Federal Hocking vs Berlin Hiland - 6PM

[SG REBEL]

Obviously, a bad call or two, or certainly a bunch of them, especially late, can affect the game. But I would maintain they don't determine the outcome. It's a simple math thing. There are 10 players on the court, 2 coaches, and 3 refs. The refs in a typical game, let's pick a big number, make 75 affirmative calls (fouls, travelling, OOB, etc.) and maybe another number in that range where they decide to not make a call. So, the officials make 150 calls/non-calls a game that have some impact on the game. But the 10 players are constantly doing things, some good and some not good, over the course of 32 minutes that equate to thousands of decisions. Coaches make hundreds of decisions during a game: who plays, what combinations play, when to substitute and with who, what defenses, what offensive sets, timeouts, speed up, slow down, press, trap, etc. So, I would argue that the math is x thousands of decisions that impact the game coming from the coaches and players vs. 150ish from the refs. In that context, the officiating may help one team some, or hurt them some, but the teams themselves have plenty of opportunities to take the officials completely out of the realm of possibility of determining the game with a bad call by executing and playing well.

Refs are human, so they are certainly capable of caring who wins, and I'm sure that has happened - but 3 of them colluding to sabotage a high school game that really doesn't matter in the big scheme of things? I don't believe that happens. Trashing their integrity by violating ethics rules to make sure one team wins? No way. I do think that they like some coaches and despise others, and that does affect how tolerant they are of disagreement coming from the bench. But I would view that as more of a coach being a jerk problem more than a ref bias problem. FWIW

Blame the refs. SAD. Take responsibility. Move on. Pick up NEXT YEAR. VERY SAD. BOO HOO

So you blaming the players? No one blamed anyone. Just saying all three, coaches, players and refs, have an affect on the outcome of the game.

Last I checked players and/or coaches lose games. There are no outside affects. Play the game, have a good time. Winner wins, Loser loses. Go home and enjoy something else. Sports is just a game. Lots more important things to worry about, especially a referee who is literally losing money to give his time to the kids.

[Gray Cat]

Blame the refs. SAD. Take responsibility. Move on. Pick up NEXT YEAR. VERY SAD. BOO HOO

So you blaming the players? No one blamed anyone. Just saying all three, coaches, players and refs, have an affect on the outcome of the game.

Last I checked players and/or coaches lose games. There are no outside affects. Play the game, have a good time. Winner wins, Loser loses. Go home and enjoy something else. Sports is just a game. Lots more important things to worry about, especially a referee who is literally losing money to give his time to the kids.

If he’s losing money he isn’t very smart or he’s wasting his money. I know literally dozens of refs and none of them lose money. Coaches, yes. Refs, no. But that’s a nice cliche you promote there. Proud of you.

[IVCguy]

Nice story. Glad for you that you’ve been resurrected. Two points I disagree with you on. First, some refs do care who wins the game. In fact truth be known it’s probably many. Not to say they all are affected by that as far as how they call the game. But they do care for various reasons. Secondly, the calls the refs make can and many times do help determine the outcome of a game, just like a good or bad play or decision by a coach or player does. I don’t know of a Bengals fan who won’t name two or three calls by the refs that cost them the game against KC in the AFC championship. My opinion is the players, coaches and refs all play a role in determining the outcome of the game. Other than that, good post.

Obviously, a bad call or two, or certainly a bunch of them, especially late, can affect the game. But I would maintain they don't determine the outcome. It's a simple math thing. There are 10 players on the court, 2 coaches, and 3 refs. The refs in a typical game, let's pick a big number, make 75 affirmative calls (fouls, travelling, OOB, etc.) and maybe another number in that range where they decide to not make a call. So, the officials make 150 calls/non-calls a game that have some impact on the game. But the 10 players are constantly doing things, some good and some not good, over the course of 32 minutes that equate to thousands of decisions. Coaches make hundreds of decisions during a game: who plays, what combinations play, when to substitute and with who, what defenses, what offensive sets, timeouts, speed up, slow down, press, trap, etc. So, I would argue that the math is x thousands of decisions that impact the game coming from the coaches and players vs. 150ish from the refs. In that context, the officiating may help one team some, or hurt them some, but the teams themselves have plenty of opportunities to take the officials completely out of the realm of possibility of determining the game with a bad call by executing and playing well.

Refs are human, so they are certainly capable of caring who wins, and I'm sure that has happened - but 3 of them colluding to sabotage a high school game that really doesn't matter in the big scheme of things? I don't believe that happens. Trashing their integrity by violating ethics rules to make sure one team wins? No way. I do think that they like some coaches and despise others, and that does affect how tolerant they are of disagreement coming from the bench. But I would view that as more of a coach being a jerk problem more than a ref bias problem. FWIW

Once again I have to disagree with you. I’m not going to write a book but I will offer this again, that I believe all three entities have an impact on the outcome of a game. The amount of impact by any of the three can outweigh the other two in a given game. So let’s say that a team makes a plethora of mistakes but makes up for them and has a one point lead with one second left when an opposing player throws up a prayer that misses but the ref makes a phantom foul call. The player makes both free throws to win the game. The fact that the losing team made a huge amount of mistakes doesn’t lessen the impact of the bad call made by the ref. Furthermore, you can’t without a doubt say that any of those mistakes by the team determined the outcome of the game. But you can say the bad call by the ref did. It’s good to agree to disagree with you.

I think you made my point with your reply. In your example you say that the losing team made a "plethora of mistakes", then plays well, but gets a bad foul call at the end and loses. You are claiming that the bad call is as responsible for the outcome as the plethora of errors the team made. Again, as a matter of basic math, plethora of mistakes > 1 bad ref call. The plethora of mistakes put the team in the position of being hurt by a bad call. The team and its coach, by virtue of how they played, determined the outcome. The bad call was not an isolated event. The winning team almost certainly had bad and questionable calls go against them as well. The difference is that they played well enough to win, overcoming their mistakes and bad calls over the course of the entire game, regardless of what the refs did or did not do.

Refs impact the game, they do not determine the outcome of games.

[Gray Cat]

Obviously, a bad call or two, or certainly a bunch of them, especially late, can affect the game. But I would maintain they don't determine the outcome. It's a simple math thing. There are 10 players on the court, 2 coaches, and 3 refs. The refs in a typical game, let's pick a big number, make 75 affirmative calls (fouls, travelling, OOB, etc.) and maybe another number in that range where they decide to not make a call. So, the officials make 150 calls/non-calls a game that have some impact on the game. But the 10 players are constantly doing things, some good and some not good, over the course of 32 minutes that equate to thousands of decisions. Coaches make hundreds of decisions during a game: who plays, what combinations play, when to substitute and with who, what defenses, what offensive sets, timeouts, speed up, slow down, press, trap, etc. So, I would argue that the math is x thousands of decisions that impact the game coming from the coaches and players vs. 150ish from the refs. In that context, the officiating may help one team some, or hurt them some, but the teams themselves have plenty of opportunities to take the officials completely out of the realm of possibility of determining the game with a bad call by executing and playing well.

Refs are human, so they are certainly capable of caring who wins, and I'm sure that has happened - but 3 of them colluding to sabotage a high school game that really doesn't matter in the big scheme of things? I don't believe that happens. Trashing their integrity by violating ethics rules to make sure one team wins? No way. I do think that they like some coaches and despise others, and that does affect how tolerant they are of disagreement coming from the bench. But I would view that as more of a coach being a jerk problem more than a ref bias problem. FWIW

Once again I have to disagree with you. I’m not going to write a book but I will offer this again, that I believe all three entities have an impact on the outcome of a game. The amount of impact by any of the three can outweigh the other two in a given game. So let’s say that a team makes a plethora of mistakes but makes up for them and has a one point lead with one second left when an opposing player throws up a prayer that misses but the ref makes a phantom foul call. The player makes both free throws to win the game. The fact that the losing team made a huge amount of mistakes doesn’t lessen the impact of the bad call made by the ref. Furthermore, you can’t without a doubt say that any of those mistakes by the team determined the outcome of the game. But you can say the bad call by the ref did. It’s good to agree to disagree with you.

I think you made my point with your reply. In your example you say that the losing team made a "plethora of mistakes", then plays well, but gets a bad foul call at the end and loses. You are claiming that the bad call is as responsible for the outcome as the plethora of errors the team made. Again, as a matter of basic math, plethora of mistakes > 1 bad ref call. The plethora of mistakes put the team in the position of being hurt by a bad call. The team and its coach, by virtue of how they played, determined the outcome. The bad call was not an isolated event. The winning team almost certainly had bad and questionable calls go against them as well. The difference is that they played well enough to win, overcoming their mistakes and bad calls over the course of the entire game, regardless of what the refs did or did not do.

Refs impact the game, they do not determine the outcome of games.

Hey, at least you are coming around to my way of thinking by saying refs impact the game. But you must have missed the point I made that the team made up for all the mistakes. And don’t give me the, well if they wouldn’t have made those mistakes… bit. No one can say for certain what would have happened if they hadn’t made those mistakes. But everyone can say for certain that if the ref wouldn’t have made the bogus call they would have won the game. In this scenario the ref most certainly determined the outcome of the game. There’s really no reasonable argument against it.

[Farmer Yoder]

Obviously, a bad call or two, or certainly a bunch of them, especially late, can affect the game. But I would maintain they don't determine the outcome. It's a simple math thing. There are 10 players on the court, 2 coaches, and 3 refs. The refs in a typical game, let's pick a big number, make 75 affirmative calls (fouls, travelling, OOB, etc.) and maybe another number in that range where they decide to not make a call. So, the officials make 150 calls/non-calls a game that have some impact on the game. But the 10 players are constantly doing things, some good and some not good, over the course of 32 minutes that equate to thousands of decisions. Coaches make hundreds of decisions during a game: who plays, what combinations play, when to substitute and with who, what defenses, what offensive sets, timeouts, speed up, slow down, press, trap, etc. So, I would argue that the math is x thousands of decisions that impact the game coming from the coaches and players vs. 150ish from the refs. In that context, the officiating may help one team some, or hurt them some, but the teams themselves have plenty of opportunities to take the officials completely out of the realm of possibility of determining the game with a bad call by executing and playing well.

Refs are human, so they are certainly capable of caring who wins, and I'm sure that has happened - but 3 of them colluding to sabotage a high school game that really doesn't matter in the big scheme of things? I don't believe that happens. Trashing their integrity by violating ethics rules to make sure one team wins? No way. I do think that they like some coaches and despise others, and that does affect how tolerant they are of disagreement coming from the bench. But I would view that as more of a coach being a jerk problem more than a ref bias problem. FWIW

Once again I have to disagree with you. I’m not going to write a book but I will offer this again, that I believe all three entities have an impact on the outcome of a game. The amount of impact by any of the three can outweigh the other two in a given game. So let’s say that a team makes a plethora of mistakes but makes up for them and has a one point lead with one second left when an opposing player throws up a prayer that misses but the ref makes a phantom foul call. The player makes both free throws to win the game. The fact that the losing team made a huge amount of mistakes doesn’t lessen the impact of the bad call made by the ref. Furthermore, you can’t without a doubt say that any of those mistakes by the team determined the outcome of the game. But you can say the bad call by the ref did. It’s good to agree to disagree with you.

I think you made my point with your reply. In your example you say that the losing team made a "plethora of mistakes", then plays well, but gets a bad foul call at the end and loses. You are claiming that the bad call is as responsible for the outcome as the plethora of errors the team made. Again, as a matter of basic math, plethora of mistakes > 1 bad ref call. The plethora of mistakes put the team in the position of being hurt by a bad call. The team and its coach, by virtue of how they played, determined the outcome. The bad call was not an isolated event. The winning team almost certainly had bad and questionable calls go against them as well. The difference is that they played well enough to win, overcoming their mistakes and bad calls over the course of the entire game, regardless of what the refs did or did not do.

Refs impact the game, they do not determine the outcome of games.

If you think for one second that I haven’t had my palms greased to have an effect on a final score then yo momma raised a fool. It happens!

[IVCguy]

If you think for one second that I haven’t had my palms greased to have an effect on a final score then yo momma raised a fool. It happens!

I think my momma raised me to put on my muck boots and hip waders when the bullship starts piling up.

Bullship = a vessel carrying male bovine.

[P Finger]

What the he!! is wrong with you people? SMDH