Stanford wuz robbed: Pac-10 officials sure love to blow those whistles!
Oops: Wilmer has a very similar take on the call, and he’s Wilmer, so you should read his take over mine. Or read both.
I’m no Bay Area homer, which I think has been proven about a thousand times. It’s the exact opposite in 99% of my thinking, typing and berating.
I also can’t stand excuses, especially excuses pointing to the officials, a particular call or anything like that. The game is the game. You win, you lose, it’s the dang game, everybody gets good calls, everybody gets bad calls. Move on.
But in this one case…
That foul call on a clean Lawrence Hill block of Darren Collison’s lay-up attempt with 2.5 left at Pauley Pavilion was awful. It changed the game–Collison made the two free throws to tie the game and UCLA charged past Stanford in OT.
Most of all, it was a whistle that should’ve never been blown because the call was made by the side official, who was blocked out by traffic.
Typical touchy Pac-10 officiating, I must say. TYPICAL. I would’ve said the exact same thing if Stanford had gotten the call on a Mitch Johnson lay-up/block by Alfred Aboya, I guarantee you.
Blown call that cost the game.
If there was a call to be made, it had to be the underneath official who was, what, six feet away from Hill? And he didn’t call anything.
Obviously, Stanford crumbled some in the late-going. If it hadn’t crumbled, the bad call wouldn’t have mattered. Definitely true.
And obviously, can and will survive this–a road OT loss to UCLA should only help tournament seeding and a road OT loss on a terrible late call should earn the Cardinal a major committee look-see for a No. 2 seeding, though I’d certainly understand a 3.
(And there’s not much difference between the 2 and 3 slots, as Wilmer has previously explained to me. If you’re a 2, you open against 15 and play the winner of 7-10 next. If you’re a 3, you open against 14 and play the winner of 6-11 next. Not a huge difference.)
But say Stanford gets the droops after this pressure-cooker and loses at USC. Very possible. Then say Stanford is rattled and loses early in the Pac-10 tournament next week.
That’d be a lot of losses in the final flurry… could that knock Stanford to a 4 seed? Possible. Not probable, but possible.
So go back: If that Collison whistle never happens, the shot is blocked, the game is over, Stanford wins at UCLA and locks up a No. 2.
Reality: Collison gets the foul, makes the free throws, Bruins stampede OT and the Cardinal now had better win at USC to make sure it has a solid claim to a 3 seed.
Biiii-iiig difference. (Obviously if Wilmer has more to say on this, he’s the Hotline master, so all deferrals go that way.)
My pointed beef: I don’t like Pac-1o officials. I think they’re way too whistle-happy, I think they don’t know how to call physical games and when you have Stanford vs. UCLA, you are going to get physical activity.
There are bad officials in every conference, of course. But the Pac-10 officials (after I hear they got a warning this season to allow some more physicality) have a baked-in addiction to whistles.
They anticipate. They get antsy if they’ve gone a few minutes without a call. They rush make-up calls after a bad one on the other side. The game slows down.
The worst thing for the league is that this really hurts Pac-10 teams heading into tournament play, which is often much rougher and far less bogged down by whistles.
Stanford, particularly, can get knocked off stride (remember Alabama in 2004?) by a quick burst of athleticism and energy in an early round, when they’re used to whistles and whistles don’t come.
UCLA has gotten away with it the last two Final Four years because they’re more physical than anybody and the Bruins have gotten the respect of the Pac-10 officials.
That carries over to the tournament, obviously, and I have watched UCLA maul enough teams–maul with talent and determination, I salute them for it–to know that the Bruins are one team that can rise above the Pac-10 whistles.
They did it again tonight.
Your 2004 Alabama-Stanford example is a poor one. Alabama shot 34-44 from the line, on 31 Stanford fouls, while Stanford only got 11 free throws total. It wasn’t that fouls were not called, it was that they were all called on Stanford.
did the same ref who “non called” the travelling blow this call?
ucla sucks and Rick Neuweasel had them in his “friendly neighborhood pool”, so that explains why Stanford lost.
The “real” call should have been made at the other end in the key as Stanford CHARGED into Kevin Love. Yes, Love was set, feet firmly planted and there should have been a charging call resulting in NO basket for Stanford and then Love it shooting to keep the lead…. instead, a questionable, make-up call at the other end leaving fans screaming they were robbed!
Oh well.
Have a little cheese with that whine!
Is Rick’s neighborhood pool any worse than Reggie’s neighborhood slush fund? Weasels all, I tell you!
Totally agree with post 5. And what about the double dribble right in front of a ref that wasn’t called against Stanford when UCLA was getting momentum? Re posts 4 and 6, Rick’s neighborhood was a silly, minor infaction unlike the Bush money under the table. UCLA rules!
RE: Post #5
The Hill basket was called just the way the block on Collision SHOULD have been called: as a no call. Even if Love was standing still, it appeared as though he leaned towards Hill, who was trying to avoid contact. The officials actually did the right thing by not making a call, but probably only because they weren’t paying attention.
By the way, Barbara, if a charge had been called on Hill, Love still wouldn’t have been shooting free-throws. You don’t shoot free throws, even in the bonus, on a player control foul.
Learn the rules.
RE: Post # 5 and 7
Thought I was the only one who couldn’t figure out why a charge wasn’t called - definitely should have been…
WHATEVER! If Stanford was robbed, it was payback for the last win over Arizona they were GIVEN by the officials. Now THAT was a robbery.
Stanford just does not learn from their mistakes.
This is a replay of the ASU game, that they blew on the road. Up by 7 with under 5 to go, they fail to run time off the clock and take a poor shot (B Lopez), allow at least 6 second chance hoops, including not boxing on a guard 20 feet from the hoop off a missed free throw.Why was Robin on the bench at crunch time?
Their offense is so predictable down the stretch: throw the ball into Brook who will get doubled or tripled, who then forces a bad pass or shot.
The foul at the end of regulation was a terrible call, but it should have never come to that. Well there’s always the Pac 10 Tournament, or the NCAAs, maybe they’ll learn how to close out games.
Kawakami, you Homer.
Teh only thing about bad officiating is that it comes around and goes around. Stanford wins the game at Arizona last month after a terrible call that allowed them to steal it at the free throw line in the final seconds. Last night, they felt the same pain. Both calls were game changing and wrong. Insider told me last year that Tom Hansen is fit to be tied about the poor quality of his officaiting and has tried multiple things to improve it. Many officials have been phased out but the new ones are even worse. Realy frustrating for west coast basketball. A solution allowing for credibilty is really needed.
All you whiners complainig about the one foul call! Shut up and suck it up already! If Stanford didn’t let their lead slip, it wouldn’t have come down to that. Please! Stanford was getting calls their way all night! There were so many “tic-y-tac” fouls called against UCLA all night. If Stanford was able to quench every Bruin rally, why couldn’t they do it in OT? Don’t tell me they lost their momentum, or spark, you play til you’ve got nothing left. The Lopez twins worked Love and they could have continued that dominance in OT, but they mentally just let it go. I’m a Bruin alumni, and I’ll even admit that should have been a no-call, but at the same time, the Cardinals blew the lead so shut up already! And to those UCLA haters who only hate UCLA because you are from or cheer for USC, at least we play like a team. OJ Mayo is just playing it up for the scouts and the NBA. I’ll admit ‘SC was a much better and more dangerous team last year when there was no superstar and they were playing team ball.
Take a look at the replay. The block was clean at the top, but Collison was knocked off balance at the body. That’s still a foul. The refs let everything go during the first half, and called the second half tight. They called the same thing on Mata once or twice and on Love. The fact that there was only 2.5 seconds left is not a reason to swallow the whistle.
To post #5 and all the self justifying UCLA fans…are you blind? First off, Hill didn’t charge - Love did one of his famous ‘UCLA Flops’ - I mean, the dude practically dove backwards as Hill came across (not into) his body. Don’t even try to justify the call.
Have all you UCLA homers noticed that every single member of the national media (see Gottlieb on ESPN) has called this game out as being BS? Stanford was robbed. UCLA got its typical favored treatment.
I’m down here in SoCal and just wanted to see if NoCal was on suicide watch after seeing the look on your coaches face last night. I was checking the news wire to see if a body was found near the arena.
It was a bad call, but there were many bad calls in the final 10 minutes called against the Bruins and they still pulled it out. Stanford quit in OT, plain and simple.
See you in the tourney!
There is usually a turning point in any game, like you protest a bad foul call that Collison was able to capitalize on make two freethrows to force overtime, but what about the Stanford intentional foul call in the overtime period when Westbrook hit the floor. That intentional Stanford blunder was the turing point in the game, I believe, that was flooded with poor officiating from start to finish. You are going to get some calls and not others. UCLA prevailed by tenacioius, never give up play, that scored a Pac-10 Title.
Stanford has benefited from some calls late in games, these things have a way of evening themselves out.
As a Cal guy, I hate Stanfurd — and love to see ‘em lose, at anything. But, man, they sure got the screw job on that call last night — and it wasn’t even close, just a picture perfect block. What a horrible call. That ref has got to go.
Stanford didnt LOSE the game on that call. They TIED. If UCLA won the game on that play I could understand all the gripes…but they didnt. Stanford still had 5 minutes of overtime to prove they were the better team. Stanford LOST because they couldnt put the play behind them and show up in overtime. UCLA did.
Bad calls have always been part of basketball and they always even themselves out over the long haul. Stanford had every opportunity to win the game in regulation and in overtime, but they choked. Stanford and its fans are now just dwelling on ONE play because they cant admit that they had UCLA on the ropes and blew it.
What an Idiot…Stanford did let UCLA back in the game several times, but that’s going to happen when you play a team as good as the bruins…there will be runs on both sides. Nevertheless, the Cardinal (no “s” idiot) always seemed to answer the bruin run and keep a lead. It’s just too bad that the final UCLA run at the end of regulation was assisted by someone not wearing a Bruin Uniform. Not complaining or crying…we’ll just have to take you out at Staples Center next week (unless the Trojans do it first.)
I’m a UCLA student who attended the game and stood in the student section. I had a fantastic view of Hill’s last basket and it was definitely a charge. Love did a great job anticipating where Hill was going and got to the spot before Hill did. It was a charge, plain and simple. The score would have been tied and UCLA would have had possession with 7 seconds left. Darren Collison would have probably had the ball in his hands with a chance to win the game in regulation. The problem with Stanford fans is that they aren’t looking at the play that gave them a 63-61 lead. You can’t complain about something that shouldn’t have happened in the first place.
It was interesting that Tim noted that the ref who made the call with 2.5 seconds left was out of position. During the game there were 4 calls made against UCLA by officials who were out of position. The official who was in position didn’t call anything because there was no call to be made.
The refs were horrible. I’ve never heard the fans get on the officials as much as they did in that game. They missed a double dribble on Love in the first half that led to basket and a double dribble on Johnson in the second half that led to a bucket.
# 7
How can Barbara learn the rules when you are crying all over them?
Three points:
Hill told the Chronicle he DID foul collison. But I guess all of you know better?
Envy (of the Bruin program) is an ugly thing.
Ehere was all the crying that there should have been a no-call on Buddinger in the Az game?
Bad calls may be a part of the game, but they’re still bad calls and should be called out (and the block/foul was a very bad call). Only one post mentioned the obvious traveling violation that didn’t get called a couple of minutes before the block. That was so obvious a 3rd grade baller could have called it without a replay and with one eye closed.
All that being said it shouldn’t matter to the Stanford players, they need to suck it up and play. Watch the game films and try to improve their defensive rebounding, that’s what really killed them. Also a couple of whispers in B. Lopez’s ear about better shot selection might help.
1. you said stanford is not above the pac-10 whistles, but objectively they had a few calls in their favor last night as well.
2. The guy who fouled, admitted he fouled. And while the counter response to this is collison’s comment, but collisson also thought it was a make up call, meaning, the game might not have been where it was on that last foul if traveling calls were made
3. The foul was on the body, not the stanford hand on the ball, because anyone could see that was clean.
4. You say, if that foul wasn’t called, game over?? I think you forget that it was out on stanford and that it would have been a ucla ball…we still would have had an opportunity to score and even it up.
5. And if stanford continued with that momentum in OT, then you wouldn’t have cared about the call.
Post # 14 and 17
I’ve never seen a team in any basketball game get all the calls all night and shoot 8 free throws. UCLA got all the bad calls and Stanford shot 8 free throws 8!! and the majority of Stanford’s points come from the paint. Something is not adding up here. By the way it’s Cardinal, not Cardinals.
Post # 15
The fact that there were 2.5 seconds left is every reason to swallow your whistle. You don’t want to make a bad call that decides the game, as happened last night.
Post # 21
They did have every opportunity to win the game in regulation and they took advantage of it by blocking Collison’s shot to win the game. That blown call erased the fact that they did take advantage of the opportunity. Should they have played better in overtime, absolutely, but overtime a) should never have happened and b) it is very hard to overcome something like that for any team in any situation let alone when you’re on the road against the no. 2 team in the country.
Bryan: Come on man. Stanford just dumped the ball in the pain most of the time to the Lopez twins and had them face up to the basket and shoot. You’re not going to get fouls when you don’t attack the rim. Stanford didn’t earn free throws and UCLA did. Now if you want argue numbers, go check the box score from last years UCLA-Stanford game at Stanford. UCLA got hosed by the officials that game. But of course these biased Bay Area writers couldn’t make that the story like they have here.
I was in perfect position (student section) to see Hill’s shot with 8 seconds to take the lead. It was definitely a charge. UCLA should have had the ball with 8 seconds left with the score tied. At worst UCLA was going into overtime where they pounded Stanford. You can’t complain about a call that shouldn’t have affected the game in the first place.
i hope stanford doesn’t dwell on this or they’ll end up losing to ’sc, losing early in the pac-10 tournament and then getting bounced early at the ncaa tournament. get over it. the regular season pac 10 title is meaningless. what matters is what happens in a couple of weeks from now. if ucla lost they’d be co-champs with stanford in the pac-10…big deal. if that’s all that stanford is playing for (a pac-10 title), they might as well not show up for the ncaa tournament. ucla only hangs national championship banners up…not pac 10 championships.
Geez, some of you talking about this bad call talk as if it was the first athletic game you’ve ever watched. There are bad calls made all the time, all you can do is hope that a)your not the recipient and b) your team is good enough to overcome them if your team is on the receiving end. Stanfurd was UP the entire game by double digits and didn’t close out in the end. Did that one call erase an entire double digit lead? I don’t think so, and in OT they pretty much packed up and left Pauley. I’ve seen enough UCLA games (class of’96) to say that we’ve been on the cruddy end of many calls and I’m sure all of you can say your fave team has gotten some favorable calls too. So, the real question you Stanfurd fans should be asking is “How did we completely CHOKE the final 2 min. and in OT”.
That was a GOOD CALL. He had all ball on the block, but he body slammed his body right into Collison. You have sour grapes. If the defenser would have went straight up and blocked he would have been fine, but he slammed his body right into him.
You have been writing hoops for some time Tim, and I am quite surprised that you didn’t see the body foul below the block, nor do you mention the OBVIOUS charge that was not called on the previous play.
UCLA won fair an square, and the replay shows Collison was hit in the body, hard.
The Stanford student covering the game for the Stanford Daily admits that Hill’s go-ahead basket was either a charge or a travel. Either way, it should have been a tie game, UCLA ball, 10 seconds to play.
http://daily.stanford.edu/article/2008/3/7/closeFall
Also, did anyone catch Mitch Johnson’s blatant-yet-uncalled double dribble? It led directly to a Stanford basket. The bad calls in this game tended to even out.
It’s a shame to have a referee decide that hard-fought battle between two top-ten teams. The players should decide it.
I’m wondering if that ref was paid off…
UCLA always gets the benefit of the doubt, reffing. UCLA and Stanford both snubbed Arizona of clear cut Arizona wins at Mckale, of all places, recently.
IGNORANT ass UCLA fans thinking they deserved to win this game.
“UCLA should have had the ball with 8 seconds left with the score tied.”
It wasn’t a charge..plain and simple STAN. Are u fans fckin blind? Your FAT boy wasn’t even set in position (moving for that matter during the play). Give me a break idiot. The game was OVER when these pac 10 refs decided to do their socal bias bs. The refs blew the last 4-5 plays in that game which cost Stanford the game
I’ll make this clear right now to all u UCLA fans. UCLA will choke in the tourney like EVERY year. The better teams are more physical and faster than these overrated Bruins. You have no Ed O’Bannon to save you this time.
Refs now hose Cal, to give UCLA a miracle win. With 7 secs. left Cal player was hacked/fouled and then ball went out of bounds off of UCLA and the ref gives the ball to UCLA. BS
Terrible calls send you to a loss, not to overtime. If you are truly hoping to see Stanford in the playoffs, they are lucky their failure to respond to occurred prior to the tournament. Even Hill didn’t complain about the foul called against him. Now it’s your turn to grow up. .
good insight; looks like the officials just took one away from Cal today also. Did not call an obvious foul to give the ball back to UCLA at the end.
PS. Stanford made a lot of weak plays that cost them tha game. Very poor shot selection and throwing the ball way. Looked like they were afraid of UCLA. Seems like STanford gets that way at the end of the season. Choke, tired ? whatever it is I’m sure the coach would like to know what makes the players not tough enough for the end of the season.
THE PAC 10 is one of the hardest conference’s to officiate in. Remember they are human and will make mistakes. It’s part of life. Yes there are a lot of implications when it comes to sports, but it happens to all of us. In our everyday job we can get everything right but then there is that one little mistake we make then we are in the bosses office getting chewed out since the company lost money. So stuff happens and lets move on.
If Stanford can survive the first week of the tournament they will be in good shape.
By the time you get to the regional semis, the officiating is better and they let the kids play. The more physical play they allow, the better Stanford’s chances of winning.
But the Pac-10 as a conference has got to get its act together on officiating. They need to let the kids play more.
Look no further than the UNC-Duke game. The officials put their whistles in their pockets and let the kids decide the outcome. What a great game it was! Stanford-UCLA could have been the same.
Stan is Canned Says:
“I’ll make this clear right now to all u UCLA fans. UCLA will choke in the tourney like EVERY year. The better teams are more physical and faster than these overrated Bruins. You have no Ed O’Bannon to save you this time.”
This guy is the biggest idiot I’ve even seem a post from. Wow! I bet Stanford would love to have 2 final four appearances the last 2 years & the championship game in 2006! What is Stanturds record in the tourney the last 2 years? Bruins are 2-0 against the crybaby cardinal this year w/o Ed O. I think Stan is sitting on the can!
Good luck loser!