DeCourcy: Suspending ACC officials was the wrong call

General30

DeCourcy posts his take that suspending the ACC officials was the wrong thing to do.

General

30 Responses to DeCourcy: Suspending ACC officials was the wrong call

  1. BJD95 02/08/2006 at 10:12 AM #

    Clougherty had to do something to restore confidence in the integrity of the game, IMHO. This has been building for a long damned time. Was it fair to single out this particular group of officils? Maybe not. But the point got made, and the Duke apologists in the national media need to get over it. There’s more to the ACC than all Duke, all the time.

    Did anybody else think that Duke get many of their typical “breaks” in last night’s game? I sure noticed that. It’s alot easier to play Duke when you’re allowed to defend them.

  2. class of '74 02/08/2006 at 10:39 AM #

    It is past time something was done about the poor officiating we see in this league. Eads made the call but the other guys could have pulled him aside and let him know what they saw as well. If they acceeded to Eads decision they were wrong as well. Clougherty was a good official in his day and he’s as good a man for this thankless job as we could find IMO. DeCourcy is usually pretty sharp but this time he’s offbase.

  3. VaWolf82 02/08/2006 at 10:45 AM #

    DeCourcy got cause and effect wrong when he compared the two bad calls at the end of two different games.

    In the case of the T, the officials are allowed to look at the monitors and see if a player threw a puch (or at least I think that they are). Given the context of the call at the end of the game….and the consequences…ejection of the FSU player…there should have been an effort made to get the call right.

    In the BC game, the officials made a horrible no-call that directly affected the outcome of the game. At least in my mind, making a horrible call, or letting a fellow official make a horrible call is much, much worse than a no-call.

    DeCourcey is also wrong about why the ACC stepped in. People have been screaming about the differences in the number of fouls called on Duke and UNC for years…..and it absolutely no effect.

    These two cases were handled differently because they were different. Two different officiating crews make mistakes at the end of a game that directly affected the outcome. Obvious mistakes need to be corrected and sometimes examples have to be made of people that make them. National broadcasts of those horrible calls bring to question the competence and potential bias of the ACC officials. The ACC had to act to show that incompetence and bias in officiating is not tolerated. To have done nothing would be to suggest that no one cares if the top teams get favorable calls from the officials.

  4. TVP 02/08/2006 at 10:49 AM #

    I love the “style of play” defense. Duke plays D that is as physical and as aggressive as any team in the country. Yet they don’t get called for many handchecks.

  5. Trout 02/08/2006 at 10:53 AM #

    Mike DeCourcy was on Adam Gold’s show last night, basically saying what was in the article.

    His other “defense” of Duke not “getting calls” was to bring in the UCONN game, when Duke played UCONN for the title. He said if Duke “got all the calls” how do you explain UCONN winning the title? It was weak an anything I have ever heard by a so-called college basketball “expert.”

  6. choppack 02/08/2006 at 10:58 AM #

    Yep – I’ve noticed that a lot in the media are defending the refs. Of course, they use very duplicious methods to counteract the charges of unfair officiaiting. First, they say, “There is NO conspiracy by the officials.” Well, no one is saying that there is. Those of us who have questioned ACC refs are simply saying, Duke is getting the benefit of the doubt from officials and we don’t get a fair shake. Nothing demonstrated that more clearly than the technical foul called on FSU…except maybe the intentional foul called in the first half vs. FSU for holding She-will….or the tech called against Julius Hodge 2 years ago at Cameron. These are the details that these idiot talking heads miss. I’m not even going to get into how stupid it is to ask Jay Bilas whether or not officials have a pro-Duke bias.

    Secondly, they use straw men argument saying that it’s Duke’s style that creates the discrepancy. Here’s a perfect example of how these folks mislead:

    “Duke spaces the court and drives the basketball, and frequently throws it inside to Shelden Williams. That leads to personal fouls. ”

    Yea, we try to do the same thing w/ Cedric Simmons, and we’ve actually done it w/ Hodge, Crawford, Melvin, Evtimov or Grundy at one time or another…But look at our foul shots compared to Duke or Carolina’s.

    Yet whenever these folks bring up style of play they rarely mention how Duke plays defensively. They play an aggressive man to man – almost exclusively – they overplay and hand-check. A few teams are allowed to defend against Duke and other opponents similarly – we do not typically fall into this category.

  7. choppack 02/08/2006 at 11:00 AM #

    Trout – I’d say that the reason Duke lost to UConn was because they were so used to getting the benefits of the calls that they lost a great deal of mental toughness. I noticed key spots in the G’town game this year, where Duke typically gets calls. I also noticed key spots in the first half where Duke typically gets call – the first JJ Redick flop and the foul they somehow missed when Sheldon was shoved out of bounds on the break away.

  8. RickJ 02/08/2006 at 11:04 AM #

    BJD95 – I definitely noticed a difference in last night’s game. I actually broke out laughing on the first foul call on Reddick. The UNC guy literally ran over a perfectly positioned Reddick. He knocked Reddick to the floor and then tripped over his body. The ref called tripping on Reddick. Williams had a breakaway lay-up later in the first half – the UNC player ran him down and fouled him at least as bad as Williams fouled Rice at the end of the BC game and no call was made. With the nation watching, I think a real effort was made to not give Duke any advantage.

    On a higher level, I believe the ACC office has a real challenge in placating the satellite teams of the league (BC, VPI, Miami, GT & FSU). BC & GT felt gypped in the bowl selections. Will the all ACC teams be fairly determined? Were the new teams aware that Duke & Carolina had a National Network promoting these two programs ala NBC & Notre Dame football? These types of events are starting to generate some real discontent among their fan bases. We’re pretty much used to it. Will money be enough to keep everyone happy? I think these suspensions may be a reaction to these concerns.

  9. choppack 02/08/2006 at 11:14 AM #

    RickJ – I think you bring up a good point. It’s funny that coaches for both VaTech and BC have been outspoken about the officiating. True followers of the league have long accepted this as a given – UNC-Ch and Duke must be beaten by 12-15 points for you to have a chance to win to make up for the officiating.

  10. class of '74 02/08/2006 at 11:43 AM #

    Guys come on, nothing breeds success like success. Duke and UNC have earned what they have. Do I think from time to time they get calls? Well yes!
    But I recall hearing the same things said regarding Case and McGuire or Bubas and Smith. Even Sloan in the halcyon years.

    It would be nice to eliminate three things and with those three things eliminated 98% would be happy. They are:
    1. all hand checking period. Automatic foul.
    2. all carrying the ball. Automatic violation.
    3. all coaches/benches cursing/baiting refs. Automatic technical. Second offense ejection.
    Rid the game of those and it would be a better contest.

  11. choppack 02/08/2006 at 11:47 AM #

    c of 74 – I don’t care about what’s eliminated, but I want consistency. 1.Some folks can cleary palm the ball – others such as Justin Gainey – can’t.
    2. Some teams – such as Duke and Carolina – can hand-check, others can’t.
    3. Some refs – such as Coach K – can curse refs – others such as Sendek – get teed up when they ask “What’s the difference?”

    A foul on one team, should be a foul on the other…It’s the old strike zone argument. The discrepancies in an umps strike zone are only really annoying if they aren’t consistent.

  12. class of '74 02/08/2006 at 11:56 AM #

    ^then consistently eliminate those three things and I contend the majority of the problems are solved. Hand checking alone is so darned subjective as it now is done. Heck one minute you see almost a body cavity search going on and the next a touch foul is called. I share in your frustration!

  13. ncsslim 02/08/2006 at 12:44 PM #

    c of 74 – changing the rules alone will not impact this inconsistancy of the application. I don’t have the answer, but I’m willing to settle for this (the uproar, suspension, ect) minor start. It just irks me that UNC, of all people, was the immediate benefactor Further irritating was the lack of competence shown in the “new world order” in the overall call of the game, specifically described in RickJ’s first paragraph. No one is asking that the game be thrown in one direction or the other, just be remotely consistant! It’s as if they don’t have a clue as to the issue at hand.

    Also, did anyone notice Ratface’s new controlled demeanor? Appears that he was given a message as well, which I assume was along the lines of “make your choice, but your normal behavior will not be tolerated in this particular game”. The shameless hypopcrite acually took it quite well, which I found quite surprising.

    Regardless, hopefully a step toward sanity.

    I wonder who the whipping boy might be to show the rest of the conference there is not favoritism toward triangle teams. Umm, I wonder…

  14. class of '74 02/08/2006 at 12:56 PM #

    ^I don’t see any cabal in officiating just poor officiating in general.

  15. BJD95 02/08/2006 at 1:09 PM #

    Maybe I’m way offbase here, but over the past 5-10 years I have noticed it WAY more wrt Duke as opposed to UNC. Officiating in UNC games hasn’t seemed that gross to me, at least since Dean left.

  16. choppack 02/08/2006 at 1:25 PM #

    BJ – I thought this year’s was really gross when it came to the disparity of Ced vs. Hansborough. I’d go as far as to say, it made the eventual outcome – a UNC-Ch victory – more likely.

  17. ncsslim 02/08/2006 at 1:36 PM #

    c of 74 – agreed, no cabal, but if you’re saying that merely randomly poor, no way… it’ all about K. Don’t ask me to explain because I don’t know why they’ve given away the upper hand to the little bully-prick. But it was (is?) pretty absolute.

    bjd – no doubt, the unc bias has pretty well been history over the period you’re speaking. I’ve don’t have near as much dispair going into the Nose as I do with Dook coming to the RBC. I talked to Tony Haynes about this a couple days before out last visit to Cameron (which strangely, was relatively speaking, a resonably called game for a change) about the angst I feel going into that venue,and he honestly didn’t know what I was talking about. You just know something bad will happen, even in the unusual circumstance it matters.

  18. class of '74 02/08/2006 at 1:56 PM #

    ^I think since 1953 the upper tier coaches have gotten better treatment by officials. And I agree on K trying to intimidate the zebras, that’s why no coaches commentary to officials should be allowed. T them up and shut them up. Clougherty’s office can handle this by simple memo to coaches no more lip. I think it would kill K not to be able to bully the zebra’s.

  19. SaccoV 02/08/2006 at 1:59 PM #

    I think a larger issue needs to be addressed here, and it concerns me, given the Packman’s ACC Index Card (of which Duke and Carolina are the top two teams in terms of free-throw disparity versus their opponents), that more legitimate media outlets don’t talk about calls or non-calls when it comes to college basketball. Seton Hall v. Michigan in ’89, and Duke/State in ACC Final ’02 are two perfect examples of where one call determined the outcome.

    The disparity in the benefits of foul calls between one team and another should never be so great as the Duke/BC game, where I think Duke shot 43 free throws to BC’s 18. Although the fouls were roughly even, all of BCs fouls came when Duke was shooting. (It’s funny to note that I was listening to Bob Harris and the Duke Nutwork last night, and Harris was complaining that Duke finally got into the bonus with :54 left in the first half as Carolina had already made it into the double bonus with 10 Duke fouls.) Even though there are athletes that can drive to the basket more effectively than others, the real inconsistency in officiating comes from calls away from the ball. The moving screen is now basically legal, especially if you set the screen under the basket or away from the area of the ball. Maryland, Clemson and virginia all had big guys setting motile screens to free shooters on the wing. Calls down low are never even, especially as certain big men establish position in the low post. Elton Brand definitely got away with being extra physical on the offensive end. Handchecking is ridiculous and should be outlawed. If the player puts his hand on another player away from the low post, that’s a foul. Agreed with choppack that handchecking can only really be explained as a representation of Clemson’s guards versus Carolina’s (or other likely scenarios). And regardless of talent, UNC wins that battle every day of the week. I’m always amazed at Duke getting complimented for being a “tough” defense. When you can handcheck a guy from the other team on every possession, your defense improves immediately.

    The best analogy in response to DeCourcy’s idiotic comment regarding Duke’s loss to UCONN in the Final 4 a few years ago is simple. The Atlanta Braves pitching staff. You wonder why the Braves have only won one World Series? It’s because Maddux, Glavine and Smoltz get lots of extra corner in the regular season. In the postseason, those extra three inches are gone, and usually those pitchers get hammered when the plate is a true 18 inches. When Duke doesn’t get the benefit of the foul/free throw situation, they are not as good as when they do. UNC is in the same benefit boat. I can still remember the Carolina game when Clemson committed 50 fouls as a team and had only four elligible players when the game was over. Ask Clemson if the referee disparity works in Carolina’s favor. Sorry to drone on. Wonderful topic for discussion and DeCourcy’s opinions are those of someone who doesn’t really follow the other ten teams in this conference enough. It’s not bitter grapes that we’re discussing here; it’s legitimate criticism of consistent officiating. Good job, ACC!!!

  20. BJD95 02/08/2006 at 2:15 PM #

    You also see it frequently in the NCAA tourney – a Duke player driving the lane and flopping over the expected call rather than focusing primarily on making the actual shot. Or quick frontcourt foul trouble b/c Duke is actually whistled for over the back calls when rebounding. The best evidence for the refereeing disparity is Duke’s relative dominance of the best (or at least one of the 2-3 best) conferences vs. their recent NCAAT performance. If they can so easily dominate the tough ACC, why not a more diluted Field of 64?

  21. ncsslim 02/08/2006 at 2:15 PM #

    My only problem with any index is that there’s no way it can peg how bad it actually is. In past games with Duke, we were in constant (Hodge/Powell/ect) foul trouble over nick-nack crap when Duke actually got to commit fouls. I.e., not only were the stats out of balance, but they were allowed to play the more physical game. Our calls turn over possession, their’s merely causes the clock to be reset. Also, foul discrepancies do not take into account critical no-calls, travels, out-of-bounds, etc, which can be just as critical and unbalanced as the actual foul or free throw count.

  22. Trout 02/08/2006 at 2:25 PM #

    On Jan. 21, 1984, after uneven officiating cost Duke a win against Smith’s North Carolina dynasty, Krzyzewski unloaded in his postgame news conference.

    “I want to tell you something,” he said. “… You cannot allow people to go around pointing at officials and yelling at them without technicals being called. That is just not allowed. So let’s get some things straight around here and quit the double standard that exists in this league, all right?”

  23. Trout 02/08/2006 at 2:27 PM #

    BJD stated: “The best evidence for the refereeing disparity is Duke’s relative dominance of the best (or at least one of the 2-3 best) conferences vs. their recent NCAAT performance. If they can so easily dominate the tough ACC, why not a more diluted Field of 64?”

    WOW. We think exactly alike. I actually was so pissed at DeCourcy’s idiotic comment regarding Duke’s loss to UCONN that I did try to call into the 850 show and say the EXACT same thing BJD stated.

  24. BJD95 02/08/2006 at 2:42 PM #

    DeCourcy is the ultimate defender of the status quo, and cheerleader for the front-runners. He has a more even delivery (and better overall knowledge base) than Vitale, but otherwise just as annoying.

    I was much more surprised to hear Billy Freaking Packer, of all people, play down the officiating disparity this week on Sporting News Radio. I’ve never heard of officiating that good old Billy wouldn’t criticise (and he does hate Duke even more than he hates everybody else). Maybe they sedated him or something.

  25. class of '74 02/08/2006 at 3:02 PM #

    ^Trout that old K quote after the UNC game was priceless. I remember exactly how mad K was at the time. The more things change the more they remain the same.

1 2

Leave a Reply