Butler Officiating

[Gato78]

If you want to look at games as evening out and calls don't make anymore difference at the end of a game as the beginning, I do not want you on my team. My ideal teammates get tougher and more intense as the game goes on. Same with officials. If you aren't at your best at the end, I don't want you on the floor.

[ChicosBailBonds]

If you want to look at games as evening out and calls don't make anymore difference at the end of a game as the beginning, I do not want you on my team. My ideal teammates get tougher and more intense as the game goes on. Same with officials. If you aren't at your best at the end, I don't want you on the floor.

You are mixing things entirely.  Has nothing to do with intensity, nor was that the premise of this thread or the posts.  You're just trying to justify your comments with an unrelated comment about intensity, etc. 

Officials make calls throughout a game, they make good calls throughout the game and they make some bad calls throughout the game.  If I get hacked shooting a jumpshot with 6 minutes to go and it is not called and we lose by 1 point, that play (just as every other play) can be pointed to.  No differently than if the exact same play is missed with 14 seconds left.  In both cases, the points opportunities are missed.

Refs see what the see and they make calls.  Every call or non call throughout a contest is impactful.  Fans just like to focus on the calls at the end. 

I'd invite you to read an award winning book on this and many other aspects of winning games, including home field advantage, why refs call things differently for the home team than the visiting team, biases, and of course the impacts of a call early in the game vs late in the game.

I think you will find it is quite enjoyable.

[forgetful]

You are mixing things entirely.  Has nothing to do with intensity, nor was that the premise of this thread or the posts.  You're just trying to justify your comments with an unrelated comment about intensity, etc. 

Officials make calls throughout a game, they make good calls throughout the game and they make some bad calls throughout the game.  If I get hacked shooting a jumpshot with 6 minutes to go and it is not called and we lose by 1 point, that play (just as every other play) can be pointed to.  No differently than if the exact same play is missed with 14 seconds left.  In both cases, the points opportunities are missed.

Refs see what the see and they make calls.  Every call or non call throughout a contest is impactful.  Fans just like to focus on the calls at the end. 

I'd invite you to read an award winning book on this and many other aspects of winning games, including home field advantage, why refs call things differently for the home team than the visiting team, biases, and of course the impacts of a call early in the game vs late in the game.

I think you will find it is quite enjoyable.

Chicos, the problem with this type of treatment is that it actually defies reality.  You are completely correct, 2 pts lost with 6 minutes left is the same as 6 seconds as far as points are concerned.  But that does not reflect the entirety of any situation.

The problem is there are an infinite number of variables at play, thus the effect of a blown call can not be ascertained with any certainty the further removed from the actual occurrence.  Statisticians and modelers can try to argue otherwise (from a pts perspective), but ultimately any of those analyses distills life down to a few parameters that individual deems important.  They neglect a single parameter (of importance) out of the infinite number of variables and their analysis becomes meaningless.  So the only way an event definitively affects an outcome is when it occurs in close proximity to that outcome.

All the previous calls/events generated the current state and may or may not have balanced each other out.  They become insignificant, unless a systematic bias is observed.  In contrast, the end call dictated the result.

[keefe]

God, keefe, you had to bring that up? The call on Whitehead was one of the worst in history.

Defending National Champs with everyone back but Bo and Neary. I think that one call deflated our balloon more than any other single event. Changed the entire complexion of Hank's tenure. We win that game and Bowie and the McCrays sign.

[4everwarriors]

Was Scooter the cat who played a solo on the skin flute? Or was it Rodney?

[ChicosBailBonds]

Gato

Let me give you a perfect example.  End of the NIT championship game between MU and Virginia Tech.  Tech is fouled with like a second left, MU fans all hacked off, etc, etc.  We lose by one point.

MU fans blaming that foul for the game loss (even though Mike Deane felt it was the right call).  If MU hadn't gone 6 of 16 from the stripe in our own regard, then that call doesn't seem quite so "big", but fans don't remember that we went 6 of 16 from the line, they remember the foul at the end. They remember it because of what was on the clock in terms of time.

Every play contributes to the outcome of a game.  You miss shots early in the game, they impact the rest of the game, but it is human nature to focus more on the plays at the end...even though they have the same weighting.  We're just hyper focused to pay attention to them and ignore the missed bunny in the first half, the missed foul shots, the calls, etc. 

[Gato78]

Read a book about stats? Learn how to be a frickin' competitor. And when you are balls to the wall, and you get robbed, its real comforting to know the calls even out because some book recommended by Chicos said so. I played in the State championship football game in Lambeau Field in 1973. Lost the game. To this day, guys are still affected by that game and certain plays in that game. You can say any damn thing you want about books and stats and evening things out but it is all crap. What happened at the end of that game lives with guys to this day. The calls, the mistakes the plays. No one forgets, and some guys cannot even discuss it to this day. It is all because of what happened at the end of that game. The stuff in the middle was not outcome determinative, it just got us to the drama at the end. And the end changed peoples lives. You can say all this dispassionate, it all evens out crap, but all that tells me is you were never in the arena. It does matter. It is memorable. And when you are on the receiving end of bad calls, and lose, it hurts. You probably believe the athletes when they say it wasn't this call or that call. They are BSing  and when they talk among themselves, the truth comes out. The athletes never forget the bad calls at the end that cost them.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Defending National Champs with everyone back but Bo and Neary. I think that one call deflated our balloon more than any other single event. Changed the entire complexion of Hank's tenure. We win that game and Bowie and the McCrays sign.

That Miami(OH) game is another great example of this.

Few people remember that MU shot 13 of 20 from the free throw line that game.  Miami shot 16 of 19.  That was big.

Or the fact Jimmy Boylan only hit 1 of 2 free throws at the end with 20 seconds left.  Makes them both, what happens?   Hank doesn't get a T, what happens?  MU had a 10 point lead with a little over 3 minutes to play when that bad call was made.  MU self destructed, but still had opportunities to win in regulation and in OT...plus many missed opportunities throughout the game.  MU had the lead and the ball with a little over 1 minute to play.  We turned it over twice.

Human nature focuses on one call, not all the other things that could have been done that weren't. 

[ChicosBailBonds]

Chicos, the problem with this type of treatment is that it actually defies reality.  You are completely correct, 2 pts lost with 6 minutes left is the same as 6 seconds as far as points are concerned.  But that does not reflect the entirety of any situation.

The problem is there are an infinite number of variables at play, thus the effect of a blown call can not be ascertained with any certainty the further removed from the actual occurrence.  Statisticians and modelers can try to argue otherwise (from a pts perspective), but ultimately any of those analyses distills life down to a few parameters that individual deems important.  They neglect a single parameter (of importance) out of the infinite number of variables and their analysis becomes meaningless.  So the only way an event definitively affects an outcome is when it occurs in close proximity to that outcome.

All the previous calls/events generated the current state and may or may not have balanced each other out.  They become insignificant, unless a systematic bias is observed.  In contrast, the end call dictated the result.

I never said it did reflect the entire of the situation, in fact I'm arguing exactly that point that a game's outcome is made up of EVERYTHING that happens from the opening tip until the end of the game.  Each play is significant, each call, each make, each miss, etc.  You are also correct that as one play happens, that result leads to another action \ reaction which cannot ever be defined.  Absolutely 100% agree.

You're saying the end call dictated the result of a game, this is where I do not agree (nor do the authors of the book).  Tonight, SF lost to Seattle.  Did they lose the game because of the last interception?  Many will say yes.  What about the interception 4 minutes earlier...what would have come from that drive?  Etc, etc.  Fans, by their nature, focus on what happens at the end, and that is logically incorrect.

It's a great book, I would recommend it to anyone.

If you are a fan of game theory, etc...just a great read.  Flows well.

NY Times review of it

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/30/books/review/Weber-t.html?pagewanted=all

[Gato78]

100% correct. J Whitehead was such a dominating force in the middle. That one call rattled the MU team. The mistakes made thereafter were largely related to J Whitehead's ejection. That call caused the loss of confidence and poor play thereafter. It was a defining moment in MU hoops history. Chico is right, there were other chances but that call affected players' confidence and absolutely was a primary cause of that loss.

Defending National Champs with everyone back but Bo and Neary. I think that one call deflated our balloon more than any other single event. Changed the entire complexion of Hank's tenure. We win that game and Bowie and the McCrays sign.

[dgies9156]

That Miami(OH) game is another great example of this.

Few people remember that MU shot 13 of 20 from the free throw line that game.  Miami shot 16 of 19.  That was big.

Or the fact Jimmy Boylan only hit 1 of 2 free throws at the end with 20 seconds left.  Makes them both, what happens?   Hank doesn't get a T, what happens?  MU had a 10 point lead with a little over 3 minutes to play when that bad call was made.  MU self destructed, but still had opportunities to win in regulation and in OT...plus many missed opportunities throughout the game.  MU had the lead and the ball with a little over 1 minute to play.  We turned it over twice.

Human nature focuses on one call, not all the other things that could have been done that weren't. 

Right on, brother. That game was horsecrap.

Game management was everything and Hank couldn't settle the team down. We should have blown them to kingdom come. The fact that with less than five minutes left, Miami of Ohio was STILL a game was a testament to poor coaching and even poorer game management.

That was the 1978 version of a 16 seed upsetting a 1 seed. It was an embarrassment to Marquette University and was the first sign that things weren't right in the basketball department.

We aren't there yet. Buzz has done wonders for our program. But how we come out of where we are -- referees or not -- is everything to our future.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Read a book about stats? Learn how to be a frickin' competitor. And when you are balls to the wall, and you get robbed, its real comforting to know the calls even out because some book recommended by Chicos said so. I played in the State championship football game in Lambeau Field in 1973. Lost the game. To this day, guys are still affected by that game and certain plays in that game. You can say any damn thing you want about books and stats and evening things out but it is all crap. What happened at the end of that game lives with guys to this day. The calls, the mistakes the plays. No one forgets, and some guys cannot even discuss it to this day. It is all because of what happened at the end of that game. The stuff in the middle was not outcome determinative, it just got us to the drama at the end. And the end changed peoples lives. You can say all this dispassionate, it all evens out crap, but all that tells me is you were never in the arena. It does matter. It is memorable. And when you are on the receiving end of bad calls, and lose, it hurts. You probably believe the athletes when they say it wasn't this call or that call. They are BSing  and when they talk among themselves, the truth comes out. The athletes never forget the bad calls at the end that cost them.

I get it, I lost in the final four CIF (California's high school federation) in 1986 and was on the field for the entire game.  Yup, it hurts.  Still hurts.  If only we had made that one play....but if we had, they can make the same argument on their side, too.  This is the part people forget.  Opportunities lost on both sides, but folks like to look at only OUR lost opportunities, not theirs.  Human nature.

Again, nothing you are saying I disagree with, but you're bringing something into the argument that has no bearing on the discussion at hand.  Apples to lemons. 

Just for pleasure reading, as a sports fan, I think you will find the book of great interest.  It's not a book just on stats.  Much much more.  Any sports fan would find it enjoyable.  You talk of pain playing and losing, you'll enjoy this book.  You talk of intensity in the 4th quarter vs the 1st quarter, there is an entire section on this type of thing...you'll enjoy this book.

http://scorecasting.com/

A few items of discussion in the book:

Does defense truly win championships?
Is there really such a thing as momentum in sports?
Does icing the kicker work?
Are the Chicago Cubs cursed?
Are officials biased? 
Can you really quantify the subjective aspects of sports, like officiating?
What is really driving the home field advantage in all sports?
Officials are biased...but not for the reasons you think.
Using all four downs in football is still considered sports heresy. Wrongly, but everyone punts, right?
Tiger Woods is, in fact, mortal . . . even on the golf course.
Why picking first in the entire NFL draft might be worth less than the first pick in the second round.
Why star players are treated differently (but not necessarily better) by the officials?
Why the Cubs may not be so unlucky.
The myth of momentum in sports and why so many fans, coaches, and broadcasters fervently believe in it.


I think this review captures it well

"A counterintuitive, innovative, unexpected handbook for sports fans interested in the truths that underpin our favorite games. With their lively minds and prose, Moskowitz and Wertheim will change the way you think about and watch sports. Not just for stats nerds, Scorecasting enlightens and entertains. I wish I had thought of it!"

- Jeremy Schaap, ESPN reporter, Author of Cinderella Man

"Scorecasting is both scholarly and entertaining, a rare double. It gets beyond the cliched narratives and tried-but-not-necessarily-true assumptions to reveal significant and fascinating truths about sports."
- Bob Costas, NBC Sports commentator

[Texas Western]

Read a book about stats? Learn how to be a frickin' competitor. And when you are balls to the wall, and you get robbed, its real comforting to know the calls even out because some book recommended by Chicos said so. I played in the State championship football game in Lambeau Field in 1973. Lost the game. To this day, guys are still affected by that game and certain plays in that game. You can say any damn thing you want about books and stats and evening things out but it is all crap. What happened at the end of that game lives with guys to this day. The calls, the mistakes the plays. No one forgets, and some guys cannot even discuss it to this day. It is all because of what happened at the end of that game. The stuff in the middle was not outcome determinative, it just got us to the drama at the end. And the end changed peoples lives. You can say all this dispassionate, it all evens out crap, but all that tells me is you were never in the arena. It does matter. It is memorable. And when you are on the receiving end of bad calls, and lose, it hurts. You probably believe the athletes when they say it wasn't this call or that call. They are BSing  and when they talk among themselves, the truth comes out. The athletes never forget the bad calls at the end that cost them.

Bad calls happen all the time. There is no question they rob teams of well earned victories. However, I think it is a losing proposition to dwell on back calls. you can't change them they are part of sports . Just move and conquer the next mountain.

[forgetful]

I never said it did reflect the entire of the situation, in fact I'm arguing exactly that point that a game's outcome is made up of EVERYTHING that happens from the opening tip until the end of the game.  Each play is significant, each call, each make, each miss, etc.  You are also correct that as one play happens, that result leads to another action \ reaction which cannot ever be defined.  Absolutely 100% agree.

You're saying the end call dictated the result of a game, this is where I do not agree (nor do the authors of the book).  Tonight, SF lost to Seattle.  Did they lose the game because of the last interception?  Many will say yes.  What about the interception 4 minutes earlier...what would have come from that drive?  Etc, etc.  Fans, by their nature, focus on what happens at the end, and that is logically incorrect.

It's a great book, I would recommend it to anyone.

If you are a fan of game theory, etc...just a great read.  Flows well.

NY Times review of it

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/30/books/review/Weber-t.html?pagewanted=all

Here's my issue with your rationale, you are acting like the gamblers who say that the next time they have to win, because the coin was flipped heads 50 times in a row.  The next time it has to be tails.

Similarly with a game.  When it gets to crunchtime, the whole rest of the game doesn't matter (the heads 50 times in a row).  At that point all that matters is the current play/call.  It does decide the game (the single coin flip is all that matters). 

[keefe]

I reserve legendary status for folks like Stu Merrill, John Holmes, and Charlie Sheen

Robin Olds, Chuck Yeager, and B.B. King

[keefe]

Right on, brother. That game was horsecrap.

Game management was everything and Hank couldn't settle the team down. We should have blown them to kingdom come. The fact that with less than five minutes left, Miami of Ohio was STILL a game was a testament to poor coaching and even poorer game management.

That was the 1978 version of a 16 seed upsetting a 1 seed. It was an embarrassment to Marquette University and was the first sign that things weren't right in the basketball department.

We aren't there yet. Buzz has done wonders for our program. But how we come out of where we are -- referees or not -- is everything to our future.

To your point and Lenny's, there is no way Miami should have been within sniffing distance of the defending National Champ that late in the game. Game management was the responsibility of one man. The game was still ours to lose even after J was ejected. It was Hank's job to get the situation under control. And he did not.

Let's assume Marquette wins it all again and that we signed Bowie and the McCrays. I still think Marquette would have slipped from where Al had us. I think we all knew that all of the cachet and mystique left with Al. It is astounding how quickly we not only fell from national prominence; within a few years we had become irrelevant.

This year is a watershed moment for the Marquette program. How Buzz manages the next 24 months will be crucial for the university.   

[keefe]

Was Scooter the cat who played a solo on the skin flute? Or was it Rodney?

Scooter was working his Trom-Bone when Majerus walked in on the jam session. Obviously, a very uncomfortable moment for all concerned. The McCrays ended up signing with Denny Crum (who begged to replace Al at Marquette) and Louisville won two Ships in 4 trips to the Final Four between 1980-86.

Meanwhile, Rick Majerus was so disturbed by the "Scooter Jam Session" he began sh1tting in towels during team meetings.

And Marquette? We hired Bob Dukiet.

[jesmu84]

My only gripe about officiating comes with end of game situations. If it's a foul/infraction at any other part of the game, it's a foul/infraction in the last 2min, 1min, 30sec, whatever. I hate the phrase "refs shouldn't decide the game." Within a small scope, that's correct - they shouldn't overstep their bounds and do something to alter the game. But if a player gets fouled with 10sec to go, and a ref wouldn't hesitate to make that call in the first 5min of the game, then they shouldn't hesitate ever. The rules are there for a reason.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Here's my issue with your rationale, you are acting like the gamblers who say that the next time they have to win, because the coin was flipped heads 50 times in a row.  The next time it has to be tails.

Similarly with a game.  When it gets to crunchtime, the whole rest of the game doesn't matter (the heads 50 times in a row).  At that point all that matters is the current play/call.  It does decide the game (the single coin flip is all that matters).  

Quite to the contrary.  I'm a firm believer AGAINST that kind of thinking.  When people say it's come up tails ten times the the next time the odds are it will come up heads...they're just wrong. The odds are still 50-50.  

My problem with what you are saying is that when you say "at that point all that matters is the current play/call...it does decide the game" then you are willingly ignoring everything else in the game.  You're essentially saying that nothing else mattered.  Why even play the first 38 minutes of the game then, if ONLY that call matters?  You are sequencing is really all you're doing.  You are giving it more importance because time is coming to an end, but that doesn't mean you get to ignore everything else...yet that's what fans do.

This is the trap that so many people fall into.  They put it all on the last play, the last interception, the last touchdown, the last call as if the rest of the plays, calls, etc are of no consequence and should just be ignored.

Think about it.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Right on, brother. That game was horsecrap.

Game management was everything and Hank couldn't settle the team down. We should have blown them to kingdom come. The fact that with less than five minutes left, Miami of Ohio was STILL a game was a testament to poor coaching and even poorer game management.

That was the 1978 version of a 16 seed upsetting a 1 seed. It was an embarrassment to Marquette University and was the first sign that things weren't right in the basketball department.

We aren't there yet. Buzz has done wonders for our program. But how we come out of where we are -- referees or not -- is everything to our future.

Yet people focus on "the call"...Human nature.  It makes them feel better about the fact we never should have lost that game or come unraveled. It's easier to blame a ref (be it Jim Burr or someone else) than to blame our free throw shooting, or turnovers, or our own missed opportunities.  I don't blame folks, we all fall into the trap. Every one of us.  Human nature.

Interesting that you mention it was equivalent to a 16 vs 1.  Not sure if that is the right comparison, but close.  The key to me is that it was Hank's first tournament and that loss killed us in the perception game.  It was as if MU wasn't MU without Al.  You win that game, maybe a few others, and recruits still come.

The seedings back then were much different.  Each region had the top 4 seeds by automatic bids and then there were top 4 seeds by at large teams as well.  That was the last year the tournament was seeded in such a fashion.  We were the #1 At Large in the Mideast and Miami was the #3 Auto Qualifier.  Western Kentucky was the #4 Auto Qualifer.  So I would equate is more like a 15 vs 2 than a 16 vs 1. 

[ChicosBailBonds]

My only gripe about officiating comes with end of game situations. If it's a foul/infraction at any other part of the game, it's a foul/infraction in the last 2min, 1min, 30sec, whatever. I hate the phrase "refs shouldn't decide the game." Within a small scope, that's correct - they shouldn't overstep their bounds and do something to alter the game. But if a player gets fouled with 10sec to go, and a ref wouldn't hesitate to make that call in the first 5min of the game, then they shouldn't hesitate ever. The rules are there for a reason.

Agree.  A foul in minute 10 should be the same as a foul in the last minute.

I don't know if you heard, but there is a great book called Scorecasting that gets into why this happens.      It really does.  Excellent analysis on why officials do what they do.

[Boozemon Barro]

[ChicosBailBonds]

[dgies9156]

This is the trap that so many people fall into.  They put it all on the last play, the last interception, the last touchdown, the last call as if the rest of the plays, calls, etc are of no consequence and should just be ignored.

Think about it.

I absolutely agree with you. As I noted above, we did not lose to Miami of Ohio because of an inept referee. We failed to manage the game.

In watching several of our losses this year, we lost from coast to coast. From the beginning of the game to the end. From the Ohio State game, where we were down early 19,243-2, or Becky and Creighton, where we furiously came back but dug ourselves a hole so deep in the first half, light didn't get down that far.

Basketball is a 40 minute game. You can look at any game and see a turning point. You lay off the gas, miss a shot or whatever. It's seldom something boneheaded in overtime.

As a final thought, we lost a game in 1969 in OT that would have put us in the final four if only Ric Cobb had hit two free throws in regulation. He hit one. Cobb didn't lose that game. The team did. The whole team. Cobb was just the guy at the end that was most obvious against Purdue.

[keefe]

This is a GREAT movie. Lee Ermey's performance is one for the ages. What's interesting is that Kubrick filmed it entirely in the UK, including scenes from The Nam. Throughout the movie the sky was just wrong, looking entirely like summer in the UK than Parris Island or the tropics. Still, just tremendous cinema.