MUScoop
MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: wadesworld on December 27, 2017, 09:44:22 PM
-
The guys in stripes. 5 on 8. Played tough given the handicap. Guess getting ranked in the top 5 in the country will get you some calls. Even on the road.
Honorable mention to free throws mattering.
-
Free throws- 90%+ vs like 55%?
-
It was pretty absurd tonight
-
The call on Hauser's block was a killer, deflated the team. On the front end of the block on Howard's layup, Howard has to invite the contact to get the call.
But the foul on Hauser was crap.
-
The ref called it from the side. He saw two guys going up and assumed contact. Anticipated the call. And missed it.
-
There was a jump ball call that was mind boggling.
-
Ive never seen the home team get hosed by the refs. That was tough to watch. Not entirely the refs fault but they made some very big and bad calls.
-
Driscoll'd
-
Refs weren't the reason MU lost. Seriously quit the whining. There were bad calls on both sides like every game.
-
Worst officiating I've seen against the home team ever.
-
Add Howard to the list, he played an extremely poor game. I have to keep reminding me self that he is only a sophomore.
-
Worst officiating I've seen against the home team ever.
Nope. Not even close.
-
Pretty rough officiating. I'll wait for the replay to see the TV angles, but it just felt like outside a Macura over the back, we didn't get a single borderline call.
-
Officiating was bad but it was bad on both ends. The blew some calls that went in MU's favor as well
-
The refs made a couple of calls at big moments that went against MU. They bought what Macura was selling on the Froling T. And Macura easily could have been T'd up at the end of the first half. They certainly didn't do MU any favors, but I don't think they cost the game.
-
Officiating was bad but it was bad on both ends. The blew some calls that went in MU's favor as well
Exactly. People are biased and don't remember when it benefits them. College basketball officiating is terrible and this game was an example of that.
-
Nope. Not even close.
I’d put it in the team picture.
-
The refs made a couple of calls at big moments that went against MU. They bought what Macura was selling on the Froling T. And Macura easily could have been T'd up at the end of the first half. They certainly didn't do MU any favors, but I don't think they cost the game.
Hate to say it, i would hang this one on Howard. I know he is only a sophomore, but the team needed him tonight and he did not rise to the occasion. He will obviously bounce back, but in a tight Big East, we need his floor to be a lot better than what was provided tonight.
-
Froling technical and the Hauser block were exceptionally poor calls. If you're reffing Macura or Rowsey you know they're baiting calls like that. Unfortunate
-
Pat Driscoll, undoubtedly. Refs won the game for Xavier. We were the better team.
-
Pat Driscoll, undoubtedly. Refs won the game for Xavier. We were the better team.
No they didn't and no we weren't.
-
Refs weren't the reason MU lost. Seriously quit the whining. There were bad calls on both sides like every game.
You are correct, but there were some bad calls and I feel like it weighted more towards X on this particular night. The T on Froling, couple of flops by Macura, the no call on Macura's block followed by the call on Hauser's block.
X benefited from the officiating today but that's part of the game. One team is almost always going to end up getting more calls than the other. Can't play in a way that allows that to dictate the outcome.
-
I won’t say that officiating cost Marquette the game because if Markus was better we win. But to deny the officials impact on the game would be foolish.
-
Refs impact every game. TAMU is spot on. It's a loser's lament.
-
Refs impact every game. TAMU is spot on. It's a loser's lament.
If Marquette won the game would it be okay to bring this up?
-
As blatantly one sided of a game as I’ve ever been at in person, and it isn’t even remotely close. First half we’re on a run, Howard gets mauled to the ground resulting in a turnover, Xavier brings it down 4 on 5 and gets a touch foul and one. Macura hardly gets touched, goes flying from the free throw line to the scorer’s, technical foul. Howard gets cleanly blocked on a break, correctly allowed to play on, Hauser cleanly blocks Macura, Macura goes to the line for 2. That’s directly a 5 point swing plus 4 free throws in a 4 point game. And on top of that each call was also a momentum shifter.
Tough to win against a team like Xavier as it is. Tougher to do it with a one sided reffing affair. I applaud the guys for playing tough through it. They deserved better.
Oh and breath on Blueitt and it’s a foul, no matter how hard he’s trucking full speed into you.
-
Refs impact every game. TAMU is spot on. It's a loser's lament.
Pure revisionist BS. I said the same thing on Twitter when we had the lead so don't give me that.
-
Its not the reason MU lost but it sure as hell didnt help. The really bad calls also came at crap timing for MU.
-
The points Xavier got at the line from the T and from bad foul calls were the difference, therefore, the Refs swung the game in X's favor. They were clearly biased. It doesn't help that Rowsey is talking to them all the time - I think he pisses them off, but these guys were seriously working for Xavier.
-
The ref called it from the side. He saw two guys going up and assumed contact. Anticipated the call. And missed it.
Tower, this is what I told my friends
-
First half we’re on a run, Howard gets mauled to the ground resulting in a turnover, Xavier brings it down 4 on 5 and gets a touch foul and one.
5-point swing there and that's the game. Not including the technical, the Froling scissor takedown, etc etc etc.
-
If Marquette won the game would it be okay to bring this up?
You can bring up whatever you want. It will be wrong regardless.
-
Refs impact every game. TAMU is spot on. It's a loser's lament.
See I don't quite agree with this. Being on the wrong side of the officiating balance was a factor in this loss. It's fine to mention it. If we had gotten a few more calls we would have won. But we also would have won if we made a few more shots. Or if we grabbed a few more boards. Or had a few less turnovers. We can "control" the shots, rebounds, and turnovers. We can't control the officiating. Focusing in on officiating as the main or only cause for a loss is where fans get into trouble.
-
See I don't quite agree with this. Being on the wrong side of the officiating balance was a factor in this loss. It's fine to mention it. If we had gotten a few more calls we would have won. But we also would have won if we made a few more shots. Or if we grabbed a few more boards. Or had a few less turnovers. We can "control" the shots, rebounds, and turnovers. We can't control the officiating. Focusing in on officiating as the main or only cause for a loss is where fans get into trouble.
Right. I agree with this. The concept that college refs are going to be consistent, much less perfect, is misguided. It’s prt of every game.
-
Right. I agree with this. The concept that college refs are going to be consistent, much less perfect, is misguided. It’s prt of every game.
I don’t think the refs are bad every game. I’d say they are good more than they are bad. But tonight they were bad and I don’t think there’s anything wrong with saying that.
-
Refs weren't the reason MU lost. Seriously quit the whining. There were bad calls on both sides like every game.
This.
A couple bad calls - but show me any game where that doesn't happen.
-
The model for college officiating is broken. Until D1 contracts and they decide to make these guys FT with some oversight, it's gonna continue to suck most nights.
One of the many reasons why the NBA gets most of my viewing these days.
-
I don’t think the refs are bad every game. I’d say they are good more than they are bad. But tonight they were bad and I don’t think there’s anything wrong with saying that.
And quite often they're bad both ways. That wasn't the case tonight. Yes, we could have done more to overcome the reffing. But the reality is we did enough to overcome Xavier but not enough to overcome Xavier and a one-sided reffing screwjob.
-
And quite often they're bad both ways.
Also true.
-
See I don't quite agree with this. Being on the wrong side of the officiating balance was a factor in this loss. It's fine to mention it. If we had gotten a few more calls we would have won. But we also would have won if we made a few more shots. Or if we grabbed a few more boards. Or had a few less turnovers. We can "control" the shots, rebounds, and turnovers. We can't control the officiating. Focusing in on officiating as the main or only cause for a loss is where fans get into trouble.
Totally agree with this.
I thought the reffing was poor tonight. The foul on Hauser was brutal, and Bilas even said so in a tweet. I'd say we definitely had more bad calls against us than X did.
And yet if Markus plays his typical game, we win. If we make a few more FTs, we win. If we play better defense and don't commit some REALLY stupid fouls - giving them 3-point plays on sure layups when we had no chance to block shots - we win. If we get that loose ball down the stretch instead of giving up a 3 ... that was a huge factor in the loss. Etc, etc, etc.
In the end, of course it's OK for fans to whine about the reffing. It's what we do! I hope Wojo and the lads aren't doing the same, though. They had plenty of chances, and they need to take responsibility for what they can control.
-
We shoot from outside, they went inside. That means FTs favor the guys that are aggressive. Some of the calls sucked, but the law of averages in how refs call games will go to those that aren't jump shooting.
-
I did not like the refs, but the reason we lost was Howard's shooting.
-
Refs weren't the reason for the loss. It was the little plays that a Top 6 program makes and we don't. Hauser grabs that loose ball and prevents a 3, Sacar makes 2 free throws, TJ makes 2 free throws, Howard makes one of the two layups and HF not suckered into a T . . . We win! It doesn't even have to be all of those. Pick a few!
-
No they didn't and no we weren't.
To defend these refs is an abomination. Tim Clougherty should never ref another BE game. Ever.
That said, Wojo, please defend the paint. Your defensive scheme is a joke.
-
Pure revisionist BS. I said the same thing on Twitter when we had the lead so don't give me that.
And you were wrong then as well.
-
To defend these refs is an abomination.
I'm not defending the refs. The refs were what most college refs are. Imperfect and inconsistent. I've been bitching about the state of college reffing for years. But when it comes down to it, it's simply something you have to deal with and not whine about.
-
I'm not defending the refs. The refs were what most college refs are. Imperfect and inconsistent. I've been bitching about the state of college reffing for years. But when it comes down to it, it's simply something you have to deal with and not whine about.
The worse college refereeing is (and you concede that it's awful) the more possible it is to be a (the?) deciding factor in a game. Each missed or incorrect call can go either way (50/50, a coin flip) but in a small sample (10?) it's not uncommon for them to fall 7-3 0r 8-2. So saying that referees can't be pivotal to a game's outcome (i.e., teams can't get hosed) is both illogical and provably false. Whether we got hosed last night is a subject that is debatable - whether it happens in college basketball is not. So you may or may not be right on the former but you're dead wrong on the latter.
Your point that it won't change and that teams/fans have to "deal with it" is beside the point - everybody concedes that the outcome can't/won't be changed. That doesn't mean that any factor that contributed to the outcome isn't worthy of discussion.
-
The worse college refereeing is (and you concede that it's awful) the more possible it is to be a (the?) deciding factor in a game. Each missed or incorrect call can go either way (50/50, a coin flip) but in a small sample (10?) it's not uncommon for them to fall 7-3 0r 8-2. So saying that referees can't be pivotal to a game's outcome (i.e., teams can't get hosed) is both illogical and provably false. Whether we got hosed last night is a subject that is debatable - whether it happens in college basketball is not. So you may or may not be right on the former but you're dead wrong on the latter.
Not really. 10 calls over the course of a 40 minute game are near meaningless. So the smaller you make the sample size, the less relevant it becomes.
I just place proper importance on the impact of refereeing on the outcome of a game. You don't.
-
I'm not sure I'd go as far as to suggest the refs cost MU the game, but to say the officiating last night was typical or par for the course is patently absurd.
It was a terribly officiated game, even by college basketball standards. Not just some of the bad on-court calls, but the bizarre replay reviews, the repeated (and unnecessary) delays to lecture players, etc.
Poor job all around.
-
Here is my main beefs, mainly with Clougherty. Maybe the game wasn’t on yet on FS1. Harry gets in the game and grabs a rebound to start a fast break. The Xavier player on the ground has a hold of Harry’s leg for 10 seconds preventing his breakout. It was a clear technical right in front of him. No call. Blatant. Yet X keeps pulling their chippy crap on Harry all night because he didn’t have the nads to make the right call.
He was late on the Markus breakaway/trip no call. Was late on the Sam block. Same guy.
Fast forward to Harry’s technical as he protects his teammate, and all of a sudden he brings out his T whistle. That was the turning point.
Brutal, just brutal. Low rated, hated in many major conferences. Not a BE quality official.
Any one see Mack go at Driscoll for a good five minutes after the horn at half? They swallowed their whistle on the last drive to the hoop at half. He was going hard after them.
-
I watched the game (once it was on FS1). I have been off scoop until just now.
While there were a couple of missed calls against MU (the Hauser block for sure; on first view that Howard had been fouled on the previous drive, but on replay, it seemed to me that he was not fouled; also, Froling deserved the technical--dumb play by him to shoulder Macura, who did a good acting job at the right time--when the game was getting chippy and the refs would be ready to re-establish control), all I can say is that I did not notice any imbalance in the officiating while watching the game.
I did notice that Howard played exceptionally poorly.
And that Cain was lights out.
-
After reading the OP, I just scrolled down until I found the obligatory "The refs didn't cost us the game" post by Sultan.
Like clockwork. If there is a post stating that the refs were bad, there will certainly be a follow up by Sultan stating that they were bad on both sides.
-
I'll put it this way...If Marquette had held on for the upset, there'd be this same thread on the Xavier board.
-
I'll put it this way...If Marquette had held on for the upset, there'd be this same thread on the Xavier board.
That certainly didn't seem to be the attitude of the group of Xavier fans sitting right next to me at the game, or of my brother, a Xavier student.
-
The refs were bad, but not one-sided in my opinion. We were bumping and bodying drivers hard, especially in the first half, and getting away with it. I thought the Hauser block was clean, but it would have been Xavier's ball under the basket if it was not called a foul, and the way they were scoring regularly I doubt it made much difference. Bottom line is there were bad call both ways.
Biggest difference in the fame is that we had a few stretches where we walked the ball up and ran poor offense. Rowsey and Howard have to always, always remember that we are at our best when we are moving the ball. Trying to force dribble through three guys rarely works. Contested 3s early in the shot clock are never a good idea. We have to waste as few possessions as possible because our defense just isn't that good.
-
That certainly didn't seem to be the attitude of the group of Xavier fans sitting right next to me at the game, or of my brother, a Xavier student.
Well in THAT case.... ::)
-
Well in THAT case.... ::)
Aww, cute!
-
Seems the majority of scoopers are blaming either the refs or Howard's rough game for this loss. And yes, those were factors. But how about the real culprit in this loss. The defense continues to be brutal. Late in the second half when X went on a run they had either dunks, layups or free throws. It won't matter how many 3's we make you cannot beat good, or even most average teams, if you can't play defense.
X really didn't have to run much offense. One or two passes and then a drive towards the basket and the lane was wide open. Something needs to change. I just have not seen any improvement over last year, which was not good for the D.
I'm sure they talk about this and work on it everyday in practice. I just hope at some point this year there is progress. If not I can't see this team winning more than 6-8 games in BE play.
-
Seems the majority of scoopers are blaming either the refs or Howard's rough game for this loss. And yes, those were factors. But how about the real culprit in this loss. The defense continues to be brutal. Late in the second half when X went on a run they had either dunks, layups or free throws. It won't matter how many 3's we make you cannot beat good, or even most average teams, if you can't play defense.
X really didn't have to run much offense. One or two passes and then a drive towards the basket and the lane was wide open. Something needs to change. I just have not seen any improvement over last year, which was not good for the D.
I'm sure they talk about this and work on it everyday in practice. I just hope at some point this year there is progress. If not I can't see this team winning more than 6-8 games in BE play.
Marquette held Xavier, one of the best offensive teams in the country, to under its season's average for FG%, 3P%, and eFG%. The defense was actually pretty great last night.
Biggest reason for the loss last night was Xavier's ability to get to the line and our inability to get there. Some of that's on the refs but most of it is on us.
2nd biggest reason was Howard's offensive play IMHO. Not just the missed shots, but he was avoiding contact on his drives which factored into reason #1 why we lost.
I think the 3rd biggest reason is a defensive one but from specific players. Heldt and John got owned in the post. Jones made Matt look silly in the first 5 minutes and the rest of the game they were consistently beaten by drivers and other post players. Thought the perimeter defenders did pretty well considering they were up against an All American and the serial flopper.
-
Not really. 10 calls over the course of a 40 minute game are near meaningless. So the smaller you make the sample size, the less relevant it becomes.
From a statistical point of view, this is flat out ridiculous. Let's assume every call is worth +/- 2 points. That's a potential 20-point swing in a game that was decided by 4.
If the balance of bad calls is 7-3 that's an 8 point swing. If it's 8-2 that's a 12-point swing. In a game that close, even if you discount the Elliott three late, either is enough to swing the outcome.
That said, 2 points is probably an understatement when you consider the non-call on Markus' drive resulted in a 5-on-4 breakout that yielded three at the other end.
-
Marquette held Xavier, one of the best offensive teams in the country, to under its season's average for FG%, 3P%, and eFG%. The defense was actually pretty great last night.
Biggest reason for the loss last night was Xavier's ability to get to the line and our inability to get there. Some of that's on the refs but most of it is on us.
2nd biggest reason was Howard's offensive play IMHO. Not just the missed shots, but he was avoiding contact on his drives which factored into reason #1 why we lost.
I think the 3rd biggest reason is a defensive one but from specific players. Heldt and John got owned in the post. Jones made Matt look silly in the first 5 minutes and the rest of the game they were consistently beaten by drivers and other post players. Thought the perimeter defenders did pretty well considering they were up against an All American and the serial flopper.
Xavier also didn't turn the ball over very much. Lowest TOV% against a P6 opponent all year.
-
Marquette held Xavier, one of the best offensive teams in the country, to under its season's average for FG%, 3P%, and eFG%. The defense was actually pretty great last night.
In what alternate world was our defense pretty great? They had over 90 in a college game - with the exception of a few stretches we did not even provide a slowdown to their offense. I haven’t looked at the numbers above in detail and who they played - but I imagine either cupcakes being in the averages or pace played a heavy role in addition to the FTA.
X is good but if this MU team is the phenomenal team next year some people think, we actually need to be able to play a minor amount of defense.
-
Xavier, 11 TO's. MU 10.
-
From a statistical point of view, this is flat out ridiculous. Let's assume every call is worth +/- 2 points. That's a potential 20-point swing in a game that was decided by 4.
If the balance of bad calls is 7-3 that's an 8 point swing. If it's 8-2 that's a 12-point swing. In a game that close, even if you discount the Elliott three late, either is enough to swing the outcome.
That said, 2 points is probably an understatement when you consider the non-call on Markus' drive resulted in a 5-on-4 breakout that yielded three at the other end.
+/-2 is a terrible assumption. Should be about +/-1 since that is a relatively normal ppp figure.
So over the course of a game with only ten calls, an 8-2 difference in bad calls (which in a 50/50 coin flip would be only 1 out of every 22 game or so) would be six points. Not much of a factor really.
But of course it is nowhere near random so a 8-2 margin is rarely if ever going to happen. (Refs aren't *that* bad.) It's probably more like 5-5 or 6-4. Not much of a factor at all.
-
In what alternate world was our defense pretty great? They had over 90 in a college game - with the exception of a few stretches we did not even provide a slowdown to their offense. I haven’t looked at the numbers above in detail and who they played - but I imagine either cupcakes being in the averages or pace played a heavy role in addition to the FTA.
X is good but if this MU team is the phenomenal team next year some people think, we actually need to be able to play a minor amount of defense.
Part of the reason why they scored that many points is because the pace was pretty high.
Yeah I don't think the defense was stellar, but it wasn't terrible either.
-
That certainly didn't seem to be the attitude of the group of Xavier fans sitting right next to me at the game, or of my brother, a Xavier student.
(https://i.imgur.com/N9ROTcF.gif)
-
(https://i.imgur.com/N9ROTcF.gif)
Maybe you saw or heard something else. Would love to see it.
-
Reffin’ matta’s, hey?
-
Reffin’ matta’s, hey?
Amen.
-
One of the reasons they scored 91 is because we fouled them,intentionally at the end and they made all of the free throws.
Xavier has the 5 th best offense in the country......they scored 89 against Cincy...which has the 5th best defense in the country......our defense isn't great by any means but against this team we were always going to have to,out score them.....we almost did.
Markus 1-8 from 3 with 4 turnovers and missing tons of shots at the rim are going to bite you against a team that good.
-
+/-2 is a terrible assumption. Should be about +/-1 since that is a relatively normal ppp figure.
So over the course of a game with only ten calls, an 8-2 difference in bad calls (which in a 50/50 coin flip would be only 1 out of every 22 game or so) would be six points. Not much of a factor really.
But of course it is nowhere near random so a 8-2 margin is rarely if ever going to happen. (Refs aren't *that* bad.) It's probably more like 5-5 or 6-4. Not much of a factor at all.
What's the average FT% up to now? 65%? Let's assume 1.3 ppp. Next, if it's 5-5 or 6-4, it's pretty much an evenly officiated game so those games won't even be discussed. That's just trying to tilt the statistical argument that was already slanted against you more in your favor.
I hardly think 7-3 or 8-2 is outlandish. It was easily that type of disparity last night. Any game where reffing is a legit talking point will be 7-3 or worse. So a 5.2-7.8 expected swing. Even at a paltry 1.00 you still get 4-6 which would've swung last night to overtime at the minimum.
If we assume that "not much of a factor" 6 points you want to argue, that would exceed the difference in 26 of Wojo's 55 Big East games. Maybe for you a changed outcome in 47.2% of conference games is "not much of a factor" but I'd say that's significant.
-
Brew it wasn’t even close to a 7-3 or 8-2 disparity. That’s the ridiculous assumption you started with.
-
Brew it wasn’t even close to a 7-3 or 8-2 disparity. That’s the ridiculous assumption you started with.
Okay, let's try to keep the goalposts in one place. First of all, this is what YOU said:
Not really. 10 calls over the course of a 40 minute game are near meaningless.
Let's just start with the basic fact that this statement by you is completely disconnected from reality. 10 calls = 10 possessions because every call results in possession of the ball or the chance for uncontested points at the line. Last night's game was 74 possessions, so the number that you were only too happy to use before I ever cited a number of 10 represents 6.8% of the possessions of the game. In a game decided by 4 points, that's significant. Especially when those 10 possessions also represent 13 points on 1.3 ppp.
Any way you slice it, 10 possessions in a 4 point game are not meaningless. Personally, I think the figure of 10 was probably too high. I would say it was closer to 8 with a disparity of 6-2 in Xavier's favor. Even if we say it's only a 5-3 disparity, those two possessions are worth 2.6 points in a game decided by 4 points when the winning team was intentionally sent to the line for 6 free throws in the final minute.
So your argument becomes 8.6 points are meaningless in a game with a 4-point margin of difference? And that's pushing the margin closer than Lennys' original premise. Speaking strictly from a statistical point of view, those points matter. Those calls matter. And if there's an obvious two-call benefit, in last night's game, it would've mattered (and it was more than two calls).
I get the idea of not wanting to blame the refs. I understand the criticism of that argument. I fully understand that if we hit our free throws, if Markus and Rowsey hit more of their open shots, if Sam takes more shots, if we secure rebounds, don't make turnovers, etc etc etc we also win. That said, if we do all those things and get equal calls, we don't just win, we blow the doors off Xavier.
If we shoot our regular free throw percentage, we win. If Howard shoots his regular percentage on open shots from three, we win. If Rowsey shoots his regular percentage on open shots from three, we win. If Sam takes his normal number of shots with the efficiency he had last night, we win. And if we get equal calls from the refs, we also win. Any one of those things would've resulted in a Marquette win. We didn't get any of them, so we lost. That doesn't change that it was a horribly officiated game that benefited the visiting team significantly.
-
Okay, let's try to keep the goalposts in one place. First of all, this is what YOU said:
Let's just start with the basic fact that this statement by you is completely disconnected from reality. 10 calls = 10 possessions because every call results in possession of the ball or the chance for uncontested points at the line. Last night's game was 74 possessions, so the number that you were only too happy to use before I ever cited a number of 10 represents 6.8% of the possessions of the game. In a game decided by 4 points, that's significant. Especially when those 10 possessions also represent 13 points on 1.3 ppp.
Any way you slice it, 10 possessions in a 4 point game are not meaningless. Personally, I think the figure of 10 was probably too high. I would say it was closer to 8 with a disparity of 6-2 in Xavier's favor. Even if we say it's only a 5-3 disparity, those two possessions are worth 2.6 points in a game decided by 4 points when the winning team was intentionally sent to the line for 6 free throws in the final minute.
So your argument becomes 8.6 points are meaningless in a game with a 4-point margin of difference? And that's pushing the margin closer than Lennys' original premise. Speaking strictly from a statistical point of view, those points matter. Those calls matter. And if there's an obvious two-call benefit, in last night's game, it would've mattered (and it was more than two calls).
I get the idea of not wanting to blame the refs. I understand the criticism of that argument. I fully understand that if we hit our free throws, if Markus and Rowsey hit more of their open shots, if Sam takes more shots, if we secure rebounds, don't make turnovers, etc etc etc we also win. That said, if we do all those things and get equal calls, we don't just win, we blow the doors off Xavier.
If we shoot our regular free throw percentage, we win. If Howard shoots his regular percentage on open shots from three, we win. If Rowsey shoots his regular percentage on open shots from three, we win. If Sam takes his normal number of shots with the efficiency he had last night, we win. And if we get equal calls from the refs, we also win. Any one of those things would've resulted in a Marquette win. We didn't get any of them, so we lost. That doesn't change that it was a horribly officiated game that benefited the visiting team significantly.
For God's sake, I was using a hypothetical based on Lenny's randomness argument. That's it.
The true "net difference in bad calls" that benefited Xavier? Who knows? Maybe two is my guess. It just wasn't a factor.
-
For God's sake, I was using a hypothetical based on Lenny's randomness argument. That's it.
The true "net difference in bad calls" that benefited Xavier? Who knows? Maybe two is my guess. It just wasn't a factor.
Relax Sultan. It's okay for someone to have a different opinion than you. You are holier than thou in assigning any type of blame on the refs for factoring into the result of a game. In a 4 point loss, 2 extra calls going the wrong way...well, I'll let you do the math on that one and figure out whether that's a "big deal" or "not a factor."
-
If X lost by 1, think they'd be upset about the no-call on Macura's drive to the hoop at the end of the first half? For the most part, "bad" calls even out over the course of a game. Fans typically don't see it that way, particularly when their team loses.
-
If X lost by 1, think they'd be upset about the no-call on Macura's drive to the hoop at the end of the first half? For the most part, "bad" calls even out over the course of a game. Fans typically don't see it that way, particularly when their team loses.
Yes, fans of both teams tend to walk away thinking they got the short end of the reffing stick. One of them is usually right. More games end with uneven reffing than with perfectly balanced reffing. Part of the game.
Last night I'm confident that we got the short end. But not by as much as some seem to think
-
The refs were bad, but not one-sided in my opinion. We were bumping and bodying drivers hard, especially in the first half, and getting away with it. I thought the Hauser block was clean, but it would have been Xavier's ball under the basket if it was not called a foul, and the way they were scoring regularly I doubt it made much difference. Bottom line is there were bad call both ways.
Biggest difference in the fame is that we had a few stretches where we walked the ball up and ran poor offense. Rowsey and Howard have to always, always remember that we are at our best when we are moving the ball. Trying to force dribble through three guys rarely works. Contested 3s early in the shot clock are never a good idea. We have to waste as few possessions as possible because our defense just isn't that good.
Agreed. Too much ball stopping later in the 2H with no-pass or few-pass possessions. Hauser needs to touch the ball on almost every possession in crunch time, even if he's not in position to score. The guy's so smart he won't force anything if it's not there, and it gets the defense moving.
-
So over the course of a game with only ten calls, an 8-2 difference in bad calls (which in a 50/50 coin flip would be only 1 out of every 22 game or so) would be six points. Not much of a factor really.
But of course it is nowhere near random so a 8-2 margin is rarely if ever going to happen. (Refs aren't *that* bad.) It's probably more like 5-5 or 6-4. Not much of a factor at all.
Of course whether a bad call is made for or against you is random, unless you want to tilt the scales slightly in the direction of the home team.
A 5-5 or 6-4 split will occur 2/3 of the the time. 1/3 of the time the distribution will fall between 7-3 and 10-0. So saying that in close games unevenly poor officiating can be the difference is true and it's not even debatable. It's also true (and not debatable) that complaining about it won't change anything.
-
Marquette held Xavier, one of the best offensive teams in the country, to under its season's average for FG%, 3P%, and eFG%. The defense was actually pretty great last night.
Biggest reason for the loss last night was Xavier's ability to get to the line and our inability to get there. Some of that's on the refs but most of it is on us.
2nd biggest reason was Howard's offensive play IMHO. Not just the missed shots, but he was avoiding contact on his drives which factored into reason #1 why we lost.
I think the 3rd biggest reason is a defensive one but from specific players. Heldt and John got owned in the post. Jones made Matt look silly in the first 5 minutes and the rest of the game they were consistently beaten by drivers and other post players. Thought the perimeter defenders did pretty well considering they were up against an All American and the serial flopper.
TAMU, I usually agree with you, and when I don't it is only partial disagreement. But, on the bolded above, I can only assume you have been day drinking. There is nothing great about Wojo's defense. In fact, not only is it the worst defense in the Big East, it would be the last or the lowest 2-3 in just about every major P5 conference. It is also the worst defense I have ever seen at Marquette (no hyperbole needed). It is below the Mendoza Line.
As I stated earlier, 73% of X's points came in the paint or on FTM. In the 2nd half, X was 13-18 on twos. MU plays defense like a sieve which is also a reason for its foul troubles as well. Wojo promised last year the defense will be improved. The team practiced defense exclusively in the pre-season. If, as Sultan says, Wojo won't adjust his scheme, then MU will continue to lose these close games and we can continually have these pissing matches about bad calls and missed free throws.
In the end, if MU gets some stops building a defense from the baseline out, this team could be dangerous. If it finds itself on the outside of the bubble, there is only one place to point a finger.
-
Evil Man, wee ain’t got know rim protector. And, I don’t meen a Trojan, hey?
-
Dr B,
I grant that pretty great was probably too strong, should have added the qualifier "for us."And if this was a game against Georgetown or Butler, I would agree with you. We held a top 5 offense to under their season averages on FG%, 3P%, and eFG%. Anytime you can do that, your defense has done enough to give the offense a chance to win. You gotta take the quality of the opponents offense into account.
The FTR is a good point though. That's on the defense and I didn't purposely take that into account. I'd need to watch but a lot of that disparity was due to intentional fouls and bad calls (which I believe you agreed that the officiating made several bad ones).
I think the defense is better than last year (eye test, not checking numbers). And I've actually been encouraged that it's been improving since the Wisconsin game.
-
Here is my main beefs, mainly with Clougherty. Maybe the game wasn’t on yet on FS1. Harry gets in the game and grabs a rebound to start a fast break. The Xavier player on the ground has a hold of Harry’s leg for 10 seconds preventing his breakout. It was a clear technical right in front of him. No call. Blatant. Yet X keeps pulling their chippy crap on Harry all night because he didn’t have the nads to make the right call.
He was late on the Markus breakaway/trip no call. Was late on the Sam block. Same guy.
Fast forward to Harry’s technical as he protects his teammate, and all of a sudden he brings out his T whistle. That was the turning point.
Brutal, just brutal. Low rated, hated in many major conferences. Not a BE quality official.
Any one see Mack go at Driscoll for a good five minutes after the horn at half? They swallowed their whistle on the last drive to the hoop at half. He was going hard after them.
The play where Froling is tied up from getting up for at least 5 seconds by the X player and nothing was called is mind boggling!
-
The play where Froling is tied up from getting up for at least 5 seconds by the X player and nothing was called is mind boggling!
There was a play were Markus was trip unintentionally, still a foul, and nothing was called.