NCAA tournament — UCLA got a call? Get out!
I heard from a few UCLA faithful a couple of weeks ago when I wrote this tongue-in-cheek item about the “help” UCLA was going to get on the way to its first NCAA tournament championship since 1995. And when I blogged on a related item later. (One e-mailer compared me with Rush Limbaugh. I thought Rush was more of a football guy, though.)
But this post isn’t tongue-in-cheek. It’s more like arm-on-wrist-and-other-arm-on-elbow, at least as these pictures of Texas A&M’s final shot Saturday night seem to show. I don’t think Texas A&M would have won anyway — UCLA was rolling by then, so much that the Bruins might have gone on to cover the 10 1/2 if they had played an overtime — but it’s hard to say the refs didn’t swallow their whistles on that one. Just another sign that UCLA is the new Duke in the officials’ eyes. (But, hey, we need a new Duke, because the old one just isn’t cutting it anymore. I mean, watching the Blue Devils just won’t be fun after another five or six years of this.)
The comments under those pics (link is to UCLA’s message board at Scout.com) are pretty indicative of the Bruin fan base, which is a lot like the Patriot fan base in its misplaced righteous indignation. Lots of phantom justifications and talk about how the refs really were biased against UCLA and that call just finally evened things out. Sounds very Krzyzewski-circa-2001-ish. Yeah, every call matters in a basketball game, just like every call mattered in the Tuck game. But some calls, like the ones on the final possession, matter just a teensy bit more, no? And UCLA just seems to be on the beneficial end of a lot of those calls lately.
UCLA. Top seed. Home crowd. No call. Primary obstacles to Final Four eliminated. The Plan is all falling into place, just as it’s drawn up at headquarters.
I’m not going to waste anymore time on this than you deserve. You’re wrong. Only idiots believe conspiracy theories. It was the right call. Deal with it.
The author clearly didn’t wasn’t at the game. He probably didn’t watch it either. I’m a Stanford fan that stayed for the UCLA game in Anaheim. Some blown calls both ways. And refs always swallow their whistles in the last 10 seconds. Bottom line, teams shouldn’t leave it up to the refs to decide the game. Play better. Go Trees.
Sure would bite to win a national championship with that call hanging over their head. The refs choked on that one. The what if’s will fly higher the further ucla goes. That’s why those criticals calls are made and the game is decided on the floor, and not by writers or anyone else. On the court, not leaving any questions to doubt.
Cody
and yes, I’m an Aggie and proud of it.
Man, I have never seen so many cry babies in my life. TAMU fans, Kansas fans, everybody whining for days over a couple of calls… obviously these people not of programs great in the history of college basketball. Obviously these people place a rather low value on personal responsibility. You know those type, always playing the victim, always blaming other for their lot in life. Frankly, I am getting a little sick of it. It’s time for them to go back to their trailer parks and chill a little bit. Give it a rest.
There were many calls that went against the Bruins, one particularly egregious one was when Darren Collison was called for a foul… AFTER HE WAS THROWN TO THE FLOOR. Apparently it’s his fault that he had A&M wrapped all over him and then thrown to the ground.
During the flow of the game, and from the camera angle, it was difficult to see if a foul was committed. Here was an instance that not calling anything would have been fine. Further, UCLA was up at the time and OT would have also been acceptable. The unwillingness to call a foul may have also been brought up by the fact that Kevin Love was a blocking machine in that game, and initially looked to have a hand on the ball (although it was later credited to Josh Shipp) and may have caused the refs to hold on to their whistles.
Ridiculous. There were bad calls all throughout the game, and VERY uneven officiating, as they couldn’t decide whether to call the first five minutes loose, or the next five tight, or everything against UCLA or everything against A&M.
Quit the crying about the officiating and let’s all agree that the officiating in every sport seems to be lacking. Is the reason for this older refs/officials that can’t keep up with today’s game, or are the leagues putting too much emphasis on offense for the sake of the fans and its sponsors? When you reach the “BIG” Leagues as a referee/official, the only thing you need to worry about is not totally blowing a call that will be caught and shown on Sportscenter over and over. There seems to be a complacency among these officials that they’re “untouchable” becuase they’ve made it to the “show”. Officials just like the players/coaches should be held accountable for their actions. Yeah that means the NBA and NFL too!
Every team at every level gets calls that go for and against them; it’s just part of the game. I must admit that being a UCLA alum, I feel lucky when we get away with one and slightly bummed when we get jobbed. I could share several stories of the latter (women’s NCAA hoops v. ‘Bama, football v. Miami before instant replay) as could anyone and everyone. (How about the St. Louis Cardinals in Game 6 of the 1985 World Series v. the KC Royals?) Our human nature is also such that we are more inclined to remember the times the calls went against us, as my aforementioned recollections demonstrate. People respond to them however they choose - either with bitterness or “c’est la vie.” It’s all part of sports, like it or not. Anyone wanting perfect officiating will have to wait until God returns to this earth. I do believe when that happens, however, He will have more important things to do than to make correct calls in a game. It would be cool, though, to have the Almighty judge whether a certain play was a charge by the offensive player or a block by the defender - or even a “no call.” Even Trent Johnson wouldn’t argue with God!!! (Or would he? Just wondering.)
John Ryan:
Oh no, here we go with Patriot fans comparison again. I’m about to show more objectivity in this post then you have in either of UCLA conspiracy posts, so pay attention.
The “block” by Shipp on the Aggies final possession looked to be just that. That’s watching it live. However, after seeing the pictures of that play, it was clearly a foul. Sloan should have been at the line shooting two with a chance to tie the game and send it into overtime. Why wasn’t it called a foul? I can only speculate on that. Maybe it had something to do with foul called on Hill against Collison at the end of the game. I believe that the head of officials said that he wanted a strong call at the end of the game, and although calling a foul there would have been a strong call given the pictures, it appeared it could have been a clean block watching it live, thus making it a weak call.
Personally, once I saw Sloan dribble past the three point line I was hoping UCLA would foul him. Why? Sloan is a poor free shooter, and more than likely would have missed one of those. The aggies could have got an offensive rebound if he missed the second one, and either won or tied the game, but that probably unlikely. Still, the aggies should have been afforded that chance. Also, it should be noted that had Sloan made both free throws, UCLA would have had a few seconds to try to win the game. Given that Love throws amazing outlet passes and that Collison has 4.3 speed, UCLA could have easily got a shot off and possible drawn a foul. This too is unlikey, but it certaintly could have happened especially considering that the aggies would have crashed the boards in the event of a miss.
Also, as you noted UCLA had the momentum at that point as a result of the home crowd and its come back. There’s a good chance that they still would have won had the game gone to overtime. But again, the aggies should have been given a chance to put the game into overtime. They played exceptional and gave UCLA all they could handle.
To all of those UCLA fans who are saying “the refs should swallow their whistles in the final seconds…”:
Where were all of you when the refs completely screwed Stanford out of its rightful victory in the game on March 6 when the refs did NOT swallow their whistles on the final play in regulation. What is worse, that play was NOT a foul, and Collison got the star treatment. The NCAA must want UCLA to win the whole thing again. Ridiculous!
Buzz — great comparison of UCLA fans to Patriot fans — spot on!
This is just another sports blog. Just another subjective, personal opinion. Is it based on facts? Barely. It would appear to be largely based on conjecture and bias (as well as previously blogged conjecture and bias.) Mr. Ryan seems to feel that UCLA is the only university that has ever had a call benefit them at a critical time. Perhaps myopia, or perhaps simply living in Cal and Staford country, is responsible for this narrow-minded personal opinion.
John Ryan:
This post is a continuation of the last, so again, pay attention.
You might wonder why (perhaps not) UCLA fans are defending that non-call on that play, the Hill foul on Collison, the non-call on Westbrook’s strip of Ryan Anderson, and Shipps’s game winning over-the-backboard circus shot. Maybe it’s because, although UCLA has received beneficial calls or non-calls at the very end of the games, the media (especially you) seem to overlook the bad calls or non-calls that go against UCLA. The foul call that went against Collison when the player he was defending threw him to the ground is a good example. That was one of the worst calls I had ever seen. Much worse than the non-calls and calls that went in UCLA’s favor. Did you mention that? No. Sure, it was earlier in the game, but to fail to mention it, is just plain wrong. Your writing is unbelieveble slanted.
Back to the Cal and Stanford games. The slow motion video of the Westbrook strip of Anderson shows that it was it was clean. Not only that, it shows that the ball went off of Anderson. UCLA was rightfully awarded the ball. That being said, Shipp’s shot went over the backboard and should not have counted. Cal should have won that game. Watching the replay you can see it going over the corner of the backboard. Watching it live, it was definitely more difficult to tell. Should that play have been reviewable? Sure. Should a shot that goes over the backboard be illegal? No way. It’s a ridiculous rule that shouldn’t be in the rule book. That being said, Cal should have won the game because it is a rule and the shot did go over the backboard.
The Stanford game is a different story. Yes, UCLA received a beneficial call at the end of the game, but that was just one of many bad calls or non-calls in that game. Hill appeared to travel and then definitley charged into Love on the go-ahead basket before the infamous foul call on Hill. UCLA should have had the ball with 8 seconds left and the scored tied. At worst UCLA was going into overtime with Stanford.
If you want to argue that calls at the end of the game matter more than calls at the beginning of the game, I can understand that. After all, a team has more time to overcome bad calls/non-calls the more time there is left in the game. In this particular game, the bad non-calls that went in UCLA happened in the beginning of the game. For instance, Love double dribbled on one possession and scored as a result. Luc also scored despite traveling. However, the officials missed Mitch Johnson’s charge into Aboya that led a bucket for Stanford. All these were in the beginning of the game. You conviently failed to point out that Mitch Johnson double dribbled in the second half and Stanford scored a bucket on that same possession. You didn’t mention that UCLA was the victim of an additional four bad calls made by officials that were out of position. All these non-calls or calls that benefitted Stanford definitely affected the game. They helped Stanford take a big lead and maintain it until the very end of regulation. Yes, there were certaintly some calls that went in UCLA’s favor as I mention, but UCLA was definitely the victim of the officials more often then Stanford in that game. Had the officials called it fairly, that last call probably wouldn’t have even mattered. It probably wouldn’t have come down to that play. But I’m sure you never thought to consider that.
Also, did you see all the travels the Lopez twins got away with in the UCLA-Stanford PAC-10 tourney game? How come you don’t mention that? Probably because UCLA overcame those bad non-calls and won anyways. Oh, and what about last year’s UCLA-Stanford game at Stanford? That officiating was probably the worst I’ve ever seen. Stanford got so many calls that they shouldn’t have received, yet you fail to mention that.
This isn’t about one call or even one game …
Three incidents are a TREND!!!
If this continues, it will ultimately affect the integrity of the game like steroids in MLB and/or the video taping scandal in the NFL.
Dr. James Naismith and Dr. Forrest “Phog” Allen must be spinning in their graves …
Wait! I forgot to mention the non calls on the Lopez twins when they traveled in the Marquette game. Lets see, those happened toward the end of the game and Stanford won by one point right? Another HUGE non-call in Stanford’s favor at the end of the game? Get out!
Bruins fans are insufferable.
I am trying to move on from this non-call. People say it happens all the time at then end of the game. Should it happen especially when the game is so close? The game had been physical with a lot of contact. I would have assumed if the refs were doing their jobs they would have been on top of this especially since the game was so close. Guess I was wrong. I hate the fact that the ref decided the game for us. It should have been decided by Sloan shooting the free throws. Ha - the refs were so good they didn’t even know time had run out when the last shot was made. I REALLY am trying to let this go…….
I know a lot of Bruins fans very well. They have for many years complained bitterly and repeatedly about the many ridiculous benefits that Arizona and Stanford receive from the (admittedly horrible) Pac-10 officials. In their minds, this is the only thing that has prevented Bruin championships for the last 2 decades straight. Now that UCLA is once again the Pac-10 and national darling, they are the ones receiving the most love from the officials. Suddenly, it’s okay. Suddenly, it’s “just part of the game.” And, suddenly, “one call doesn’t really matter … what about all the others?” That mature acceptance was mysteriously lacking before. Where does this sense of entitlement come from?
The problem is that this does not begin or end with UCLA fans. We all seem to make excuses and gladly accept bad officiating that goes our way. And we all are so angry when we are robbed of a victory (or an opportunity) by bad calls. This is absolutely ridiculous and backwards. All of us should want our victories to mean something. And we should be upset and apologetic when we get unfair benefits. In UCLA’s case, they’ve been very fortunate to be on the receiving end many times this year — and it threatens to undermine their success. UCLA has a very good team that could well earn a national championship this year. Where’s the outrage from the UCLA fans? Instead of earning it, they may get stuck with being handed it… which is nauseating, even to the biggest fan. Why don’t they stand up and complain? I think we’ve seen in recent games that the UCLA players have been flat and complacent in long stretches of their games — no doubt because the players are coming to expect that they will get the help they need when the situation requires it. Bad officiating is bad … even when it at first appears to help you. Where’s the outrage? Why make excuses and shower love on bad officiating? It’s hurting your team — a good team that deserves an opportunity to show what they can do, without interference that threatens to undermine all of their victories. If you think your team is the best, then you should be angry at the help they are getting. If you don’t believe in your team, then you shouldn’t be so loud and proud…
New Duke? Duke was a mere pretender. We are talking the new UCLA.
The officiating in Anaheim in the last 8 minutes was truly cowardly. UCLA could be crazy agressive and A&M had to wear kid gloves. You KNEW how it was going to end.
The last (non) call was just the icing on the cake. The deck was really stacked in this case. Much more than it should ever be in an NCAA tournament game.
This stuff happens. But to pretend that UCLA hasn’t been the beneficiary of some home cooking is ridiculous.
Hey Sevenyearincollegehawk,
I told you go back to the trailer park and GIVE IT A REST!!!! There is no trend, there is no conspiracy, and there damn sure ain’t nuthin’ fer you to go on an on about (understand now? Good).
What there does seem to be, especially from the Kansas fans, is a lot of UCLA envy. 11 > 1 national championship banners hanging at home will do that I guess (they will always have Danny Manning)
DoubleDown:
I don’t know any UCLA fans who blame the officiating for UCLA’s last two tourney losses to Florida. Nor do they blame the venue like Kansas and Memphis fans did the last two years. They simple recognize that Florida was the better team, that outplayed UCLA and deserved to win.
The difference between UCLA fans and fans of other teams is that they recognize that the other bad calls affect the game too. What’s nauseating is that Stanford and other fans don’t recognize this. They ignore all the bad calls/non-calls that went in their team’s favor because of a bad call at the end of the game. They take Darren Collison’s free throws as a given and the overtime victory the Bruins earned as predetermined. Collison may be a clutch player but he is still capable of missing. Case in point: He went 3 for 5 from the line in the PAC-10 tourney final. UCLA hasn’t been handed anything. They’ve overcome slow starts and poor officiating to fight their way back into games.
The outrage from UCLA fans comes from watching the entire game and making note of all the calls that go against UCLA that allows their opponent to gather or sustain momentum. All we hear and read about is the calls that went in our favor. Does that really seem right to you? Not once have I read about how UCLA got shafted by the refs even though they have on mulitple occasions.
You ask where the outrage is from UCLA fans about getting beneficial calls at the end of games. How hypocritical is that? Where was the outrage from Stanford fans about all the calls and non-calls that benefitted them? What about last year’s UCLA-Stanford game at Stanford? Stanford clearly received the benefit of poor calls/non-calls the entire second half. All that help allowed them to win the game. That was even worse, because it was happening throughout the entire game. Where was the outrage from Stanford fans then? Where was the outrage when Collison was mugged but was called for a foul in Saturday’s game?
To say that “the UCLA players have been flat and complacent in long stretches of their games — no doubt because the players are coming to expect that they will get the help they need when the situation requires it”, is to make an untrue statement. The Bruins are a second half team - they’ve been that way the entire year. They don’t expect they will get the help they will need when the situation requires it”. That’s an unfounded statement that you try to pass off as fact.
Oh, my God! It’s a conspiracy. The only question is whether or not it is divinely inspired or do the refs just love Bruin blue and gold? Actually I think that A&M was in on it - at least some of the players. why else would their player IGNORE his coach’s instruction to go for a 3 and then deliberately throw his wrist in the way of shipp’s grasp.
Give me a breat. How about all the other calls that went against UCLA in the game - and some against A&M as well? Did none of them alter the game? Did none of them cost either of the teams points? Only the last miss - if it was a miss - was important.
Give me abreaK I expect such nonsense from posters, but from a reporter who SHOULD know better.
Some of you are the kings of stupid.
Wow, the Bruin’s fans are becoming just like Patriots fans, though that would take a couple championships rather then Final Four faulters.
Just admit it guys, the refs have been giving you sweet calls (or non-calls) all season and all tournament long. it’s not your fault, just come clean. Your saving grace is here
http://dailybruin.ucla.edu/news/2008/mar/10/iucla-shouldnt-need-refs-help-wini/,
at least he can admit it, and even if UNC will wipe the floor with you, don’t let yourselves become the next Duke!
No one is critical of North Carolina NOT LEAVING the entire state of CAROLINA until the FINAL FOUR.
No one is complaining of how TEXAS WILL be playing the
REMAINDER OF THEIR TOURNEY games in TEXAS!!!!!!!!!
So who is the beneficiary of HOME COOKING!
If Carolina and Texas are SOOOOOOOOOOOOO GOOOD, then why weren’t their early round games moved out of their backyards? I know they earned it!!!!!!!!
For a sportswriter to take sides when he is supposed to be objective is unconscionable.
Fans will see things as they want them to be. Every Stanford supporter will oversee all the wrong plays their team has made(Could easily have arqued the Marquette player DID NOT Foul Robin Lopez! in the waning seconds to give Stanford a 1 point win-Don’t you find that ironic- Johnson gets tossed and Stanford wins one for the ole Coach!!!!!!!!! Fantastic motivational ploy!!!)- Stanford fan- no outrage there.
Texas A&M played extremely well for 35 minutes and moved away from what was successful which had been parlayed into a 10 point second half lead.
For those of you who feel poor A&M and Stanford have been robbed- NO ONE TOLD STANFORD or A&M to BLOW DOUBLE DIGITS leads late in the game- perhaps if they hadn’t done so-They wouldn’t have to be whining over a perceived miscarriage of justice. To extrapolate the what-ifs is merely hot air.
The final score of the Bruin/Aggie game was changed to reflect the waving off of Westbrook’s defintive dunk at game’s end. And still this isn’t enought to soothe damaged egos of fans and writers alike. Seems there’s enough spewing of hatred in the world and that’s what these posts imply.
Stanford 07:
Its interesting that you posted a link to that article since someone already posted a link to an article written by the Stanford Daily which noted that Hill appeared to travel and charge into Love on the go-ahead basket at the end of the game. If I remember correctly that article also notes how much UCLA fans at that game were booing the officials at halftime because of how poor the officiating was.
I know you’re not talking about final four faulters the last couple of years when Stanford didn’t even make it out of the first round last year. Did Stanford even make it the tourney in 2006? You forgot to mention that UCLA has 11 NCAA Mens Basketball Championships. Woops!
The officials continue to allow the Lopez twins to get away with traveling. But that doesn’t matter because it’s not the last play of the game right? Not to mention they let Hill and Johnson to get away with charges and allow Johnson to double dribble with no consequences. How about those sweet calls/non-calls? You want Bruin fans to admit UCLA has received some calls, but not Stanford fans, and fans of other teams?
Many UCLA fans have no problem admitting UCLA received the benefit of poor calls/non-calls at the end of the Stanford, Cal and Texas A&M game. I even said that Cal should have won that game and Sloan should have been shooting free throws. However, for fans and the media to continually overlook the many bad calls/non-calls that go against the Bruins or simply accept them as part of the game is ridiculous. How fans of opposing team have the audacity to point the favorable calls/non-calls UCLA has received this year without even acknowledging the breaks the officials have afforded their own team is beyond me. They blame the officials and not their teams eventhough their team blew double digit leads.
I’ll give you credit for one thing you wrote in your post. It’s the officials who are making these calls or failing to make calls, not UCLA.
Here’s a link that shows more calls that were missed by the officials during the last game.
http://larrybrownsports.com/college-basketball/whining-ucla-noncalls/
John Ryan:
To say that Tim Kawakami is a great reporter who is always objective would be to lie. However, I do give him credit for writing this.
“Yet I cannot emphasize this enough: THAT ONE CALL IS NOT WHY THE WARRIORS LOST THIS GAME.
I understand why Warriors fans might think that, but no single call–especially with the Warriors TRAILING BY TWO at the time–loses a basketball game.
The Warriors get whistles, too, you know. Not all of them. Maybe not even a majority of them. But they get them. I hate to say it, but you have to earn whistles and you do that by winning games and titles, by making shots, playing aggressively and proving that weaker teams have to grab you to beat you.”
I love the Warriors and feel that they should have had a chance to tie the game with 4 seconds left in overtime last night, but the bad call didn’t cost them the game. It’s too bad Tim didn’t use this reasoning when talking about the UCLA-Stanford game. Maybe he has actually rationally thought about it and learned something between then and now. Stanford fans might get some perspective by replacing “warriors” with “stanford” in the material I copied down from Tim’s post.
Hello, my name is Stan and I am an idiot UCLA fan. I have no life and write 20 essays about how good the Bruins are. Everything I say is retarded because I dropped out of high school to start a band and we still play at high school parties on Friday nights and sometimes Saturdays.
The UCLA @ Stanford game last year was a farce… as a non-partisan who attended that game, I can say that it was chock full of ridiculous officiating. The one-sided officiating ruined what would have been an exciting 2nd half, one in which Stanford outplayed UCLA and earned a chance to comeback. Instead of being given the opportunity to show what they could do (and they were doing well), Stanford was handed the game on a silver platter. It’s very clear that UCLA fans are still bitter about this. As Stan points out, I’ve seen no evidence that Stanford coaches, fans, or players have exhibited the intellectual honesty to admit that they were robbed of the chance to actually earn their victory by calls which made the result a foregone conclusion. So Stan’s argument seems to be that, since Stanford fans are gladly willing to embrace bad calls that help them, UCLA fans and all other fans should also gladly accept this. I, for one, have no desire to be like a Stanford fan. Why should this be the low standard for which we should aim? We can do better. And it will begin when we decide that the most important thing to us is good, quality games in which the players get to decide the outcomes rather than our favorite team winning at all costs and under any circumstances. Let’s not make excuses for bad officiating … let’s admit that it just plain sucks for both the winning and the losing teams when the players’ efforts are undermined by substandard or biased officiating. We should stick together on this point, no matter whether we happen to support one of the teams in question. UCLA wasn’t robbed. Stanford wasn’t robbed. A&M wasn’t robbed. We were all robbed.
SEE FOR YOURSELF.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SW5QT70DHhI
Man that is one of the worst calls in history.
Stan says:
That’s probably the dumbest post I’ve read yet. Obviously you haven’t read the majority of my posts or “essays”. I usually point out the other missed calls and poor calls that go against UCLA; I even pointed out a couple more that went in their favor that were not mentioned. Judging by your post I would guess that you’re 13 or 14. At the very least you have the maturity level of a 13 or 14 year-old.
Basketball Integrity Fan:
One of the worst calls in history? Not even close. In fact, there was no call. Should there have been one? Certaintly. The PICTURE proves this and makes it crystal clear, not the video footage. Did you think about why the person who put that video together had to put the picture after the footage of the “block”? It’s because it wasn’t an obvious foul watching it live.