primarily an SEC guy, also doing AAC/Sun Belt games. He's another one that usually gets a 1st round NCAA game, but that's been his ceiling.
