Just as we all probably suspected

[Kyle's Brother]

You realize that just looking at free throw disparity does not tell the whole story right? Thats such a naive way to look at how a game was reffed.

If you're going to dismiss the only piece of quantifiable data I can present to support my argument as "naive" then I'm afraid this isn't even a conversation.

Of course free throw disparity doesn't tell the whole story. No one said it did.

[justducky0]

You said it did Kyle. That game was reffed in Oregon's favor, Oregon was the more physical team and thus it played to their advantage. In the grand scheme of terrible reffing int he tournament, the Kansas v. Oregon game was not even in the top 20 of badly reffed games. But of course only look at stats and not how the game actually played out.

[duckfan96]

Oregon wins 85-73 to set up a pacific nw final.

[brich75]

Oregon wins 85-73 to set up a pacific nw final.

I like this!

I just read an article where Altman basically said NC is a bad matchup and they have no weakness. I know it's coach speak but doesn't make me any more confident hearing that. Still I have a wierd gut feeling that Oregon is just not going to lose!

[Duck07]

Oregon wins 85-73 to set up a pacific nw final.

I like this!

I just read an article where Altman basically said NC is a bad matchup and they have no weakness. I know it's coach speak but doesn't make me any more confident hearing that. Still I have a wierd gut feeling that Oregon is just not going to lose!

I feel good about this game because we've yet to see a breakout game from Brooks. An injured point guard to go with slower bigs means we should be able to get into the lane in this game. I'm not worried about foul trouble for Bell either because he plays such a smart brand of defense and reads his player well. The players seem to thrive when outsiders think they can't do it.

[duckfan22]

Oregon wins 85-73 to set up a pacific nw final.

I like this!

I just read an article where Altman basically said NC is a bad matchup and they have no weakness. I know it's coach speak but doesn't make me any more confident hearing that. Still I have a wierd gut feeling that Oregon is just not going to lose!

I feel good about this game because we've yet to see a breakout game from Brooks. An injured point guard to go with slower bigs means we should be able to get into the lane in this game. I'm not worried about foul trouble for Bell either because he plays such a smart brand of defense and reads his player well. The players seem to thrive when outsiders think they can't do it.

Im with you 07

[Kyle's Brother]

You said it did Kyle. That game was reffed in Oregon's favor, Oregon was the more physical team and thus it played to their advantage. In the grand scheme of terrible reffing int he tournament, the Kansas v. Oregon game was not even in the top 20 of badly reffed games. But of course only look at stats and not how the game actually played out.

Is this serious? I can't tell if you're trolling me.

I posted my opinion, that the game was unevenly officiated, and then posted evidence supporting that opinion. The evidence being the incredibly lopsided number of free throws attempted. That's how arguments work. You present your opinion, and then you try to support it. Why are you trying to put words in my mouth? You're the only one saying anything about the foul discrepancy telling the whole story. Ignoring the foul discrepancy completely would be silly when you're talking about how evenly a game was officiated. But you're not even doing that. You're saying that I'm naive for even bringing it up. Do you see how stupid that is? I can't even wrap my head around that notion. Just a seriously weird line of thought.

I apologize to everyone else reading this for muddying up this thread. I'm done know. This conversation feels like I'm banging my head against a wall.

[Duck07]

There was a foul shooting disparity but I don't believe there was a foul disparity in the game. We were hitting a lot of outside shots and they weren't. There was only 3 calls that I remember being ticked off at which means there wasn't much to find fault in the officials for. It's not like we were going to the basket often and not getting calls. Going to the basket was either wide open or we passed outside.

[justducky0]

RT

There was a foul shooting disparity but I don't believe there was a foul disparity in the game. We were hitting a lot of outside shots and they weren't. There was only 3 calls that I remember being ticked off at which means there wasn't much to find fault in the officials for. It's not like we were going to the basket often and not getting calls. Going to the basket was either wide open or we passed outside.

[greenyellow]

Just looked at the total fouls for both teams and it was dead even at 13 a piece, which throws Kyle's argument that it was lopsided completely out the window. What likely made it closer was Oregon having 5 more turnovers and 3 less offensive rebounds than Kansas.

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basket ... =400948650

[Kyle's Brother]

Just looked at the total fouls for both teams and it was dead even at 13 a piece, which throws Kyle's argument that it was lopsided completely out the window. What likely made it closer was Oregon having 5 more turnovers and 3 less offensive rebounds than Kansas.

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basket ... =400948650

Their foul count is inflated by intentional fouls at the end of the game.

But Jackson, Graham, and Vick all got calls on drives to the rim that we didn't get all game long. There was contact on multiple drives from Ennis, Brooks, and Dorsey that went uncalled. There was also a pivotal no-call on a blatant Jackson charge and a bizarre foul called on Ennis when Jackson threw him to the ground while Ennis was boxing out. Jackson SHOULD have had 4 before halftime, and that would have turned the game on its head. He pretty much singlehandedly shut down Brooks with his length and athleticism.

Either way though, I can't be both naive for posting the foul discrepancy and have my opinion go out the window based on number of fouls called. Some cognitive dissonance there. That logic has to cut both ways no matter which side of the issue you fall on.

You guys are all entitled to your opinions. I welcome debate, and I'm more than willing to concede when I'm wrong about things. I just don't understand the adversarial tone that people take here. I've seen it happen over and over. Maybe just respond to other duck fans the way you would if you were having a conversation with them in a bar or something.

[karlhungis]

Just looked at the total fouls for both teams and it was dead even at 13 a piece, which throws Kyle's argument that it was lopsided completely out the window. What likely made it closer was Oregon having 5 more turnovers and 3 less offensive rebounds than Kansas.

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basket ... =400948650

Their foul count is inflated by intentional fouls at the end of the game.

But Jackson, Graham, and Vick all got calls on drives to the rim that we didn't get all game long. There was contact on multiple drives from Ennis, Brooks, and Dorsey that went uncalled. There was also a pivotal no-call on a blatant Jackson charge and a bizarre foul called on Ennis when Jackson threw him to the ground while Ennis was boxing out. Jackson SHOULD have had 4 before halftime, and that would have turned the game on its head. He pretty much singlehandedly shut down Brooks with his length and athleticism.

This is how I saw the game too. I'm naive right there with ya bud.

[RanDux]

Just looked at the total fouls for both teams and it was dead even at 13 a piece, which throws Kyle's argument that it was lopsided completely out the window. What likely made it closer was Oregon having 5 more turnovers and 3 less offensive rebounds than Kansas.

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basket ... =400948650

Their foul count is inflated by intentional fouls at the end of the game.

But Jackson, Graham, and Vick all got calls on drives to the rim that we didn't get all game long. There was contact on multiple drives from Ennis, Brooks, and Dorsey that went uncalled. There was also a pivotal no-call on a blatant Jackson charge and a bizarre foul called on Ennis when Jackson threw him to the ground while Ennis was boxing out. Jackson SHOULD have had 4 before halftime, and that would have turned the game on its head. He pretty much singlehandedly shut down Brooks with his length and athleticism.

Me too.
This is how I saw the game too. I'm naive right there with ya bud.

[greenyellow]

There was like 3-4 intentional fouls at the end, which if that's the case, would make the fouls totals like 13 to 9. That is not that great of a disparity. Oregon was controlling the tempo at both ends of the court and was the decided aggressor much of the time, making the refs an almost non-existent factor in the outcome of the game. Compared to how Pac-12 games were officiated this season, I was not noticing any blatant fouls or missed calls. I'm beginning to think the poor officiating in the Pac-12 has really made people not recognize how good officiating actually looks. The one call on Ennis that people seem to think was a missed call was not one because Ennis had actually hooked Jackson's arm and then lost his balance, which made it look like Jackson had fouled him. Any other calls people thought were missed were either poor angles for the refs or judgement calls that are different from how we expect such calls in the Pac-12 to be made.

[Phalanx]

Their foul count is inflated by intentional fouls at the end of the game.

But Jackson, Graham, and Vick all got calls on drives to the rim that we didn't get all game long. There was contact on multiple drives from Ennis, Brooks, and Dorsey that went uncalled. There was also a pivotal no-call on a blatant Jackson charge and a bizarre foul called on Ennis when Jackson threw him to the ground while Ennis was boxing out. Jackson SHOULD have had 4 before halftime, and that would have turned the game on its head. He pretty much singlehandedly shut down Brooks with his length and athleticism.

Either way though, I can't be both naive for posting the foul discrepancy and have my opinion go out the window based on number of fouls called. Some cognitive dissonance there. That logic has to cut both ways no matter which side of the issue you fall on.

You guys are all entitled to your opinions. I welcome debate, and I'm more than willing to concede when I'm wrong about things. I just don't understand the adversarial tone that people take here. I've seen it happen over and over. Maybe just respond to other duck fans the way you would if you were having a conversation with them in a bar or something.

Not saying I agree - actually I have been impressed with how 'hands off' the refs are being compared to in the Pac 12 - but score one for the use of logic in your post. Either foul numbers matter, or they don't.