Opinions sought on OSU/UConn refereeings

[cabbie191]

Several times a year we have threads that decry the state of WCBB refereeing.

I was pleased with the officials in this game. I didn't think they made any obviously bad calls, were relatively consistent, and let the players decide the game (not that there was much to decide after the first few minutes).

What do others think?

 

[EricLA]

I was thinking the same thing. Even the foul calls against Stewie seemed correct to my recollection (maybe there was one that was questionable), but for the most part, I thought they were just fine.

IMHO the sign of a good reffing crew is when you don't really notice them. There are some refs who seem determined to be noticed and inject themselves far too much into the game. The only time I appreciate that is when games get super physical or chippy - then refs need to regain control of the game...

 

[Sluconn Husky]

Geno wasn't happy about the double foul involving Stewart for whatever that's worth. Never noticed the refs but then it wasn't a physical game at all.

 

[DobbsRover2]

When the calls go 22-10 in favor of your team on the road, it's easy to say that the refereeing was good. Mitchell and Alston make a nice living at the line, as last year they combined for almost 10 points at the FT line a game. They got 5 points on FTs against the Huskies, so obviously we should be glad that UConn's zone D didn't let the tandem give the refs more reasons to blow the whistle. And for the Huskies, the refs made sure play didn't get chippy by calling a fair amount of contact calls on dribbles in the paint.

Geno saw that Mitchell and Alston went 15-16 at the FT line against USCar, and a big key to Monday's game was preventing a repeat of that. When the Bucks make chucks, they're sitting ducks.