wolfpackernc wrote:

TruthBKnownReturns wrote: Those of you that think the refs mean no harm against NC State........ why is it State never benefits from an egregiously horrible call?

Because you have a limited memory that blocks those out.

CC Harrison got away with a lane violation on a missed FT to tie a game at Clemson.

Someone (might have been CC again) got credited with a 3 to beat a Tim Duncan WF team even though he had a foot on the line.

There are plenty of others.  We just don't remember them as well as ones when we are the victim.

(Not saying NC State benefits more than others or anything - only that we do get the benefit sometimes.)

CC Harrison played here 15 years ago. Got anything in this century?

ncstate00 wrote:

---------------------------------------------
--- TruthBKnownReturns wrote:

ncstate00 wrote:

---------------------------------------------
--- DeltaWolf wrote:

As long as the swoff is in power....deal with it. The refs will always be biased for the cheats and against the Pack. And he will remain silent on the whole cesspool in chapel hill.

---------------------------------------------

You can't have biased against a team that shot 43 free throws to the other teams 7.

Sure you can. We should have shot 50. I watched the game on DVR (missed most of it live), and every one of the fouls called were correct.  They just fouled us a lot in the act of shooting.  Many of our fouls on them were not.

People need to realize that the NUMBER of free throws alone matters not.  Name a foul that was incorrect.  I know of several that were not called that should have been.

---------------------------------------------

The argument can be made for both teams. With VPI putting up 80 shots and only one player going to the free throw line I think they have a pretty good argument too.

Only if they can find some unmistakeable missed calls.  I watched the game on DVR the next day, and I watched for things both ways objectively.  It was actually pretty fairly called except for the few egregious missed calls that we already know about.  Otherwise, I think it was fairly officiated.  We shot so many free throws because they kept fouling us in the act of shooting.  Many of our fouls on them were not in the act of shooting.

They really don't have a case here in complaining.  We took the ball inside a LOT.  They shot a lot of jump shots and threes.  Of course there's going to be a discrepancy in the number of fouls.  That number alone does not show or prove anything.

wolfpackernc wrote:

TruthBKnownReturns wrote: Those of you that think the refs mean no harm against NC State........ why is it State never benefits from an egregiously horrible call?

Because you have a limited memory that blocks those out.

CC Harrison got away with a lane violation on a missed FT to tie a game at Clemson.

Someone (might have been CC again) got credited with a 3 to beat a Tim Duncan WF team even though he had a foot on the line.

There are plenty of others.  We just don't remember them as well as ones when we are the victim.

(Not saying NC State benefits more than others or anything - only that we do get the benefit sometimes.)

Wow, thanks mister archives.

I think the CC thing has been discussed, and his free throw hit the rim and he was not in violation.  I also think the rules were changed after that, not allowing the shooter to jump so soon.

Someone getting credited with a three because their toe was a millimeter over the line is not an egregiously missed call.  Back in those days, I'm pretty sure they didn't use replay to verify the shot.

You'll have to do better than that. I'm talking about the really egregious stuff, like a player running from midcourt to the basket without dribbling.  The stuff they didn't call against VT.

1321wolf wrote:

wolfpackernc wrote:

TruthBKnownReturns wrote: Those of you that think the refs mean no harm against NC State........ why is it State never benefits from an egregiously horrible call?

Because you have a limited memory that blocks those out.

CC Harrison got away with a lane violation on a missed FT to tie a game at Clemson.

Someone (might have been CC again) got credited with a 3 to beat a Tim Duncan WF team even though he had a foot on the line.

There are plenty of others.  We just don't remember them as well as ones when we are the victim.

(Not saying NC State benefits more than others or anything - only that we do get the benefit sometimes.)

CC Harrison played here 15 years ago. Got anything in this century?

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

chickenkiller wrote:

1321wolf wrote:

wolfpackernc wrote:

TruthBKnownReturns wrote: Those of you that think the refs mean no harm against NC State........ why is it State never benefits from an egregiously horrible call?

Because you have a limited memory that blocks those out.

CC Harrison got away with a lane violation on a missed FT to tie a game at Clemson.

Someone (might have been CC again) got credited with a 3 to beat a Tim Duncan WF team even though he had a foot on the line.

There are plenty of others.  We just don't remember them as well as ones when we are the victim.

(Not saying NC State benefits more than others or anything - only that we do get the benefit sometimes.)

CC Harrison played here 15 years ago. Got anything in this century?

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

I know, right?  We've gotten calls from time to time.  I'm not saying we don't.  Sometimes I tell my wife, "we got away with one there."  But the refs really have to be watching a different game to have missed some of these calls.  I mean, a play as important as one that cost us the win in regulation, and should have been easy to call... and they didn't call it.  A guy takes AT LEAST four steps without dribbling, and no call.

I'm going to get grilled for this, but I watched that "under the chest" foul that was called on Howell when he had a guy all over his back.  I think they actually got that one right.  The Miami player had two mitts on the ball without really fouling Howell.  Then Howell reached up (the ball was still over his head) and really hit the Miami player's arm.  So I get that call now.

I'm not 100% sure the Miami player could have possibly controlled the ball without being over the back, but there wasn't much contact between the two until Howell hit him on the arm.  Then it became a bear hug of an over-the-back thing.  But that was after Howell hit him on the arm.

OK, grill me now.  

1321wolf wrote:

wolfpackernc wrote:

TruthBKnownReturns wrote: Those of you that think the refs mean no harm against NC State........ why is it State never benefits from an egregiously horrible call?

Because you have a limited memory that blocks those out.

CC Harrison got away with a lane violation on a missed FT to tie a game at Clemson.

Someone (might have been CC again) got credited with a 3 to beat a Tim Duncan WF team even though he had a foot on the line.

There are plenty of others.  We just don't remember them as well as ones when we are the victim.

(Not saying NC State benefits more than others or anything - only that we do get the benefit sometimes.)

CC Harrison played here 15 years ago. Got anything in this century?

Wake.......Clemson.......

Got any against UNC or Dook, Mr Canada?

I was citing examples at the end that actually won us games.

I assure you, there are plenty of cases where we have committed a foul or traveled that we have forgotten because we didn't care that we got away with something. We didn't even notice.

I bet you that VT fans wouldn't have the first clue about this egregious Green travel that everyone is up in arms about.

Well I'm sure if we got away with a 4-6 step travel, there would be video proof of it on YouTube. Link away.......we're waiting.

You gave us two close judgement calls in the last 20 years. Give me ONE call that went our way that was more egregious than the TWO that went against US in just ONE GAME. We're waiting on that too...............

wolfpackernc wrote: I was citing examples at the end that actually won us games.

I assure you, there are plenty of cases where we have committed a foul or traveled that we have forgotten because we didn't care that we got away with something. We didn't even notice.

I bet you that VT fans wouldn't have the first clue about this egregious Green travel that everyone is up in arms about.

Then they should watch this.

I watch for State getting away with stuff.  It happens, but it is rare.  We are much more often on the receiving end of the bad calls.  And it is usually something that is easy to miss, or could go either way, in the heat of the play.  But tell me a time when a State player made it from midcourt to the rim without dribbling and was not called for traveling.

TruthBKnownReturns wrote: I'm going to get grilled for this, but I watched that "under the chest" foul that was called on Howell when he had a guy all over his back.  I think they actually got that one right.  The Miami player had two mitts on the ball without really fouling Howell.  Then Howell reached up (the ball was still over his head) and really hit the Miami player's arm.  So I get that call now.

I'm not 100% sure the Miami player could have possibly controlled the ball without being over the back, but there wasn't much contact between the two until Howell hit him on the arm.  Then it became a bear hug of an over-the-back thing.  But that was after Howell hit him on the arm.

OK, grill me now.  

Hard to take you seriously when you don't know who was playing, unless you are talking about when Howell threw his back into Johnson's two extended hands on the game-winning tip

TruthBKnownReturns wrote: I'm going to get grilled for this, but I watched that "under the chest" foul that was called on Howell when he had a guy all over his back.  I think they actually got that one right.  The Miami player had two mitts on the ball without really fouling Howell.  Then Howell reached up (the ball was still over his head) and really hit the Miami player's arm.  So I get that call now.

I'm not 100% sure the Miami player could have possibly controlled the ball without being over the back, but there wasn't much contact between the two until Howell hit him on the arm.  Then it became a bear hug of an over-the-back thing.  But that was after Howell hit him on the arm.

OK, grill me now.  

If you want a grilling - go back earlier in this thread where I said the same thing and was pretty much grilled for it, by some folks at least. 

That call was at worst questionable (if one judges that Howell only hit the guy on the hand and not his wrist), but at best was indeed the right call.  If one goes back and looks at a slow-mo replay one sees it was not a horrible call by any stretch, for the reasons you mention.

(assuming you mean "VT player" and not Miami)

Man, is it possible someone finally picked up their ball and went home?

---------------------------------------------
--- TruthBKnownReturns wrote:

wolfpackernc wrote: I was citing examples at the end that actually won us games.

I assure you, there are plenty of cases where we have committed a foul or traveled that we have forgotten because we didn't care that we got away with something. We didn't even notice.

I bet you that VT fans wouldn't have the first clue about this egregious Green travel that everyone is up in arms about.

Then they should watch this.

I watch for State getting away with stuff.  It happens, but it is rare.  We are much more often on the receiving end of the bad calls.  And it is usually something that is easy to miss, or could go either way, in the heat of the play.  But tell me a time when a State player made it from midcourt to the rim without dribbling and was not called for traveling.

---------------------------------------------

In the Clemson game, did Wood commit a violation by going out of bounds trying yo get free for the winning shot?

WolfStock wrote:

TruthBKnownReturns wrote: I'm going to get grilled for this, but I watched that "under the chest" foul that was called on Howell when he had a guy all over his back.  I think they actually got that one right.  The Miami player had two mitts on the ball without really fouling Howell.  Then Howell reached up (the ball was still over his head) and really hit the Miami player's arm.  So I get that call now.

I'm not 100% sure the Miami player could have possibly controlled the ball without being over the back, but there wasn't much contact between the two until Howell hit him on the arm.  Then it became a bear hug of an over-the-back thing.  But that was after Howell hit him on the arm.

OK, grill me now.  

If you want a grilling - go back earlier in this thread where I said the same thing and was pretty much grilled for it, by some folks at least. 

That call was at worst questionable (if one judges that Howell only hit the guy on the hand and not his wrist), but at best was indeed the right call.  If one goes back and looks at a slow-mo replay one sees it was not a horrible call by any stretch, for the reasons you mention.

(assuming you mean "VT player" and not Miami)

And on Wood's 4 point play he got away with one because he actually smacked the defenders hand on his follow through after he shot the ball. In the Wake game Howell launched his face at a guy's elbow and the Wake guy got called not only for a foul, but an intentional foul! We certainly are lucky.

302ASullivan wrote:

---------------------------------------------
--- TruthBKnownReturns wrote:

wolfpackernc wrote: I was citing examples at the end that actually won us games.

I assure you, there are plenty of cases where we have committed a foul or traveled that we have forgotten because we didn't care that we got away with something. We didn't even notice.

I bet you that VT fans wouldn't have the first clue about this egregious Green travel that everyone is up in arms about.

Then they should watch this.

I watch for State getting away with stuff.  It happens, but it is rare.  We are much more often on the receiving end of the bad calls.  And it is usually something that is easy to miss, or could go either way, in the heat of the play.  But tell me a time when a State player made it from midcourt to the rim without dribbling and was not called for traveling.

---------------------------------------------

In the Clemson game, did Wood commit a violation by going out of bounds trying yo get free for the winning shot?

No, as discussed many times. That is not a violation. It would have been a violation if Zo had passed him the ball before he reestablished himself in bounds which was not the case here.

---------------------------------------------
--- wolfpack821 wrote:

302ASullivan wrote:

---------------------------------------------
--- TruthBKnownReturns wrote:

wolfpackernc wrote: I was citing examples at the end that actually won us games.

I assure you, there are plenty of cases where we have committed a foul or traveled that we have forgotten because we didn't care that we got away with something. We didn't even notice.

I bet you that VT fans wouldn't have the first clue about this egregious Green travel that everyone is up in arms about.

Then they should watch this.

I watch for State getting away with stuff.  It happens, but it is rare.  We are much more often on the receiving end of the bad calls.  And it is usually something that is easy to miss, or could go either way, in the heat of the play.  But tell me a time when a State player made it from midcourt to the rim without dribbling and was not called for traveling.

---------------------------------------------

In the Clemson game, did Wood commit a violation by going out of bounds trying yo get free for the winning shot?

No, as discussed many times. That is not a violation. It would have been a violation if Zo had passed him the ball before he reestablished himself in bounds which was not the case here.

---------------------------------------------
Thanks.

PACK 85 wrote:

TruthBKnownReturns wrote: I'm going to get grilled for this, but I watched that "under the chest" foul that was called on Howell when he had a guy all over his back.  I think they actually got that one right.  The Miami player had two mitts on the ball without really fouling Howell.  Then Howell reached up (the ball was still over his head) and really hit the Miami player's arm.  So I get that call now.

I'm not 100% sure the Miami player could have possibly controlled the ball without being over the back, but there wasn't much contact between the two until Howell hit him on the arm.  Then it became a bear hug of an over-the-back thing.  But that was after Howell hit him on the arm.

OK, grill me now.  

Hard to take you seriously when you don't know who was playing, unless you are talking about when Howell threw his back into Johnson's two extended hands on the game-winning tip

I meant VT. I've been debating someone else about the shove Miami laid on Howell at the end of that game, so I had Miami on my mind. My point remains.  You need more than a mis-speak by your opponent to win a debate, but at least the next guy that responded knew to assume I meant VT. 

302ASullivan wrote:

---------------------------------------------
--- TruthBKnownReturns wrote:

wolfpackernc wrote: I was citing examples at the end that actually won us games.

I assure you, there are plenty of cases where we have committed a foul or traveled that we have forgotten because we didn't care that we got away with something. We didn't even notice.

I bet you that VT fans wouldn't have the first clue about this egregious Green travel that everyone is up in arms about.

Then they should watch this.

I watch for State getting away with stuff.  It happens, but it is rare.  We are much more often on the receiving end of the bad calls.  And it is usually something that is easy to miss, or could go either way, in the heat of the play.  But tell me a time when a State player made it from midcourt to the rim without dribbling and was not called for traveling.

---------------------------------------------

In the Clemson game, did Wood commit a violation by going out of bounds trying yo get free for the winning shot?

No.

So what it sounds like to me is that nobody will be happy with the refs regardless of how they call the game.

If they called a close game here are the responses we would see:

1. The refs are calling a close game because team X is deeper than State, foul trouble is our achilles heel.
2. The refs know State likes to run the floor, calling fouls is their way to help team X dictate tempo.
3. The refs never ref a game this close, Swofford must have had a meeting and decided to target State's tendencies because we are threat to the blues.
4. We don't shoot FT's well, the refs know this so by calling a lot of fouls on both teams, team X is gaining the advantage.
5. Refs hate State

If they let the game play out and let it get physical people would say:

1. The only way to beat State is by manhandling their players, beat them up to win, refs are letting team X do that.
2. Oh team X gets to be so much more physical than our guys.
3. We pound the ball inside more so teams that are allowed to be physical will take State out of their gameplan.
4. How do we only have ___ free throw attempts.  We have been averaging less fouls and more FT attempts than anybody in ACC but yet this game the refs are clearly conspiring against us.
5. Refs hate State.


Honestly, I'm not sure how some of you watch games at all. It can't be enjoyable to focus on one or two calls that didn't go State's way and harp on those for days.  Are losses disappointing, yes, but some of you need to step back and enjoy the season the team is putting together.  It could be considered lack luster so far based on preseason hype but we beat both blues at home, hosted game day, getting love from top recruits and actually are a legit threat to go deep in March.  Based on the last 20+ years I'd say this season so far has had many many many more positive moments than negative.

BigBlind wrote: So what it sounds like to me is that nobody will be happy with the refs regardless of how they call the game.

If they called a close game here are the responses we would see:

1. The refs are calling a close game because team X is deeper than State, foul trouble is our achilles heel.
2. The refs know State likes to run the floor, calling fouls is their way to help team X dictate tempo.
3. The refs never ref a game this close, Swofford must have had a meeting and decided to target State's tendencies because we are threat to the blues.
4. We don't shoot FT's well, the refs know this so by calling a lot of fouls on both teams, team X is gaining the advantage.
5. Refs hate State

If they let the game play out and let it get physical people would say:

1. The only way to beat State is by manhandling their players, beat them up to win, refs are letting team X do that.
2. Oh team X gets to be so much more physical than our guys.
3. We pound the ball inside more so teams that are allowed to be physical will take State out of their gameplan.
4. How do we only have ___ free throw attempts.  We have been averaging less fouls and more FT attempts than anybody in ACC but yet this game the refs are clearly conspiring against us.
5. Refs hate State.


Honestly, I'm not sure how some of you watch games at all. It can't be enjoyable to focus on one or two calls that didn't go State's way and harp on those for days.  Are losses disappointing, yes, but some of you need to step back and enjoy the season the team is putting together.  It could be considered lack luster so far based on preseason hype but we beat both blues at home, hosted game day, getting love from top recruits and actually are a legit threat to go deep in March.  Based on the last 20+ years I'd say this season so far has had many many many more positive moments than negative.

That's the problem. Horrible officiating is distracting. It takes away from the enjoyment of the game. The officiating shouldn't be a focus and if you really watch there are just several refs that are consistently bad.

In my experience a general rule is that the more gray hair the ref has the less likely he is to blow a call. Go figure.

I can think of one - we beat Wake in 97 I believe on a 3 at the buzzer when in fact CC had his foot on the line. We won by 1.

But we certainly don't get any home cooking calls.


---------------------------------------
------
--- TruthBKnownReturns wrote:

Those of you that think the refs mean no harm against NC State........ why is it State never benefits from an egregiously horrible call?

---------------------------------------------

wolfpackernc wrote:

TruthBKnownReturns wrote: Those of you that think the refs mean no harm against NC State........ why is it State never benefits from an egregiously horrible call?

Because you have a limited memory that blocks those out.

CC Harrison got away with a lane violation on a missed FT to tie a game at Clemson.

Someone (might have been CC again) got credited with a 3 to beat a Tim Duncan WF team even though he had a foot on the line.

There are plenty of others.  We just don't remember them as well as ones when we are the victim.

(Not saying NC State benefits more than others or anything - only that we do get the benefit sometimes.)

No way CC violated.

BigBlind wrote: So what it sounds like to me is that nobody will be happy with the refs regardless of how they call the game.

If they called a close game here are the responses we would see:

1. The refs are calling a close game because team X is deeper than State, foul trouble is our achilles heel.
2. The refs know State likes to run the floor, calling fouls is their way to help team X dictate tempo.
3. The refs never ref a game this close, Swofford must have had a meeting and decided to target State's tendencies because we are threat to the blues.
4. We don't shoot FT's well, the refs know this so by calling a lot of fouls on both teams, team X is gaining the advantage.
5. Refs hate State

If they let the game play out and let it get physical people would say:

1. The only way to beat State is by manhandling their players, beat them up to win, refs are letting team X do that.
2. Oh team X gets to be so much more physical than our guys.
3. We pound the ball inside more so teams that are allowed to be physical will take State out of their gameplan.
4. How do we only have ___ free throw attempts.  We have been averaging less fouls and more FT attempts than anybody in ACC but yet this game the refs are clearly conspiring against us.
5. Refs hate State.


Honestly, I'm not sure how some of you watch games at all. It can't be enjoyable to focus on one or two calls that didn't go State's way and harp on those for days.  Are losses disappointing, yes, but some of you need to step back and enjoy the season the team is putting together.  It could be considered lack luster so far based on preseason hype but we beat both blues at home, hosted game day, getting love from top recruits and actually are a legit threat to go deep in March.  Based on the last 20+ years I'd say this season so far has had many many many more positive moments than negative.

No, if they call it right, I'm happy.  I can even handle the occasional missed call, as long as they go against both teams and not just State.

For a long time (this season), I thought the officiating was going pretty well.  Then a few games into the ACC season, the incompetence reared its ugly head again.

Just because we win a game doesn't mean it was well officiated.  I very much enjoy the season we're putting together.  This is why I'm so concerned about the officiating.  It was just last season that the officiating is why we weren't in the ACC championship game.  So yes, I'm concerned.  I don't want it happening again, so I'm hoping to be one of the voices drawing as much attention to it as possible.

packskins wrote: I can think of one - we beat Wake in 97 I believe on a 3 at the buzzer when in fact CC had his foot on the line. We won by 1.

But we certainly don't get any home cooking calls.


---------------------------------------
------
--- TruthBKnownReturns wrote:

Those of you that think the refs mean no harm against NC State........ why is it State never benefits from an egregiously horrible call?

---------------------------------------------

That's not an egregiously horrible call.  If our guy's foot was an inch on the line and the ref missed it, the ref just missed it.  I'm talking about stuff like taking enough steps to make an Olympic triple long jumper proud without being called for traveling.  They can review if a shot was a 2-pointer or a 3-pointer (not sure they could do that in 1997).  And I find it amusing that you had to go back 16+ years for an example. LOL That's rich.

TruthBKnownReturns wrote:

BigBlind wrote: So what it sounds like to me is that nobody will be happy with the refs regardless of how they call the game.

If they called a close game here are the responses we would see:

1. The refs are calling a close game because team X is deeper than State, foul trouble is our achilles heel.
2. The refs know State likes to run the floor, calling fouls is their way to help team X dictate tempo.
3. The refs never ref a game this close, Swofford must have had a meeting and decided to target State's tendencies because we are threat to the blues.
4. We don't shoot FT's well, the refs know this so by calling a lot of fouls on both teams, team X is gaining the advantage.
5. Refs hate State

If they let the game play out and let it get physical people would say:

1. The only way to beat State is by manhandling their players, beat them up to win, refs are letting team X do that.
2. Oh team X gets to be so much more physical than our guys.
3. We pound the ball inside more so teams that are allowed to be physical will take State out of their gameplan.
4. How do we only have ___ free throw attempts.  We have been averaging less fouls and more FT attempts than anybody in ACC but yet this game the refs are clearly conspiring against us.
5. Refs hate State.


Honestly, I'm not sure how some of you watch games at all. It can't be enjoyable to focus on one or two calls that didn't go State's way and harp on those for days.  Are losses disappointing, yes, but some of you need to step back and enjoy the season the team is putting together.  It could be considered lack luster so far based on preseason hype but we beat both blues at home, hosted game day, getting love from top recruits and actually are a legit threat to go deep in March.  Based on the last 20+ years I'd say this season so far has had many many many more positive moments than negative.

No, if they call it right, I'm happy.  I can even handle the occasional missed call, as long as they go against both teams and not just State.

For a long time (this season), I thought the officiating was going pretty well.  Then a few games into the ACC season, the incompetence reared its ugly head again.

Just because we win a game doesn't mean it was well officiated.  I very much enjoy the season we're putting together.  This is why I'm so concerned about the officiating.  It was just last season that the officiating is why we weren't in the ACC championship game.  So yes, I'm concerned.  I don't want it happening again, so I'm hoping to be one of the voices drawing as much attention to it as possible.

Agreed. I don't remember officiating during our out of conference schedule being poor. However, I can remember with certainty several games during our ACC schedule where the officiating was absolutely horrendous (@WF, @VA, GT, VT) and we even won two of those games.