A Conscious Design by the NCAA to Allow More Physical Play and Therefore Call Less Fouls in the Final Four? | The Boneyard

A Conscious Design by the NCAA to Allow More Physical Play and Therefore Call Less Fouls in the Final Four?

B

BBallF

Joined
Jan 7, 2020
Messages
4,242
Reaction Score
29,336
I was watching the UCLA v. Texas game and I could not believe what I was seeing. At one point a guard from UCLA with the ball deliberately knocked over a player on Texas with a stiff arm right in front of the referee and there was no call. It looks like they passed the word to "let them play" but to what extent can that be fairly implemented? That was certainly true in our game. Unfortunately, it does not help the elegance and optics of the game and also leads to low scoring, sloppy games and a different product than the regular season. Halftime score UCLA 20 - Texas 17. Final 51-44. Texas shot 30% from the field. UCLA only had 44 shots but made 20, thanks to Betts underneath. We shot 31%, SC 37%. Two very low scoring games. When you hold, grab, muscle, and foul, the scoring will drop as it did. It would be a very high level of coincidence that both games were randomly called exactly the same way. It actually appears plausible that word was passed to the referees in both games either by the NCAA or otherwise to call the games a certain way and the question is whether the result of that did anything to promote the game. I don't think it showcased anything except physicality and the poor quality of the referees. I very much doubt if the mens games will be called that way tonight. In fact, we all know they would never tolerate that.
 
BBallF said:
I was watching the UCLA v. Texas game and I could not believe what I was seeing. At one point a guard from UCLA with the ball deliberately knocked over a player on Texas with a stiff arm right in front of the referee and there was no call. It looks like they passed the word to "let them play" but to what extent can that be fairly implemented? That was certainly true in our game. Unfortunately, it does not help the elegance and optics of the game and also leads to low scoring, sloppy games and a different product than the regular season. Halftime score UCLA 20 - Texas 17. Final 51-44. Texas shot 30% from the field. UCLA only had 44 shots but made 20, thanks to Betts underneath. We shot 31%, SC 37%. Two very low scoring games. When you hold, grab, muscle, and foul, the scoring will drop as it did. It would be a very high level of coincidence that both games were randomly called exactly the same way. It actually appears plausible that word was passed to the referees in both games either by the NCAA or otherwise to call the games a certain way and the question is whether the result of that did anything to promote the game. I don't think it showcased anything except physicality and the poor quality of the referees. I very much doubt if the mens games will be called that way tonight. In fact, we all know they would never tolerate that.
Expand ...
You have hit upon something. IMO I think that the NCAA is definitely the culprit doing something they thought would help (perhaps to make the women's game more like the men's? or whatever they were seeking) but instead drastically worsening the Final Four product.
 
If this idea is not true, then what is the explanation for the low scores and shooting percentages? In the absence of a better, simpler hypothesis, you have to come back to a theory that involves "somebody" deciding that these games were the preferred visual. Who is that? What possessed them? Did they seek advice? Who gave that advice?
Is this visual something that benefits TV programming? Does is assure that games will end on time? That they'll get all the commercial breaks they want to be paid for? Who else does it potentially benefit? The players? The game?
This doesn't work for me. Outta here for now.
 
Lots of comments last season in the W about excessive physical contact, including by Geno. The idea being that the contact takes away the skills, beauty, and elegance of the best players. IMO there's a line. Too far one way and it's figure skating and too much the other way and it's mud wrestling. Maybe the NBA has found a reasonable balance. Maybe OKC is the ideal in this regard. Celtics maybe, they're not just hoisting 3's this year.
Old farts like me have grown up with the effect of hand-checking and how the rules around it have evolved.
Grabbing, pushing, shoving have never been allowed. Bad Boys in Detroit?
3 of the 4 semifinal teams shot in the 30's FG%. Games in the 40's and 50's. Sorry, not aesthetically pleasing! I thought there was a thought about growing the women's game. Powers that be- you didn't get the memo!!
 
.-.
I don't think that it's conspiracy thinking or paranoia to observe that these games have been very physical and refs have not reined it in. It would be illogical to think that the refs have done this on their own. Hence, it's most likely that the NCAA or some other supervisory entity has directed or indicated that this is the way they want the games called (& therefore, played).
 
Not blaming the refs at all as we shot poorly. But if physical play is permitted, even encouraged, then why did USC get so many more fouls called in their favor than UCONN? I mean, USC supposedly plays in a physical conference all year long so you would expect them to be more physical than UCONN. I thought ESPN failed to show replays on some UCONN fouls that seemed ticky-tack. Allie was called for one outside the play and I don't recall a replay being shown. Look, we probably lose the game anyway the way we were shooting but Geno's complaint may be valid. His comments after the 3rd quarter suggested he felt the refs were intimidated by Dawn's constant badgering. As he said in so many words, unless you're on the sideline you have no idea what's going on (on the USC sideline).
 
Lynx23 said:
Not blaming the refs at all as we shot poorly. But if physical play is permitted, even encouraged, then why did USC get so many more fouls called in their favor than UCONN? I mean, USC supposedly plays in a physical conference all year long so you would expect them to be more physical than UCONN. I thought ESPN failed to show replays on some UCONN fouls that seemed ticky-tack. Allie was called for one outside the play and I don't recall a replay being shown. Look, we probably lose the game anyway the way we were shooting but Geno's complaint may be valid. His comments after the 3rd quarter suggested he felt the refs were intimidated by Dawn's constant badgering. As he said in so many words, unless you're on the sideline you have no idea what's going on (on the USC sideline).
Expand ...
This is what I was thinking last night. Both teams played physical, however there were some "brush' fouls called that had very little contact. Now since they didn't show replays, could the defender have grabbed an arm? Possibly. However there were two plays by Azzi and Ash where I was surprised at the no call, and a whole bunch of physicality towards Sarah and Azzi where I though 1-2 whistles might have cleaned it up. For years, Geno has been opining on the whole freedom of movement concept, and it seems that each year, officiating has 1-2 focal points during a season, however I don't think it's is consistent from the beginning to end.
 
UConn plays very physical too. I feel like Sarah Strong gets away with a lot of contact in the paint, she definitely gets a star whistle. The foul discrepancy in the 3rd quarter was a valid criticism by Geno, South Carolina was also fouling just like UConn did. The free throw difference is the difference in shot selection. UConn is a jump shooting team, while South Carolina was driving. Hasn't low free throw attempts been pretty constant for UConn?

The Texas/UCLA was extremely physical. In the first half, every time Booker matched up with Rice defensively she was knocking her to the ground and stealing the ball. She had 1 foul at the half. I felt like that game was more physical. It was not a pretty game at all, hard watch. None of the four teams were making their shots though, which made the games seem like a physical battle in the paint.
 
.-.
I think it’s been a conscious effort by the refs for some time to do everything possible not to be the story in the NCAA tournament. So within reason, the goal is to let the teams play. Of course there’s always going to be disagreement over what exactly that means relative to fouls

We all remember the 2021 Elite 8 game that UConn won by 2 over Baylor, when Carrington’s last second shot at the rim was blocked by Liv. There was some contact, no foul was called and Kim Mulkey was livid after the game. We also remember the national semifinal game vs an Iowa in 2024 when Aaliyah was called for a moving screen while trying to free up Paige for a last second shot that could have tied or won the game.
 
I think in general this has been one of the worst tournaments in a long time. Most fans want to see offense, and this year has been incredibly bad in that aspect. I’m not sure if it’s officiating or skills deficiencies, but the women’s game hasn’t done itself any favors with a lot of these offensive showings.
 
Last edited:
If we play the "follow the money" game, then it behooves ESPN, Peacock, and all the other networks with skin (broadcast rights) in the game to be the one to tell the refs to clean up the game. They're the ones who stand to lose if viewership tails off, but that may only be the true bball fans that drift away. Fans of reality television and influencer crap may think this is great, it's food for content. If that's the case, good baseball is done with. The NCAA has become the joke in the room, so don't expect them to do anything. It's the networks who pay the bills and can dictate the content. And that's what the world has become: content.
 
Last edited:
BBallF said:
I was watching the UCLA v. Texas game and I could not believe what I was seeing. At one point a guard from UCLA with the ball deliberately knocked over a player on Texas with a stiff arm right in front of the referee and there was no call. It looks like they passed the word to "let them play" but to what extent can that be fairly implemented? That was certainly true in our game. Unfortunately, it does not help the elegance and optics of the game and also leads to low scoring, sloppy games and a different product than the regular season. Halftime score UCLA 20 - Texas 17. Final 51-44. Texas shot 30% from the field. UCLA only had 44 shots but made 20, thanks to Betts underneath. We shot 31%, SC 37%. Two very low scoring games. When you hold, grab, muscle, and foul, the scoring will drop as it did. It would be a very high level of coincidence that both games were randomly called exactly the same way. It actually appears plausible that word was passed to the referees in both games either by the NCAA or otherwise to call the games a certain way and the question is whether the result of that did anything to promote the game. I don't think it showcased anything except physicality and the poor quality of the referees. I very much doubt if the mens games will be called that way tonight. In fact, we all know they would never tolerate that.
Expand ...
The women's game at all levels is like this. The reason the WNBA has never taken off is they don't really play basketball it is more like what we watched in yesterday's games. The reason I became a fan of UConn back in the 90s was because of the style of ball they played and the abundance of movement the players were allowed to have. Yesterday in both games that was missing.

To a large extent the phsical play will benefit the lesser team. If a game were called where you couldn't hold, stick out your rear or push teams like Texas and SC would have difficulty keeping up with a team like UConn. UConn didn't have their big guns playing great basketball but a lot of contact was ignored, specifically on Sarah Strong.
 
.-.
Centerstream said:
#wbb #uconn #southcarolina #marchmadness
via @ESPN App http://espn.com/app
Expand ...

They showed a replay of that during the broadcast showing how good Raven's defense was on Sarah. When they showed it, I was like "You can't do that!"

FanSince17 said:
Lots of comments last season in the W about excessive physical contact, including by Geno. The idea being that the contact takes away the skills, beauty, and elegance of the best players. IMO there's a line. Too far one way and it's figure skating and too much the other way and it's mud wrestling. Maybe the NBA has found a reasonable balance. Maybe OKC is the ideal in this regard. Celtics maybe, they're not just hoisting 3's this year.
Old farts like me have grown up with the effect of hand-checking and how the rules around it have evolved.
Grabbing, pushing, shoving have never been allowed. Bad Boys in Detroit?
3 of the 4 semifinal teams shot in the 30's FG%. Games in the 40's and 50's. Sorry, not aesthetically pleasing! I thought there was a thought about growing the women's game. Powers that be- you didn't get the memo!!
Expand ...
My recollection was that many of the complaints about the officiating centered on how dangerous the play was and how many injuries there were. Yes it makes the game ugly, but the level they allow in the W also makes it unsafe.
 
After Azzi's basket cut the SC lead to one point near the end of the 3rd quarter, the refs called a soft foul away from the ball on Allie Ziebel with SC in the bonus.
They ignored incidental contact the whole game, but Dawn Staley was screaming & she intimidated the ref. That is why Geno was so upset.
Foul shots plus a basket off a UCONN turnover & SC was back in control.
 
Dogdude said:
If we play the "follow the money" game, then it behooves ESPN, Peacock, and all the other networks with skin (broadcast rights) in the game to be the one to tell the refs to clean up the game. They're the ones who stand to lose of viewership takes off, but that may only be the true bball fans that drift away. Fans of reality television and influencer crap may think this is great, it's food for content. If that's the case, good baseball is done with. The NCAA has become the joke in the room, so don;t expect them to do anything. It's the networks who pay the bills and can dictate the content. And that's what the world has become: content.
Expand ...
Agree. What a spectacular opportunity to showcase this sport that all of us are so inspired by and we got those two games. These were historically bad shooting performances by 4 of the 5 Wooden finalists. Kudos to Betts! Sports have rules for a reason. As a former elementary school teacher watching kids play at recess, it all comes down to fairness. I would interrupt a game and encourage the kids to change the rules. Sorry Raven, it's not fair to follow Sarah around the court with both your hands and arms around her.
 
Bigboote said:
They showed a replay of that during the broadcast showing how good Raven's defense was on Sarah. When they showed it, I was like "You can't do that!"


My recollection was that many of the complaints about the officiating centered on how dangerous the play was and how many injuries there were. Yes it makes the game ugly, but the level they allow in the W also makes it unsafe.
Expand ...
Geno said he wouldn't pay to watch it. Whatever. I'll say it, the game of basketball is beautiful, it's majestic, it's poetry in motion. Why would holding, grabbing, and basically impeding skillful movement be allowed or condoned?
 
Ok, so not sure I've wrapped my head around this data yet, however, it is interesting to see the drop off of points scored. Yes, as a team goes further into the tourney, it is bound to match up with a team that mirrors them in a number of stats. And as a random data point, the UConn/SC game was the only one where we only had 2 players in double figures and SC had 4, however this is most likely a direct result of Sarah and Azzi only having 12 & 8, and Blanca 7. Ash's 10 pts saved us from ... yuck. Did the parity kick in sooner this year, and is this a sign to come, or an anomaly?

And yes, I'm just trying to kill time before the men's game, so who knows ...

1775326324495.jpeg
 
.-.
GoCardinal said:
I think in general this has been one of the worst tournaments in a long time. Most fans want to see offense, and this year has been incredibly bad in that aspect. I’m not sure if it’s officiating or skills decencies, but the women’s game hasn’t done itself any favors with a lot of these offensive showings.
Expand ...
It's not the skills. It's the refereeing. When they call the game as "let them play" it's a euphemism for we only call obvious shooting fouls. It hurts the game by making it a weak imitation of the mens game when it should stand on its own as a sport of elegance , poise, grace, and teamwork. I fully believe there was word given to both sets of referees to "let them play" because the games were eerily called almost identically.
 
oldude said:
I think it’s been a conscious effort by the refs for some time to do everything possible not to be the story in the NCAA tournament. So within reason, the goal is to let the teams play. Of course there’s always going to be disagreement over what exactly that means relative to fouls
Expand ...
Unfortunately, the officiating was very poor and has become the story of these games. The "letting them play" approach means ignoring the rules of the game. It went too far and the result was unrecognizable as women's college basketball and wholly unwatchable.
 
NEforceUConn said:
This reminds me of the NHL ten years ago where clutching, grabbing and holding marginalized the speedy skilled players. It was terrible. The league made some changes and now we have a game where speed and skills excel.
Expand ...
Thanks for bringing that up. I was going to refer to the changes the NHL made for the very reason to make the game highlight the art and skill of the best players instead of trying to hold them back. People want to see excellence succeed on the ice, field or court, not an arm bar wrestling match. Anybody can push, pull or trip someone. Doesn't take a lot of skill. But it's the rare once-in-a-lifetime types that people want to see and pay to see. If the NCAA keeps trying to make it a "let them play on" they will be destroying what should be an entertaining and beautiful game of skill to watch.
 
WiseWillie said:
You have hit upon something. IMO I think that the NCAA is definitely the culprit doing something they thought would help (perhaps to make the women's game more like the men's? or whatever they were seeking) but instead drastically worsening the Final Four product.
Expand ...
It seems the games are called more like the WNBA games are now. So much crap not called makes these games terrible to watch. The benefit goes to the aggressor not the timid player. We need to adjust.
 
BBallF said:
It's not the skills. It's the refereeing. When they call the game as "let them play" it's a euphemism for we only call obvious shooting fouls. It hurts the game by making it a weak imitation of the mens game when it should stand on its own as a sport of elegance , poise, grace, and teamwork. I fully believe there was word given to both sets of referees to "let them play" because the games were eerily called almost identically.
Expand ...
This has been a pattern for several years - "let them play". At some point Dee Kantner was asked during the broadcast and said that there were clearly fouls that could have been called, but nothing "egregious" and it was consistent and even both ways.

Here's the thing - That style of refereeing will never benefit UConn, just as when CVS was coaching Rutgers she commented that a closely called game would never benefit Rutgers.

I don't typically follow the men's game, but I have watched a couple as Arizona has moved to the Final Four. Meh, I don't enjoy it much, but I don't see how calling the game loosely makes women's basketball resemble men's. One similar factor - Arizona men play a style where they try to force the other team to foul them. This works pretty well, often results in a foul discrepancy, and gets fans of the other teams claiming that the ref's are "favoring" Arizona when it is really just a style thing.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,252
Messages
4,559,963
Members
10,448
Latest member
MillerLitEd


Top Bottom