The Official March Madness 2007 Thread

[Rizon]

Originally Posted by hoosiergoody

so far IU and UCLA are a combined 15 for 61 shooting- wow. can't buy a basket...

I got so annoyed with the announcers talking about how good the defense was that I ended up changing the channel. It was average defense against HORRIBLE offense. Brick after brick after brick. Forced shots due to impatience. Sloppy play. Just excruciating to watch.

[MrBug708]

Originally Posted by Rizon

I got so annoyed with the announcers talking about how good the defense was that I ended up changing the channel. It was average defense against HORRIBLE offense. Brick after brick after brick. Forced shots due to impatience. Sloppy play. Just excruciating to watch.

UCLA must be one lucky team as most of the time people say that the other team struggled and that UCLA played average defense

[Logan]

I've barely seen any of this game, so it looks like I missed out on the crap. But it seems pretty good now.

edit: I completely forgot Sampson took over at Indiana.

[Easy Mac]

i'm pretty sure Ben Howland was playing defense on the inbounds pass. He was waving his arms and yelling at the kid.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by Logan

I've barely seen any of this game, so it looks like I missed out on the crap. But it seems pretty good now.

edit: I completely forgot Sampson took over at Indiana.

I MUSHed the hell out of this game. Terrible ending.

[MizzouRah]

Is it just me or has the officiating been terrible?

Damn, can Oden just do whatever the hell he wants to? When did college basketball become the NBA?

[Thomkal]

Woot Marist Women! 13th seeded Red Foxes upset Ohio State in the first round of the women's tourney. Combined with the Marist men winning the regular MAAC season title and upsetting Oklahoma State in the first round of NIT, its been a pretty good year for them.

Okay back to the men's tourney...

[Fouts]

Looking forward to USC-TEX. I'd love to see the Trojans pull this off, but even I picked Texas to win this before the tourney started.

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by MizzouRah

Is it just me or has the officiating been terrible?

Damn, can Oden just do whatever the hell he wants to? When did college basketball become the NBA?

I would say the officiating has been pretty consistent. They have either allowed physical play throughout the game or they have called ticky tack fouls throughout. That is all you can really ask for. Have they missed some calls? Absolutely. But overall I think the officiating has been pretty good.

[wade moore]

... It hurt to watch that VCU loss. The near steal early in OT could have totally shifted the game, instead it turned into a 3 and a bad run for the Rams.

Ahwell, they put up a good fight and did the CAA proud.

[MizzouRah]

Originally Posted by miami_fan

I would say the officiating has been pretty consistent. They have either allowed physical play throughout the game or they have called ticky tack fouls throughout. That is all you can really ask for. Have they missed some calls? Absolutely. But overall I think the officiating has been pretty good.

I guess NBA style officiating turns me off. Oh well... Maybe today we can see more football style blocks.

[lordscarlet]

Originally Posted by MizzouRah

Is it just me or has the officiating been terrible?

Damn, can Oden just do whatever the hell he wants to? When did college basketball become the NBA?

That's why he fouled out?

[MizzouRah]

Originally Posted by lordscarlet

That's why he fouled out?

Yeah so? Should have been called a flagrant foul, period. You don't enforce that rule whenever it's convient.

I'm not an Xavier fan over Ohio St., I just hate the way the game is called once the tourney starts and refs are on TV. Xavier should have fouled Lewis before he even had a chance to put up a three. Still doesn't make it right for Oden to shove a player like that - right in front of the refs!! If that would have been called, game over Xavier wins due to the technical free throws and Xavier's ball.

[BrianD]

Originally Posted by MizzouRah

Yeah so? Should have been called a flagrant foul, period. You don't enforce that rule whenever it's convient.

I'm not an Xavier fan over Ohio St., I just hate the way the game is called once the tourney starts and refs are on TV. Xavier should have fouled Lewis before he even had a chance to put up a three. Still doesn't make it right for Oden to shove a player like that - right in front of the refs!! If that would have been called, game over Xavier wins due to the technical free throws and Xavier's ball.

For those that want to see the foul:

hxxp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dn6CyCuFkgw

I don't believe that is even close to a flagrant foul worthy of a technical. It may be an intentional foul, but everyone who watches college basketball knows that a team that needs to foul at the end of the game can do so without it being called intentional. Oden went for the foul and made more contact than was strictly necessary, but it wasn't flagrant. It was a typical big-man/little-man contact which doesn't take much for the little-man to go down.

[Logan]

I said this on another board...save the flagrant foul call for when there is a strong chance of injury (tackling a player while he is in the air) or a clear intent to injure. If that was a weaker guy doing the shoving, or a bigger guy taking it, it doesn't look nearly as bad.

By your logic, every end-of-game foul should be called intentional. Why are you only enforcing that rule when it's convenient?

edit: Beat by a minute.

[BrianD]

I should probably note that when I saw the foul during the game, I thought it would/could be called intentional. Seeing it many times in replays since, I don't think it was nearly as bad as I first thought.

[Easy Mac]

Originally Posted by BrianD

For those that want to see the foul:

hxxp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dn6CyCuFkgw

I don't believe that is even close to a flagrant foul worthy of a technical. It may be an intentional foul, but everyone who watches college basketball knows that a team that needs to foul at the end of the game can do so without it being called intentional. Oden went for the foul and made more contact than was strictly necessary, but it wasn't flagrant. It was a typical big-man/little-man contact which doesn't take much for the little-man to go down.

actually that's the very definition of a flagrant foul.

[Easy Mac]

dola, but 99% of the time, the foul is committed in a way that conveys the attempt at stealing the ball, hence why no intentional foul is called. Watch Oden, does he make a play for the ball, or does he shove the player full force? Especially since its a smaller player, its even more abhorrent.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Easy Mac

dola, but 99% of the time, the foul is committed in a way that conveys the attempt at stealing the ball, hence why no intentional foul is called. Watch Oden, does he make a play for the ball, or does he shove the player full force? Especially since its a smaller player, its even more abhorrent.

There is no way the reaf is calling a flagrent there and deciding the game. If he did 10X as many people would be bitching about the official deciding the outcome.If Xavier wants someone to blame they should blame themselves for turning the ball over with a minute left and giving OSU 6 points in 4 seconds

[Easy Mac]

Originally Posted by Lathum

There is no way the reaf is calling a flagrent there and deciding the game. If he did 10X as many people would be bitching about the official deciding the outcome.If Xavier wants someone to blame they should blame themselves for turning the ball over with a minute left and giving OSU 6 points in 4 seconds

And all of those people would be from OSU, not the rest of America. There's a large difference between intentional and flagrant. Your taught from a young age that you make an appearance of going for the ball in order to avoid an intentional foul late in the game. I can't see how it can be argued he is going for the ball.

[Easy Mac]

dola, and how does the call decide the game? Wouldn't it have been Oden's stupidity, or OSU missing three shots? Either way, the non-call decided the game just as much as making the call would have. Just because refs are consistently too scared to make the right call doesn't mean they shouldn't when they have the chance.

[ImTheCrew]

TN-UVA


HUGE VOL FAN HERE GO VOLS!

[lordscarlet]

Ok. Wade's team versus my team. Brother versus brother!

[lordscarlet]

Originally Posted by ImTheCrew

TN-UVA


HUGE VOL FAN HERE GO VOLS!

Go 'Hoos!!

This should be a good matchup.

[ImTheCrew]

VOLS and Lofton BEST THREE POINT SHOOTING TEAM !

[Logan]

Originally Posted by Easy Mac

And all of those people would be from OSU, not the rest of America.

You could not be more wrong with this statement. Every reporter would have written an article about it and it would've been debated all week by every analyst whether you can call that foul in that situation. The call would've been bad for college basketball. No one would've given Xavier any credit for winning.

[BrianD]

Originally Posted by Easy Mac

dola, but 99% of the time, the foul is committed in a way that conveys the attempt at stealing the ball, hence why no intentional foul is called. Watch Oden, does he make a play for the ball, or does he shove the player full force? Especially since its a smaller player, its even more abhorrent.

That is a BS argument and you know it. Late game fouls rarely show an attempt at going for the ball. Players are grabbed around the waist or around the arm. Swipes at the ball are barely called, so some kind of hold is necessary to get the call. A hold is never an attempt at the ball.

He also didn't shove the foul full force. With their size difference, a full force shove would have sent him a few rows deep into the stands. He clearly knocked him down, but again the size difference makes that nearly a given. He had to definitely foul the guy to make sure it was seen and called. I think it looks like frustration made the foul harder than necessary, but it was nowhere near flagrant.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Easy Mac

And all of those people would be from OSU, not the rest of America. There's a large difference between intentional and flagrant. Your taught from a young age that you make an appearance of going for the ball in order to avoid an intentional foul late in the game. I can't see how it can be argued he is going for the ball.

The deciding factor is not that "he is going for the ball", if it were, we'd be seeing refs make that call at the end of almost every other game. Guys have ALWAYS been given leeway in that scenario at the end of the game - they grab arms, wrap guys up, no one thinks anything of it. Here, you have a huge size difference, and one of the players falls down. If they seriously win a game with a call there, it's a ridiculously cheap, fluky win that people will complain about forever.

[Easy Mac]

you've seen far too many cartoons. watch them wrap their arms around on a late foul. Its to give an appearance of going for the ball from behind. Ask any coach and they'll tell you that. Now compare that to a shove. And I said it was intentional, not flagrant. Again, a huge difference between the two. The Henderson foul on Hansbrough was flagrant, but it wasn't ruled intentional.

[Easy Mac]

Originally Posted by molson

The deciding factor is not that "he is going for the ball", if it were, we'd be seeing refs make that call at the end of almost every other game. Guys have ALWAYS been given leeway in that scenario at the end of the game - they grab arms, wrap guys up, no one thinks anything of it. Here, you have a huge size difference, and one of the players falls down. If they seriously win a game with a call there, it's a ridiculously cheap, fluky win that people will complain about forever.

So again, you swallow the whistle because of how it will look to people instead of making the right call?

[BrianD]

Originally Posted by Easy Mac

actually that's the very definition of a flagrant foul.

You never said this?

[Easy Mac]

Originally Posted by BrianD

You never said this?

I was arguing the force of the foul, since then the argument was evidently was ruled irrelevant because Oden was larger.

[BrianD]

Originally Posted by Easy Mac

So again, you swallow the whistle because of how it will look to people instead of making the right call?

No, you let the players decide things on the court. There are enough people on this board who think it shouldn't have been called an intentional foul, so it is not unreasonable to think that there would have been disagreement even among the refs. You never call the stronger foul in a game deciding situation unless you are SURE that you are right.

[molson]

Another reason I'm glad the call wasn't made - if it were, the last 2:00 minutes of college basketball games would be utter flop-fests.

[BrianD]

Originally Posted by Easy Mac

I was arguing the force of the foul, since then the argument was evidently was ruled irrelevant because Oden was larger.

Sorry, I thought you had claimed to "never" say it should have been flagrant. That argument clearly would have been wrong, but now it doesn't look like you ever said that. My bad there.

[molson]

It's not so much WHEN the call happened (I'm generally not a huge fan of "let 'em play"), but the context. Those types of fouls are ALWAYS intentional, so it obvious that there must be a higher standard for a call there than earlier in the game, where such a foul would be more blameworthy (since there is no legitimate in-game reason for an intentional foul there).

I'm not directing this to anyone here, but any Xavier fans that are bitching about this are being completely obnoxious. It's not like the refs are taking something away that they did, they decided not to make a borderline call on a play that had no impact on the game whatsoever. (It'd be like a ref not making a call on a coach who wandered too far down the court).

[BrianD]

But the "when" clearly plays a factor. Fouls are called less often as the game nears the end. The last second drives/shots always have more contact than would be allwed earlier in the games. I would say that refs don't want to make calls at the end of a game but will make the calls that are necessary.

Having said that, I don't think Oden's foul would have been called intentional at any point in the game. It would have brought ref attention to make sure it didn't escalate, but it wouldn't have been intentional.

[Easy Mac]

Therein lies our disagreement, which I'll leave at that.

As to Tennesse, did they explain the odd headband-yamulke thing?

[molson]

Originally Posted by BrianD

But the "when" clearly plays a factor. Fouls are called less often as the game nears the end. The last second drives/shots always have more contact than would be allwed earlier in the games. I would say that refs don't want to make calls at the end of a game but will make the calls that are necessary.

Sure, that's a part of it, my point is just that it's not a necessary part of it. I'm typically annoyed when the game becomes something other than basketball in the last 2 minutes because the refs basically leave to get sandwiches and whatnot, but here, there's many other reasons why a no-call is appropriate.

[MizzouRah]

Originally Posted by Lathum

There is no way the reaf is calling a flagrent there and deciding the game. If he did 10X as many people would be bitching about the official deciding the outcome.If Xavier wants someone to blame they should blame themselves for turning the ball over with a minute left and giving OSU 6 points in 4 seconds

"IF" "IF" "IF"

Again, listen to the so called "pros" on ESPN after that game, they all agreed it was a flagrant foul, every single one of them. It's in the rules, you call it whenever you see it, period.

They even said Oden conveyed he was ticked at that point in the game. IF Xavier would have fouled Lewis before he goes down the court, game would have been over, BUT Oden clearly shoved the Xavier player like he was playing football.

I'm moving on and I hope Tennessee or Virgina beats the crap out of them.

[MizzouRah]

Originally Posted by BrianD

But the "when" clearly plays a factor. Fouls are called less often as the game nears the end. The last second drives/shots always have more contact than would be allwed earlier in the games. I would say that refs don't want to make calls at the end of a game but will make the calls that are necessary.

And that's bs. Call the f'n game the same no matter where it's at time wise. Refs get way to much leeway in sports today.

[BrianD]

Originally Posted by molson

Sure, that's a part of it, my point is just that it's not a necessary part of it. I'm typically annoyed when the game becomes something other than basketball in the last 2 minutes because the refs basically leave to get sandwiches and whatnot, but here, there's many other reasons why a no-call is appropriate.

I agree here. It would be nice if the officiating in the last 2 minutes matched the officiating in the rest of the game. I would like to see the players decide the outcome of the game, but I'm sure they all know they can get away with more contact at the end so they change their play accordingly.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by MizzouRah

"IF" "IF" "IF"

Again, listen to the so called "pros" on ESPN after that game, they all agreed it was a flagrant foul, every single one of them. It's in the rules, you call it whenever you see it, period.

They even said Oden conveyed he was ticked at that point in the game. IF Xavier would have fouled Lewis before he goes down the court, game would have been over, BUT Oden clearly shoved the Xavier player like he was playing football.

I'm moving on and I hope Tennessee or Virgina beats the crap out of them.

The same talking heads on ESPN would have been screaming let them play is a foul had been called.

[MizzouRah]

Originally Posted by Lathum

The same talking heads on ESPN would have been screaming let them play is a foul had been called.

I honestly believe you are dead wrong.

[BrianD]

Originally Posted by MizzouRah

And that's bs. Call the f'n game the same no matter where it's at time wise. Refs get way to much leeway in sports today.

And who is at fault for that? The refs are employees of the league they officiate. They are evaluated by the league and they get their assignments by the league. You don't think their actions match what the league is looking for?

[MizzouRah]

Originally Posted by BrianD

And who is at fault for that? The refs are employees of the league they officiate. They are evaluated by the league and they get their assignments by the league. You don't think their actions match what the league is looking for?

I guess that's a question for the head of the league officials isn't it?

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by MizzouRah

I honestly believe you are dead wrong.

Then we agree to disagree. Those guys are paid to start discussion and arguments and debate. If they agree with everything there would be no story and nothing to debate.

[BrianD]

Originally Posted by MizzouRah

Again, listen to the so called "pros" on ESPN after that game, they all agreed it was a flagrant foul, every single one of them. It's in the rules, you call it whenever you see it, period.

I would love to see anyone post a replay of a situation like this that was called a flagrant foul...at any point in the game. You can argue "what it should be" all you want, but I can't remember seeing a call like this ever called flagrant.

[BrianD]

Originally Posted by MizzouRah

I guess that's a question for the head of the league officials isn't it?

If the NCAA wanted things games officiated differently, that is the first thing they would do.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by MizzouRah

Again, listen to the so called "pros" on ESPN after that game, they all agreed it was a flagrant foul, every single one of them.

And the "pros" on CBS (that I heard) all agreed that they made the right call.
{shrug}