[Schfourteenteen]

Okay although I agree with SJ and fact is refs didnt lose us that game and we need to move on that is one of the worst analogies i have ever heard.... Now if you said you were forced to eat cake everyday by your family that would work better: Even though the cake doesnt help, fact is its not the only reason you are you sized (Dont take offense you opened it up...)

[SuperJon]

That's an ongoing phrase that I have said on here for over a year. Is it a legitimate phrase once you disect it? Maybe not, but most people know what I'm talking about.

[prototype]

Good Post HMO! The officiating has been bad all year. LU has been on the opposite end all year and the weird thing is I haven't seen Duke. Maybe he wasn't that bad after all:)

[thepostman]

I say no because I don't think the officiating favored either team...it was bad both ways....as SJ said, we lost this game because of poor defense the entire night including terrible transition defense at the end of that game....

and now the team hasn't responded since...

[Purple Haize]

Let's see, 15 missed calls that were pointed out after several reviews of the game film. I didn't see the game but if they only missed 15 calls, some of which were not that egregious, than I would say they did a good job. Take into account the following:
1. How many TOTAL calls were made during the game? Out of bounds, violations, fouls, 3pt fg's etc. That is a pretty good number in the grand scheme of things.
2. It mentioned two out of bounds calls that were incorrect. That, if you ask ANY official is the hardest call to get right on a 'bang/bang" play.
3. How does "Technical Deserved" rate in the missed call list?
4. How does this prove LU got hosed? In this game it looks like there were more missed calls (somewhere there is a logical non sequitor) in CCU 's favor. But does it prove intent? Absolutely not. From the list I see, these are all common "mistakes" that ANY official no matter where they are calling can make.

Of course officials want to get better. There are evaluators at just about every game. I know that when I get a chance I always look at the tape to see what I missed, what I got right etc. If I don't come off the floor with at least a handful of plays that I want to take a look at than I am not doing my job. Also, and this is sort of ironic, why is it that the officials are expected to be perfect yet the participants are not? What is the difference between RD going through game film sayin "We should do this better, we missed that screen, that defensive assignment etc" and officials doing the same thing? Please feel free to yell at officials all you want (more creative ones are appreciated quite fankly) but when you want to sit down and nit pick, take the "Big Picture" into account. I am willing to bet that these officials got at least 90% of their calls correct. Can either team say they executed with 90% efficiency?

[bigsmooth]

no kidding LUconn say hello my friend! the game was bad both ways, but the information regarding the game does show it was bad against the home team.

[WWJFD]

I just wonder if RD is developing a repuation for complaining about the refs??? I think he filed something after the Longwood game as well. I spoke to a ref the other night and there are many refs that hold grudges. He also made a great point. The referees have a long season as well. At the end of the year, they are tired; they have been chewed on all season; and there can be a tendency for refs to have a little less patience on what is being said from the sidelines. Sounds like a phych. course. Hope that makes sense.

[Hold My Own]

Let's see, 15 missed calls that were pointed out after several reviews of the game film. I didn't see the game but if they only missed 15 calls, some of which were not that egregious, than I would say they did a good job. Take into account the following:
1. How many TOTAL calls were made during the game? Out of bounds, violations, fouls, 3pt fg's etc. That is a pretty good number in the grand scheme of things.
2. It mentioned two out of bounds calls that were incorrect. That, if you ask ANY official is the hardest call to get right on a 'bang/bang" play.
3. How does "Technical Deserved" rate in the missed call list?
4. How does this prove LU got hosed? In this game it looks like there were more missed calls (somewhere there is a logical non sequitor) in CCU 's favor. But does it prove intent? Absolutely not. From the list I see, these are all common "mistakes" that ANY official no matter where they are calling can make.

Of course officials want to get better. There are evaluators at just about every game. I know that when I get a chance I always look at the tape to see what I missed, what I got right etc. If I don't come off the floor with at least a handful of plays that I want to take a look at than I am not doing my job. Also, and this is sort of ironic, why is it that the officials are expected to be perfect yet the participants are not? What is the difference between RD going through game film sayin "We should do this better, we missed that screen, that defensive assignment etc" and officials doing the same thing? Please feel free to yell at officials all you want (more creative ones are appreciated quite fankly) but when you want to sit down and nit pick, take the "Big Picture" into account. I am willing to bet that these officials got at least 90% of their calls correct. Can either team say they executed with 90% efficiency?

This is from Forte....email him at his NBA.COM address if you want further details


Geeeeeez your such an apologist for officials! At least just say....dang, that's coming from one of the most respected officials in the country

[LUconn]

Sorry, it's just a weird thing. It would be strange going up to someone who you've never met before, "Hello, you may know me as LUconn, I suspect you may be HoldMyOwn, and you Big Smooth?" If it wasn't you I'd probably have to leave the area.

[WWJFD]

Sounds straight out of some Dukes of Hazard. Lost Sheep to Bo Peep you seen Shephard.

[Purple Haize]

I am not sure, is Joe a BS evaluator? But again, the opinion is being expressed by someone who obviously is experienced by watching video tape, with no need to make a snap decision (which means the rewind and replay buttons are getting a work out) I am not arguine whether the calls that were pointed out were right or wrong, I am just making the point that if you take THOSE calls in the entirety of the game, ONLY missing 14 (not putting TECH DESERVED as a missed call) is not that bad.

[Hold My Own]

Sorry, it's just a weird thing. It would be strange going up to someone who you've never met before, "Hello, you may know me as LUconn, I suspect you may be HoldMyOwn, and you Big Smooth?" If it wasn't you I'd probably have to leave the area.

Well, you could be like PA and have a Tshirt made saying PAMEDIC across the front

[Libertine]

Sorry, it's just a weird thing. It would be strange going up to someone who you've never met before, "Hello, you may know me as LUconn, I suspect you may be HoldMyOwn, and you Big Smooth?" If it wasn't you I'd probably have to leave the area.

Big Smooth is unmistakable. He just looks like a big smooth.

[PAmedic]

Sorry, it's just a weird thing. It would be strange going up to someone who you've never met before, "Hello, you may know me as LUconn, I suspect you may be HoldMyOwn, and you Big Smooth?" If it wasn't you I'd probably have to leave the area.

Well, you could be like PA and have a Tshirt made saying PAMEDIC across the front

worked like a charm, too.

wear said shirt to game and you then have 2 options:

1. (Discreet) walk up to person you suspect may be "friendly" . Make eye contact and open jacket slightly so logo on shirt is visible. If they recognize name they will immediately break into conversation, which includes hilarious comment about shirt.
If you have ID'd wrong person, they will either clutch their children tightly and walk quickly away or assume you are pulling a gun on them and hit the floor.

2. (Overt- the method I chose, shockingly enough) Visually locate your target within close proximity where you can be clearly seen. Hit up your target on the cell at said sporting event. When they answer the phone, direct them to turn around.
Be wearing your personalized T in a conspicuous manner (say: without pants)
If they fall over in histerics, they've seen you and recognize you. Never fails.



You're welcome.

[Purple Haize]

I don't know PA I would be VERY leery of someone sporting a porn 'stache coming up behind me and flashing me through their jacket. But that is just me

[Casper]

I think whoever Dunton sent the appeal complaining about the refs to should reply to RD by sending him a Transition Defense Instructional Video. That was the real problem.

[Purple Haize]

I am not sure he actaully sent an appeal. Maybe HMO or TBGB or Manger can clarify. The issue with submitting video for review is that if you do it too often it is like crying WOLF. THere are VERY few egregious officiating guffaws so if you keep sending a tape in , when/if one actually happens you won't have as much credibility. Not saying that a certain coach with another team didn't have that problem early on.

[mrich]

I think whoever Dunton sent the appeal complaining about the refs to should reply to RD by sending him a Transition Defense Instructional Video. That was the real problem.

Ouch