| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Who will win this game? |
| Aces |
|
27% |
[ 11 ] |
| Mystics |
|
72% |
[ 29 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 40 |
|
| Author |
Message |
NYL_WNBA_FAN
Joined: 28 May 2007
Posts: 14097
Back to top |
 Posted: 09/19/19 6:45 pm ::: |
Reply  |
|
| ClayK wrote: |
The problem at all levels of basketball -- and it's a real one -- is that the officiating is always "crappy and inconsistent." It's almost impossible to see everything, and angles are crucial. If a player blocks the ref's view of contact, then what is she supposed to do? Guess? (Not saying that happened with Plum/EDD by the way.)
I don't think there's a solution, really, and basically, that's the nature of the game. There will always be bad calls, there will always be inconsistency, and there will always be frustration.
On the other hand, if there is a solution, is a way to improve the situation, I'd love to hear it. |
I think the officiating is actually somewhat better honestly. The only two Libs games that I thought were absolutely horrendously officiated were the Libs home game vs. LA and away game in Dallas.
Two things to me that are evidence are IMO better assessment of legal guarding position and the vids the league put out defining moving screens. Moving forward, I’d like to see extended definitions of “outside the box” calls like the one we saw in this game. Maybe also address one “focal point” in each off-season. This year I’d say defining what types of post defense are allowable and what types are excessive would make for a good area of focus.
And I’m a fan of the team with among the worst free throw disparities in the league and in spite of that I still think it’s trending up.
_________________
The poster formerly known as LibWNBAFan.
|
|
myrtle
Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 32336
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/19/19 6:55 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| nsw43 wrote: |
If you look at the video shot from the side showing the whole court, EDD comes straight up the center of the court after hitting her shot. Plum comes up the right side (facing Aces basket) and then suddenly veers left into EDD's path. EDD slows down, almost stops, and raises her hands to indicate she is trying to avoid Plum. Plum heaves a desperation shot and falls down. Time runs out.
If Plum had continued on her initial path, she may have gotten a pretty good look at a 3-point shot and perhaps won the game. Instead she wasted effort and focus by trying to intercept EDD and draw a foul. Maybe she thought she could hit the 2-pointer get an and-one to win the game. Klunky way to do it, and it didn't work.
The refs were erratic all game, but they were right to stuff their whistles at the end. It was a good no-call. |
BS homer bias.
_________________
For there is always light,
if only we’re brave enough to see it.
If only we’re brave enough to be it.
- Amanda Gorman
|
|
Luuuc
#NATC
Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 21937
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/19/19 7:54 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Yeah, that was a foul. Every day of the week.
In general play there is a lot more leeway as to what level of contact actually affects the ball-handler, but when someone is taking a shot it's a whole nother level of protection for the shooter, and so it should be. You graze their arm even slightly, that's a shooting foul. You touch them after the ball has already left their hands and its trajectory can't even be affected by contact, that's still a shooting foul. You run into them from behind with force, it doesn't get much more clear than that. Someone putting their arms up like "I was trying to avoid contact but was unable to" doesn't undo the contact.
It was a blown call. It happens. (More often than usual when EDD is involved, somehow) but it also wasn't the only blown call of the game, and it can't be claimed that it was a game-decider because had the foul been called, the best scenario for Vegas was still taking it to OT.
But that's gotta be a foul. Whoever missed that one probably shouldn't be reffing for the rest of these playoffs.
_________________
Thanks for calling. I wait all night for calls like these.
|
|
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11157
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/20/19 9:22 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| zune69 wrote: |
| ClayK wrote: |
| >I don't think any official would disagree with you -- so how do you get that to happen if it doesn't happen now? |
1. Get rid of the lowest graded officials...and re-train them.
2. Make sure that the officiating is in line with the rule book. We don't need any rogue officials.
3. Ignore the complaints of the Coaches/Players during game action...Any complaints during the game can be addressed during a timeout, halftime or after the game.
4. Officiate the games without letting the fans influence their decision making.
5. Hire strong-minded officials who don't give a bleep what other people think and not officials who are emotional and easily manipulated by the opinions of others.
6. Give the officials bonuses based on Grade/Performance.
7. All officials should have to undergo a psychological evaluation.
| ClayK wrote: |
| >Do you think officials consciously don't make the same judgment calls for both teams? If so, what is their bias? Or, to put it another way, why don't they? |
I think it's both (consciously/subconsciously) I feel that some officials (not all) show slight favoritism towards the home team. As you mentioned in your previous post...Officials have a tendency to respond to crowd pressure...Had the Delle Donne/Plum play took place in Las Vegas they more than likely would've called the foul on EDD. |
First, the NFL is the richest, most important sports league in America -- and the officiating is a constant source of criticism and complaint. If any league could make better officiating happen, it would be the NFL ... and it can't.
1. Get rid of the lowest graded officials...and re-train them.
If officials are fired, who replaces them? And the training for officials at all levels is pretty extensive right now. Even high school officials get lots of input and support, and every WNBA game is gone over by officials' supervisors.
Another way to look at it: You could train a college player to play in the WNBA every day, and it wouldn't be the deciding factor.
2. Make sure that the officiating is in line with the rule book. We don't need any rogue officials.
That's what supervisors are for, and that's what they do.
3. Ignore the complaints of the Coaches/Players during game action...Any complaints during the game can be addressed during a timeout, halftime or after the game.
That's interesting -- in the old days, officials would never even listen to complaints, but the modern theory is to listen so that players and coaches feel heard, and conceivably gather valuable information. We could return to the old standard where any interaction might lead to a T.
4. Officiate the games without letting the fans influence their decision making.
Human nature makes this difficult ...
5. Hire strong-minded officials who don't give a bleep what other people think and not officials who are emotional and easily manipulated by the opinions of others.
And where would these new officials come from?
6. Give the officials bonuses based on Grade/Performance.
Great idea ... I wonder if it happens. I think the officials are unionized, so this is unlikely, though.
7. All officials should have to undergo a psychological evaluation.
And if they fail, will the replacements be any better?
One major issue -- perhaps the major issue -- is a very limited pool of officials to draw from. Nobody wants to get yelled at trying to do an impossible job.
_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
|
|
GlennMacGrady
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 8231
Location: Heisenberg
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/20/19 10:59 am ::: |
Reply |
|
Complaining about officials is the biggest and most useless waste of time, space, words, eyes and ears in all of sports.
Officiating is what it is, what it always has been, and what it always will be: a subjective exercise of judgment by intrinsically fallible human beings that will always have an inexorable and uncorrectable margin of error.
Guess what: For the same reasons, judges and juries in the judicial system operate the same way, with far more serious consequences to the "players" -- except they're not on national TV with video replays. |
|
zune69
Joined: 27 May 2010
Posts: 8183
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/20/19 1:13 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
@Clayk,
I'm sure most of my suggestions/Ideas would hit a roadblock for a number of reasons. But if just 1 or 2 became a reality, It would be a step in the right direction.
|
|
PicknLOL
Joined: 16 Jul 2019
Posts: 149
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/21/19 7:53 am ::: |
Reply |
|
I don't think the solution to problems in officiating is to go after the officials by giving them more of a hard time and raising the bar on what's already a very difficult and thankless job. What might work is adding more officials, or inventing ways to review and correct decisions without affecting the flow of the game less and without extending it to 17 hours. The announcers for the Mystics games have been constantly suggesting the implementation of NFL's couch's challenge the whole season, association football has a VAR official who watches the game on a monitor. So there are things that you could do that don't involve finding superhumans for the job.
At the very least you could allow officials to overturn some things on replays they are already watching – they reversed a foul on Cambage this season during flagrant review on her, which made a lot more sense than “Oh sh... I see that wasn't a foul but an acting job, but I'm not allowed to reverse this...”
However, any changes you make will only result in incremental improvement, and even if it is significant it won't mean the game wouldn't be rife with maddening incorrect calls that still affect the result. If you corrected everything (or even called everything, however correctly that might be) the game might come close to unplayable and unwatchable. I've seen correcting errors within the correctable time window play out twice this and last year, and even that is already super-annoying.
|
|
Randy
Joined: 08 Oct 2011
Posts: 10911
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/21/19 9:49 am ::: |
Reply |
|
I think ClayK's idea on using tech to make some calls easier and quicker (e.g. out of bounds, 3-point line) would help, but may be pretty hard to do. Baseball came up with a rule - no arguing balls and strikes. Basketball should have a rule - no arguing fouls or no-fouls. Giving each side a limited number of call reviews is also a good idea - but no limits on what can be reviewed.
TBH - I can't see why anyone would even consider being a ref. The pay is lousy, travel is difficult, and the workplace is not very appealing to say the least.
|
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66937
Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/21/19 10:03 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| Randy wrote: |
| TBH - I can't see why anyone would even consider being a ref. The pay is lousy, travel is difficult, and the workplace is not very appealing to say the least. |
They love the game and want to stay in it, but aren't good enough to play at this level.
Also, many of them start local as a side job, so the travel and money aren't as big of a deal. Most officials never move beyond that level.
_________________
I'm a lonely frog
I ain't got a home
|
|
myrtle
Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 32336
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/21/19 11:41 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| pilight wrote: |
| Randy wrote: |
| TBH - I can't see why anyone would even consider being a ref. The pay is lousy, travel is difficult, and the workplace is not very appealing to say the least. |
They love the game and want to stay in it, but aren't good enough to play at this level.
Also, many of them start local as a side job, so the travel and money aren't as big of a deal. Most officials never move beyond that level. |
I did it locally for several years. It had its ups and downs. It is fun to stay around the game in some capacity. People were reffing for lots of different reasons, but of course nobody's livelihood depended on it or they would have been in trouble altho some of them were clearly trying to do it mainly to supplement their income. They would fight over the 'plum' higher paying jobs. I barely made gas money. I was the only woman for some time, then there was one other...in a group of around 50. Some were really macho dudes liking to be in control. One guy was called Blind Bob for a reason- by all the coaches from grade school up thru high school. I reffed one game on the border with another state and a coach from 150 miles outside our territory called a timeout after less than three minutes, asked me to come over, and asked me if my partner was the Blind Bob he had heard about. It was. It's hard to describe just how terrible he was.
The thing is that EVERYBODY makes mistakes, but at the pro level, and college as well, where even if it's not reviewable, a call/non-call can be shown over and over on tv or on the big screen so everybody can see if you make a mistake, the pressure is a lot higher.
_________________
For there is always light,
if only we’re brave enough to see it.
If only we’re brave enough to be it.
- Amanda Gorman
|
|
tfan
Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 9641
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/23/19 1:39 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| GlennMacGrady wrote: |
| Complaining about officials is the biggest and most useless waste of time, space, words, eyes and ears in all of sports. |
Beyond game-changing calls that don’t pass scrutiny, complaining about officials seems to be something that helps enliven the spectating experience. Or maybe that should be that it helps spectators pass the time. Similar to going to a soccer stadium and banging a drum or reciting a chant.
|
|
|
|
