Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2007 20:10:54 GMT -5
Also, how many times did PSU complain about calls in the match? How can you do that if you aren't willing to stand up and correct one you know was wrong?
They should have kept quiet.
|
|
|
Post by GatorVball on Oct 21, 2007 20:17:27 GMT -5
Right. So you would say the match-deciding point is not more significant? I'm not arguing with any of you. But I think PSU shouldn't have apologized then. Why show up the refs like that? In the grand scheme of things, the 1st point and last point are the same. PSU shouldn't have apologized because in the end, it is not their job to officiate matches. They just play the points and if a call goes their way, then so be it. At the same time, I have no beef at all with the Wisconsin fans who want to vent and feel their team got screwed.
|
|
|
Post by Badger Alum on Oct 21, 2007 20:27:47 GMT -5
I'm not sure you understand the point I was making. I wholeheartedly agree that officiating almost never determines the outcome of the game. That's true. This is the exception. This entire match was one of two equal teams battling it out. In game 5 alone, Penn State started off with the first 3 points, then the Badgers made a nice run up to 11-10. Then Penn State went on a great 4-0 run.
The problem I with this call is two-fold: 1. It was obviously wrong. I didn't see it on TV. I was there in person. It was obvious to everyone in the Field House except 2 refs. 2. Refs shouldn't decide the outcome of the game. It should have been 14-14. The game probably would have went into the 20s at that point.
Who knows, Penn State still could have won it fair and square. That's very possible. My complaint is that the refs never allowed us to find out the true winner. They blew a really obvious call.
Yes, their job is hard. Very hard. But that is no excuse for robbing all fans of a true outcome for a great match.
|
|
|
Post by Badger Alum on Oct 21, 2007 20:29:01 GMT -5
Penn State shouldn't have corrected the refs. It's not their job. They played a great match too.
|
|
|
Post by BOTE on Oct 21, 2007 20:54:28 GMT -5
IF the refs didn't see it because they were either blocked out because of their position on the floor or Harmato was turned in such a way thatthe couldn't see the alleged contact they have no other choice but to call a no touch. Its reaaly that imple. You can call ONLY what you see.
|
|
|
Post by Keystonekid on Oct 21, 2007 21:07:55 GMT -5
PSU acknowledged it was a bad call, Wisconsin didn't cry about it. It happens. Out of respect for how great the match was, and how well Wisconsin competed, PSU let them know the last point was a tough call. They weren't saying "you got screwed", they weren't saying "we shouldn't have won". How many calls were made in the course of a 5 game match this close? This is one point. Did it happen at a critical time? Yes. Did that point weigh any greater than point # 4 in this match? No. The down judge was the referee who needed to make the call. He didn't see it. Point. Again, that point has no more or less significance than any point in the match. Both PSU and Wisconsin coaches agree that there were calls made against PSU as well. The teams played, the officials officiated, and PSU won. It is no different than any match played anywhere in America at any level. Pete Waite is an absolute class act, and you should all take a page out of his book. Pete knows that by making this call the central issue, it denigrates the match, and it takes away from PSU's accomplishment.
|
|
|
Post by ohiovalley on Oct 21, 2007 21:15:54 GMT -5
The difference is that this call was not a tough call to make. The officials choked on their respective whistles. And who taught Harmotto to sell the "no-touch" that way. I can remember the day when there was an honor system in volleyball. Indeed, it was a long time ago, and my, how the world has changed since. The Badgers deserved better.
|
|
|
Post by Keystonekid on Oct 21, 2007 21:18:57 GMT -5
Ohio, you have to be kidding me. You think Harmotto should have approached the official and said she touched it? First of all, that wouldn't matter, they wouldn't respond to that. Secondly, It is not her call to make, her job is to attack the ball, its the officials to call it as they see it. They both did there job. For you to put that on Harmotto is just plain stupid. Officials don't decide matches. I am as competitive as anyone who ever walked this planet. I am as critical of referees as anyone. In twenty years of coaching high level volleyball I have never blamed an official. If we lost, it was our own doing, and we take responsibility for it. I guarantee you that is what Wisconsin is doing, regardless of how they feel about that call. Losers blame, winners take responsibility.
|
|
|
Post by JesusInGreen on Oct 21, 2007 21:28:20 GMT -5
The first point is the same as the last? You can't honestly tell me that there is no difference between starting a match down 0-1 and losing the match, perhaps the big ten championship, in 5, 13-15 when the score should be 14-14!!! This call was awful, and should have been detected by both referees and both line judges. These people are professionals paid to make the game equally fair to both teams so that the better team that particular night will win. Missing a call like this is just inexplicable, and pre-maturely ended an awesome match. PSU was not wrong to point out the mistake, especially in the manner they did. Missed calls happen, and you know its bad when EVERYONE knows it.
|
|
|
Post by Keystonekid on Oct 21, 2007 21:32:01 GMT -5
The call was awful. The refs did blow it. I will also absolutely tell you that that call had the exact point value as point #1. I will say it because it is true. That is not debatable. Does it feel greater? Yes. Does it carry more drama? Yes. Does it have greater significance? NO. PSU pointing it out , was a gentlemans way of expressing, "I wish this ended on a better note"
|
|
|
Post by IdahoBoy on Oct 21, 2007 21:38:38 GMT -5
Badger fans, I'm sorry to see any match end on such a sour note. I've seen my fair share of upsetting refereeing.
However, what should they have called instead? If they really missed it, do you think they should have called a "replay?" No. The ball went out, off the block. Wisconsin now knows, that if they want to win, they have to take care of business so that the refs can't make those calls.
That is the difference between a national championship caliber team, and a top ten team.
I'm sorry for your pain. I know it well. But it isn't going to be changed.
Refs have a hard job, while I'll be the first to critique a referee, I won't do it based solely on one play. So think about what you're saying. Think about what you're doing.
|
|
|
Post by Gorf on Oct 21, 2007 21:38:40 GMT -5
I'm not sure you understand the point I was making. I wholeheartedly agree that officiating almost never determines the outcome of the game. That's true. This is the exception. This entire match was one of two equal teams battling it out. In game 5 alone, Penn State started off with the first 3 points, then the Badgers made a nice run up to 11-10. Then Penn State went on a great 4-0 run. The problem I with this call is two-fold: 1. It was obviously wrong. I didn't see it on TV. I was there in person. It was obvious to everyone in the Field House except 2 refs. 2. Refs shouldn't decide the outcome of the game. It should have been 14-14. The game probably would have went into the 20s at that point. Who knows, Penn State still could have won it fair and square. That's very possible. My complaint is that the refs never allowed us to find out the true winner. They blew a really obvious call. Yes, their job is hard. Very hard. But that is no excuse for robbing all fans of a true outcome for a great match. The Badgers generally get a fair number of homer points from their line judges and again touch calls of that nature are the responsibility of the line judges. If you can happily accept points points that are obviously bad calls from your line judges that go in your favor then you can also happily accept calls from your line judges that go against your team. Did the line judges signal the call as a touch? If they didn't it's also likely that the referee had bad angles prevending him from being able to see the touch that you may or may not have seen from the stand. Plus, a referee (as mentioned early) won't make a call on something they don't see and they certainly won't make a call in your favor because the opposing coach says "we think you missed that call and you ought to give the point to the other team".
|
|
|
Post by Keystonekid on Oct 21, 2007 21:42:59 GMT -5
Nobody has more invested than the UW team and their coaches. Follow their lead and handle the loss with dignity, and applaud their opponent.
|
|
|
Post by Gorf on Oct 21, 2007 21:57:57 GMT -5
The difference is that this call was not a tough call to make. The officials choked on their respective whistles. And who taught Harmotto to sell the "no-touch" that way. I can remember the day when there was an honor system in volleyball. Indeed, it was a long time ago, and my, how the world has changed since. The Badgers deserved better. How many times did Badger players signal that they didn't touch the ball even though they actually did even if it was only a micro-touch. How many times do Badger players tell referees that they stepped on the end line while serving if the line judge or up ref missed the call. If there was an honor system that you follow you would acknowledge that the referee may well have truly not made the call because he was blocked from seeing it and you certainly wouldn't try claiming that the referee intentionally didn't make the call because he "swallowed his whistle". You'd also acknowlege that any missed calls that went in the Badger's favor were just as important as this supposedly missed call that wen't against the Badgers and you'd acknowledge that the line judges provided by the Badgers we more culpable than the referee for making that call.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2007 22:02:26 GMT -5
I'll ask again: why apologize? keystone says it was the classy thing to do, but he also says the last point is no more important than the first.
There's something I don't like about all of this.
|
|