WBB: Michigan Intercollegiate Athletics Association

[Roundball999]

I was at the game and just reviewed the replay and I saw something very different.  No contact on the shot and the CNU shooter falling from being off balance after the shot and the Hope player turning and putting a body on her to box out.  As you said, the ref was right there and made no call.  From my perspective and vantage point, it would have been a terrible call had it been made.  But at this point there's little value in debating individual calls, one can just as easily look at the video and see heavy contact on the press throughout the game and argue that many more fouls could have been called than were.  But in my view it was just two very good teams that battled hard and the refs letting them play with just enough calls to keep the game under control.

[Swish3]

This ^^^ ... too many people think fouls should be equal. TOO many people (drives me nuts at games when that is a popular call out).

Hope played well, but CNU was aggressive and usually aggressive teams cause more fouls. Kind of like seeing a foul discrepancy for a team playing against a man-to-man and attacking versus the other team playing against a zone and passing around the perimeter. No, not saying that's what happened in this game, but point out that styles of play dictate foul totals... not rules that say it is supposed to be even headed.

Go back and read what I said, Dave...I said I expect CNU to have more fouls than their opponents, but not twice as many.  Per FDF, they average 20.1 fouls per game...being called for 8 above their average is a lot...Hope shooting 24 more free throws is hard to defend.   

You can expect more calls... you just can't also have a line of demarcation as to how many is enough. A team shooting more FTs is easy to defend if a team is fouling more often especially on drives by Hope. The discrepency... needs to stop being an arguing point. FTs come from more fouls being called and another team being both aggressive on defense and the other on offense. It happens. It is part of the game. The fact they should be closer than they are is an argument I don't like. It makes it seem the officials should even the calls out or the FT attempts. I think that is a BS reasoning.

Nobody has a line, but when it's that lopsided and the statistics support it, I can sure as heck conclude that it was excessive.  Whether you like it or not, there are times when this is a completely legitimate issue...CNU is aggressive offensively, as well.  Per their website, they averaged 24 FT attempts per game, while their opponents averaged 20...so, CNU attempted 14 less and Hope 14 more.  Am I to believe that they played this game any differently than the others?  That's a big spread, particularly in a close game....   

[Swish3]

This ^^^ ... too many people think fouls should be equal. TOO many people (drives me nuts at games when that is a popular call out).

Hope played well, but CNU was aggressive and usually aggressive teams cause more fouls. Kind of like seeing a foul discrepancy for a team playing against a man-to-man and attacking versus the other team playing against a zone and passing around the perimeter. No, not saying that's what happened in this game, but point out that styles of play dictate foul totals... not rules that say it is supposed to be even headed.

Go back and read what I said, Dave...I said I expect CNU to have more fouls than their opponents, but not twice as many.  Per FDF, they average 20.1 fouls per game...being called for 8 above their average is a lot...Hope shooting 24 more free throws is hard to defend.   

Swish, the referees are not there to keep the score close or give teams an equal number of free throws. The referees are there to enforce the rules of the game. Nothing more, nothing less. On top of that, they are only human, even more so at the division three level.

Agreed, but compared to the season statistics, this game was an anomaly....

[Flying Dutch Fan]

This ^^^ ... too many people think fouls should be equal. TOO many people (drives me nuts at games when that is a popular call out).

Hope played well, but CNU was aggressive and usually aggressive teams cause more fouls. Kind of like seeing a foul discrepancy for a team playing against a man-to-man and attacking versus the other team playing against a zone and passing around the perimeter. No, not saying that's what happened in this game, but point out that styles of play dictate foul totals... not rules that say it is supposed to be even headed.

Go back and read what I said, Dave...I said I expect CNU to have more fouls than their opponents, but not twice as many.  Per FDF, they average 20.1 fouls per game...being called for 8 above their average is a lot...Hope shooting 24 more free throws is hard to defend.   

You can expect more calls... you just can't also have a line of demarcation as to how many is enough. A team shooting more FTs is easy to defend if a team is fouling more often especially on drives by Hope. The discrepency... needs to stop being an arguing point. FTs come from more fouls being called and another team being both aggressive on defense and the other on offense. It happens. It is part of the game. The fact they should be closer than they are is an argument I don't like. It makes it seem the officials should even the calls out or the FT attempts. I think that is a BS reasoning.

Nobody has a line, but when it's that lopsided and the statistics support it, I can sure as heck conclude that it was excessive.  Whether you like it or not, there are times when this is a completely legitimate issue...CNU is aggressive offensively, as well.  Per their website, they averaged 24 FT attempts per game, while their opponents averaged 20...so, CNU attempted 14 less and Hope 14 more.  Am I to believe that they played this game any differently than the others?  That's a big spread, particularly in a close game....

So let's assume the game is being called differently than the norm for CNU - heck that happens to lots of teams in this tournament.  Different officials from different conferences call things differently - it was different for Hope as well.  Players and teams need to adjust to what is being called or suffer the consequences.  Agree or disagree on the fouls being called - the officials were certainly consistent throughout the game - IMHO.

[Swish3]

I was at the game and just reviewed the replay and I saw something very different.  No contact on the shot and the CNU shooter falling from being off balance after the shot and the Hope player turning and putting a body on her to box out.  As you said, the ref was right there and made no call.  From my perspective and vantage point, it would have been a terrible call had it been made.  But at this point there's little value in debating individual calls, one can just as easily look at the video and see heavy contact on the press throughout the game and argue that many more fouls could have been called than were.  But in my view it was just two very good teams that battled hard and the refs letting them play with just enough calls to keep the game under control.

If she was off balance, it was because the Hope defender got up under her right arm and didn't allow her to come down...sure, both of us could review the video and argue calls, or lack there of, but this one seemed pretty obvious and it wasn't called, which is inexcusable, particularly when the ref is right there on top of it.

[Swish3]

This ^^^ ... too many people think fouls should be equal. TOO many people (drives me nuts at games when that is a popular call out).

Hope played well, but CNU was aggressive and usually aggressive teams cause more fouls. Kind of like seeing a foul discrepancy for a team playing against a man-to-man and attacking versus the other team playing against a zone and passing around the perimeter. No, not saying that's what happened in this game, but point out that styles of play dictate foul totals... not rules that say it is supposed to be even headed.

Go back and read what I said, Dave...I said I expect CNU to have more fouls than their opponents, but not twice as many.  Per FDF, they average 20.1 fouls per game...being called for 8 above their average is a lot...Hope shooting 24 more free throws is hard to defend.   

You can expect more calls... you just can't also have a line of demarcation as to how many is enough. A team shooting more FTs is easy to defend if a team is fouling more often especially on drives by Hope. The discrepency... needs to stop being an arguing point. FTs come from more fouls being called and another team being both aggressive on defense and the other on offense. It happens. It is part of the game. The fact they should be closer than they are is an argument I don't like. It makes it seem the officials should even the calls out or the FT attempts. I think that is a BS reasoning.

Nobody has a line, but when it's that lopsided and the statistics support it, I can sure as heck conclude that it was excessive.  Whether you like it or not, there are times when this is a completely legitimate issue...CNU is aggressive offensively, as well.  Per their website, they averaged 24 FT attempts per game, while their opponents averaged 20...so, CNU attempted 14 less and Hope 14 more.  Am I to believe that they played this game any differently than the others?  That's a big spread, particularly in a close game....

So let's assume the game is being called differently than the norm for CNU - heck that happens to lots of teams in this tournament.  Different officials from different conferences call things differently - it was different for Hope as well.  Players and teams need to adjust to what is being called or suffer the consequences.  Agree or disagree on the fouls being called - the officials were certainly consistent throughout the game - IMHO.

How so?

...and, yes, I agree that they were consistently bad.

[Dutchfan]

Swish, this is not an anomaly. It's happened before. In fact, this was the sixth time that CNU got called for more than 25 fouls. At Marymount, CNU got called for 30 fouls and Marymount was called for 20, leading Marymount to shoot 42 free throws, twice what CNU did.

Swish, if the Hope game is worthy of complaint, then an NCAA investigation should be opened into the game at Salisbury, where CNU was flagged for just 7 fouls while Salisbury was called for 25 fouls. This lead to CNU shooting 22 more free throws than Salisbury in a game that CNU won by 16 points.

[Roundball999]

I was at the game and just reviewed the replay and I saw something very different.  No contact on the shot and the CNU shooter falling from being off balance after the shot and the Hope player turning and putting a body on her to box out.  As you said, the ref was right there and made no call.  From my perspective and vantage point, it would have been a terrible call had it been made.  But at this point there's little value in debating individual calls, one can just as easily look at the video and see heavy contact on the press throughout the game and argue that many more fouls could have been called than were.  But in my view it was just two very good teams that battled hard and the refs letting them play with just enough calls to keep the game under control.

If she was off balance, it was because the Hope defender got up under her right arm and didn't allow her to come down...sure, both of us could review the video and argue calls, or lack there of, but this one seemed pretty obvious and it wasn't called, which is inexcusable, particularly when the ref is right there on top of it.

This is my point about perspectives.  In my view it was quite clearly not a foul, she was off balance as she shot (before the Hope defender was there) and there was a fair amount of theatrics, which is only a smart move on her part.  The fact that the ref was right there does more to support the idea that there was no foul than it supports the idea that the ref intentionally ignored a foul.  But I know we won't resolve these differing perspectives.

In any case, congratulations to both the CNU and Hope women on fine seasons.  As they say, everyone but one team ends the season with a loss.

[Swish3]

Swish, this is not an anomaly. It's happened before. In fact, this was the sixth time that CNU got called for more than 25 fouls. At Marymount, CNU got called for 30 fouls and Marymount was called for 20, leading Marymount to shoot 42 free throws, twice what CNU did.

Swish, if the Hope game is worthy of complaint, then an NCAA investigation should be opened into the game at Salisbury, where CNU was flagged for just 7 fouls while Salisbury was called for 25 fouls. This lead to CNU shooting 22 more free throws than Salisbury in a game that CNU won by 16 points.

In those five games you referenced, show me where CNU was called for twice as many fouls as their opponents and where they shot less than 3 times as many free throws as their opponents....

As for the Salisbury game, I completely agree w/you...if a Salisbury fan brought it up, I could certainly understand their point...just because CNU was on the better end of that scenario, it doesn't make it okay.

[Swish3]

I was at the game and just reviewed the replay and I saw something very different.  No contact on the shot and the CNU shooter falling from being off balance after the shot and the Hope player turning and putting a body on her to box out.  As you said, the ref was right there and made no call.  From my perspective and vantage point, it would have been a terrible call had it been made.  But at this point there's little value in debating individual calls, one can just as easily look at the video and see heavy contact on the press throughout the game and argue that many more fouls could have been called than were.  But in my view it was just two very good teams that battled hard and the refs letting them play with just enough calls to keep the game under control.

If she was off balance, it was because the Hope defender got up under her right arm and didn't allow her to come down...sure, both of us could review the video and argue calls, or lack there of, but this one seemed pretty obvious and it wasn't called, which is inexcusable, particularly when the ref is right there on top of it.

This is my point about perspectives.  In my view it was quite clearly not a foul, she was off balance as she shot (before the Hope defender was there) and there was a fair amount of theatrics, which is only a smart move on her part.  The fact that the ref was right there does more to support the idea that there was no foul than it supports the idea that the ref intentionally ignored a foul.  But I know we won't resolve these differing perspectives.

In any case, congratulations to both the CNU and Hope women on fine seasons.  As they say, everyone but one team ends the season with a loss.

No doubt....

Congrats to Hope, as well...until we meet again.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

There is an individual in charge of all officials. They review everything now in Division III. I assure you, even if an investigation was not asked for, they are looking over the tape. I'll give you a hint on what the outcome is: if one or more of the officials in that game are in the final four, the evaluators had a different opinion than you, Swish.

That said, that isn't the overall indicator. There were 48 officials working games last weekend. There are only 12 individuals needed this upcoming weekend... plus the scenario of trying to avoid officials who worked games of teams involved. It starts to get complicated, so my scenario may not come true for a lot of other reasons - not necessarily their grade.

However, they were also working this game because they have proven to be good officials who should be in that situation. We aren't talking about bad officials in the tournament anymore.

Just a note - we might be DIII, but there are a lot of officials who work DIII games who also work DI games... and high school. If they are good enough, they are working all levels because they are wanted... and they want to.

[dykstraj@hope.edu]

Attendance for the sectional weekend games at DeVos Fieldhouse was 5218 .

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

Attendance for the sectional weekend games at DeVos Fieldhouse was 5218 .

Well that's disappointing... I really expected there to be another digit.

LOL Well done Holland and Western Michigan. Games there are pretty good... when Hope is playing in them.

[sac]

This whole thing about CNU/Hope foul and FT disparity can be answered with advanced stats

FT Rate%
Thomas More                27.8            24.4
Gustavus-Adolphus       28.4           30.2
Hope                             34.3            23.1
Christopher Newport    33.3            37.6



both teams get to the foul line a relatively healthy amount of the time (first column),  Hope does not typically put its opponents on the line, CNU does put their opponents on the line a lot (second column)

Nothing happened in the Hope/CNU game that went against the season norms in the 2nd column.

[Swish3]

The fact is, not one time in 29 games was CNU called for twice as many fouls and shot less than 3 times the amount of free throws...if you care to, watch the press conference w/CNU's coach...it's obvious to me he took issue w/the officiating, as well.

Anyway, I've said my piece...take care, everyone.