• Welcome to BradleyFans.com! Visitors are welcome, but we encourage you to sign up and register as a member. It's free and takes only a few seconds. Just click on the link to Register at the top right of the page, and follow instructions. If you have any problems or questions, click on the link at the bottom right of the page to Contact Us.

Should refs swallow whistle in final seconds?

B

BUSongwriter

New member
After the controversial illegal screen call on UConn with just four seconds left in last night's women's Final Four game with Iowa, I'd be interested in what people on this board think about calls in the final seconds of close games. Where do you stand?

A) A foul is a foul whether it happens with five minutes left or five seconds. Or

B) In the final seconds with the game on the line, unless the foul is especially flagrant, swallow the whistle and let the players play it out.

I vote for "A". Otherwise, when does the "no call" go into effect? 15 seconds? 10 seconds? 5? 2? And what do you let go because as a ref you don't want to "decide the game" . . . a travel? A really close foot on the out-of-bounds line?

I also realize part of the debate is whether the UConn player's screen was a foul in the first place. But this is something that comes up all the time and I think we've all seen it work both ways.
 
BUSongwriter said:
After the controversial illegal screen call on UConn with just four seconds left in last night's women's Final Four game with Iowa, I'd be interested in what people on this board think about calls in the final seconds of close games. Where do you stand?

A) A foul is a foul whether it happens with five minutes left or five seconds. Or

B) In the final seconds with the game on the line, unless the foul is especially flagrant, swallow the whistle and let the players play it out.

I vote for "A". Otherwise, when does the "no call" go into effect? 15 seconds? 10 seconds? 5? 2? And what do you let go because as a ref you don't want to "decide the game" . . . a travel? A really close foot on the out-of-bounds line?

I also realize part of the debate is whether the UConn player's screen was a foul in the first place. But this is something that comes up all the time and I think we've all seen it work both ways.
Click to expand...

I saw nothing wrong with the call. She thought she was playing football and threw a body block. They are supposed to be set and not moving
 
Option B should be in place for the entire game every game. Nobody goes to the game to watch the refs and too many games have a whistle a minute.
 
I did not like that call because I did not see that it was an illegal screen. I believe in A but if you are going to make a call at the end it has to be consistent with everything you have called in that game. The game was very physical and plenty of times the refs could have called illegal screens and did not which is why I felt that screen was as legal as most in that game.
I felt UCONN should have been given the opportunity to at least have the chance at making the winning basket.
Finally I did not care who won that game and it was a terrific game played by both teams, just wish that call was not made at the end .
 
As an incredibly biased observer (check out the screen name), a foul is a foul. Period. My teams have lost more than they’ve won due to late fouls over the years. I don’t get the whole “it’s late in the game so the rules are different.” It’s a weak argument and excuse.

I’ve seen that illegal screen replay from every possible angle…and it’s a textbook foul. Heck, if you watch Gabbie Marshall’s reaction, she celebrated instinctively as she immediately knew what an illegal screen felt like as a defender.

If teams were flipped, yeah, I’d be pissed about the call in the moment, no question. But the next day would have tried to back up my argument that the foul shouldn’t have been called, and seen those replays. Pissed…but wrong.
 
Looked like a good call to me. Call it, regardless of time remaining, as long as the foul affected the play. In this case it did.
 
Games/titles/legacies can be changed all in a call or no call in the final seconds. It's just the way the game goes. Could of been a foul easily on Indiana States 3 point attempts in the end, and in the women's game last night could of easily been a no call.

The way a game is officiated shouldn't be changed because it's "crunch time". At least, I think most would agree with that. However, the game itself literally doesn't agree with that, as there are certain rules that only apply to crunch time (such as replay availability).

I think (for the most part, sorry to speak so broadly) all we as fans want is consistency, and unfortunately, so long as there are grey areas and humans officiating (we are only human after all) we won't ever get it. You can layer all the rules you want, there will still be questions and doubts. In fact, it feels the more cameras/replays/rules we have the more the officiating mistakes are highlighted and deemed "game altering".

Seems we never worry about officiating outcomes as time goes on (we don't view historical records of sports with asterisks due to officiating). It may feel bad or hurt immediately, but it's just the way the game goes. Just imagine all the mistakes with clocks and stuff that must of happened decades ago. You just move on.

However, I believe baseball will be the first "perfectly officiated game" as the human element seemingly can be taken out of officiating the game more easily then the rest. However, even when that happens, many will still be unhappy. We shall see. ​

All in all, in life all things you love have imperfections as well. Sports is not immune. We learn to take them for the good and the bad and all things in-between. In my opinion, a game like basketball is too fluid to ever be perfectly officiated, so it isn't worth the stress of even trying to. Other game like baseball, may prove to be a different story.
 
A. You follow the rulebook. It was a foul. Period. The rule book is very specific about positioning on a pick. Feet and shoulders parallel with no movement. The player in this scenario had legs wide open and moved her shoulder into the defensive player. If they don’t call it the defending team has a gripe. At least, as an official, if you decide to call the foul, you have the rule book to fall back on. If you swallow your whistle, you just “missed the call” or “let them play”. Both hurt the entire profession and integrity of the game.
 
I would say A.
As to the play last night, I felt it was a foul as it looked like, to me, that she brought her left arm out as the Iowa player passed by.
 
BUSongwriter said:
After the controversial illegal screen call on UConn with just four seconds left in last night's women's Final Four game with Iowa, I'd be interested in what people on this board think about calls in the final seconds of close games. Where do you stand?

A) A foul is a foul whether it happens with five minutes left or five seconds. Or

B) In the final seconds with the game on the line, unless the foul is especially flagrant, swallow the whistle and let the players play it out.

I vote for "A". Otherwise, when does the "no call" go into effect? 15 seconds? 10 seconds? 5? 2? And what do you let go because as a ref you don't want to "decide the game" . . . a travel? A really close foot on the out-of-bounds line?

I also realize part of the debate is whether the UConn player's screen was a foul in the first place. But this is something that comes up all the time and I think we've all seen it work both ways.
Click to expand...

A.) is the only correct answer period. Officials are put on games to officiate games by the rules and players decide whether to abide by the rules. That play last night was clearly an illegal screen and should have been called at any time in the game. It just so happens the UConn girl picked a very poor time to do it. B.} should never come into play in that situation.Period.
 
Every game is officiated differently, I just want consistency throughout the game.

It sucks to see a one possession game decided by a foul, but I think it was the right thing to do.
 
bradleyfan124 said:
I saw nothing wrong with the call. She thought she was playing football and threw a body block. They are supposed to be set and not moving
Click to expand...

Yep - there is a big fuss on social media now with people who are furious that it was not a foul. Probably too many people watching too much NBA!
 
People would have been mad if it wasn't called. You cant throw your shoulder into the player and I am one of the biggest complainers on moving screens.:eek:
 
LittleBrave said:
Yep - there is a big fuss on social media now with people who are furious that it was not a foul. Probably too many people watching too much NBA!
Click to expand...

Yes, or playing too much in the NBA, was my thought on seeing LeBron’s reply. My opinion, which I know is just crazy old man talk to anyone under 30 who watches the NBA, is that every time someone wins with a “can’t call ‘em all” strategy the officiating shifts a bit to the detriment of the game. The NBA is way over the line, but watching more women’s games this year reminded me how the college men’s game has shifted as well. But that’s another topic.

On topic, though: back in the 90’s I watched the Bulls eliminate the Sixers in a large room of Bulls fans on a college campus watching on a big screen. Now I generally rooted for the Bulls but nothing could trump my loyalty to Hersey. And when he got open under the basket for what should have been the game winning shot at the buzzer, all Michael could do was mug him from behind. I’m still sore about that whistle swallowing!
 
Plays or calls that negatively impact a game happen throughout the game. Not just in the last few minutes or seconds. Why would these calls be treated any differently. I always feel bad for the field goal kicker who misses the last second field goal to win the game and gets the blame for the loss. Why didn’t the offense build up enough of a lead earlier in the game and the defense hold off the opponent from scoring.
 
If UConn had won on a wide open 3 that was only wide open because of an illegal screen then Iowa fans would be complaining, for good reason. If a ref's gonna call something at the beginning he/she should make that same call at the end.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top