College basketball officiating often leaves much to be desired.
Monitor reviews take too long, too many officials are duped by players flopping and they award the offending flopper with a foul call against his opponent, and there are seemingly frequent occurrences when there's a large and unwarranted disparity in the number of fouls called against the home team and the road team.
But of all complaints, the rulings in block-charge scenarios are probably at the top of the list. Admittedly many of those types of bang-bang plays are difficult to call in real time but that is the job of officials. Whether a foul call is a charge or a block seems to be a coin flip decision at times, and one could argue there are plenty of plays worth swallowing the whistle but an official sees contact and feels compelled to call a foul.
Well, my growing frustration with college basketball officiating crescendoed last night, when officials Lamont Simpson and Paul Szelc found a loophole in the rules of the sport that allowed them to apply their rulings correctly while fouling out Indiana's Thomas Bryant and Purdue's Caleb Swanigan, upsetting both fan bases.
The play in question occurred with 44.5 seconds remaining in the first meeting of the season between the in-state rivals. With Purdue leading 64-59, Bryant drove to the lane from the right elbow extended while being guarded by Swanigan. Swanigan slid to his right and attempted to hold his ground in the paint, roughly halfway between the Big Ten logo and the charge circle. The two players made contact and Bryant threw up a shot that circled the rim and dropped through the twine.
In real time, I thought it was a block. Maybe it was the Indiana alumnus in me talking or maybe the poor picture quality of the TV at the bar I was at prevented me from getting a good look at the play. Upon further review, I'm more convinced it was a charge, which seems to be the opinion of the majority of viewers with Twitter accounts.
But we'll never know.
Simpson, who was on the baseline to the left of the basket, signaled a block. Szelc, standing near Indiana's bench, signaled a charge. After a lengthy discussion between the officials, they ruled it a double foul.
The kicker is that both Bryant and Swanigan had previously committed four fouls so they both fouled out on the play. Bryant's night ended with 23 points on 8-of-12 shooting (3-of-4 from 3-point range), three rebounds and two steals. Swanigan was disqualified after a 16-point, 14-rebound, three-assist effort.
Weirdly, it was the correct call, in the sense that once Simpson and Szelc called conflicting fouls on the play, they were right to call a double foul against both players, according to the rules of the sport.
From the Great Southwest Officials Association:
"There might be an indeterminate time frame where one official may call and signal “Block” while the other official calls and signals “Charge” nearly simultaneously. Hence, a “BLARGE” may result."
"You automatically go to that rule," Simpson told the media pool reporter after the game. "You can't pick one. You don't pick one. You have to go to the rule."
"Cop out," said Dick Vitale, who was broadcasting the game for ESPN. "That's a cop out call."
It's safe to say most fans for either team, at least in the moment, would have preferred a decisive block-or-charge ruling.
If the play is ruled a block, Bryant's shot counts, he goes to the line for an and-one opportunity that could have cut Purdue's lead to two and he would've stayed in the game while Swanigan fouled out. If the play is ruled a charge, Bryant's night is over and Purdue gets the ball with Swanigan still in the game.
Unfortunately, the rule, which was administered correctly by the officials, allowed the officials to hedge on making a unanimous decision, highlighting a larger issue regarding how the rulebook is written, as well as the definition and application of block-charge calls, when two officials can witness the same collision and provide conflicting rulings.
"I have a problem with that call," Vitale said.
I think we all do, Dickie V.
Monitor reviews take too long, too many officials are duped by players flopping and they award the offending flopper with a foul call against his opponent, and there are seemingly frequent occurrences when there's a large and unwarranted disparity in the number of fouls called against the home team and the road team.
But of all complaints, the rulings in block-charge scenarios are probably at the top of the list. Admittedly many of those types of bang-bang plays are difficult to call in real time but that is the job of officials. Whether a foul call is a charge or a block seems to be a coin flip decision at times, and one could argue there are plenty of plays worth swallowing the whistle but an official sees contact and feels compelled to call a foul.
Well, my growing frustration with college basketball officiating crescendoed last night, when officials Lamont Simpson and Paul Szelc found a loophole in the rules of the sport that allowed them to apply their rulings correctly while fouling out Indiana's Thomas Bryant and Purdue's Caleb Swanigan, upsetting both fan bases.
The play in question occurred with 44.5 seconds remaining in the first meeting of the season between the in-state rivals. With Purdue leading 64-59, Bryant drove to the lane from the right elbow extended while being guarded by Swanigan. Swanigan slid to his right and attempted to hold his ground in the paint, roughly halfway between the Big Ten logo and the charge circle. The two players made contact and Bryant threw up a shot that circled the rim and dropped through the twine.
In real time, I thought it was a block. Maybe it was the Indiana alumnus in me talking or maybe the poor picture quality of the TV at the bar I was at prevented me from getting a good look at the play. Upon further review, I'm more convinced it was a charge, which seems to be the opinion of the majority of viewers with Twitter accounts.
But we'll never know.
Simpson, who was on the baseline to the left of the basket, signaled a block. Szelc, standing near Indiana's bench, signaled a charge. After a lengthy discussion between the officials, they ruled it a double foul.
The kicker is that both Bryant and Swanigan had previously committed four fouls so they both fouled out on the play. Bryant's night ended with 23 points on 8-of-12 shooting (3-of-4 from 3-point range), three rebounds and two steals. Swanigan was disqualified after a 16-point, 14-rebound, three-assist effort.
Weirdly, it was the correct call, in the sense that once Simpson and Szelc called conflicting fouls on the play, they were right to call a double foul against both players, according to the rules of the sport.
From the Great Southwest Officials Association:
"There might be an indeterminate time frame where one official may call and signal “Block” while the other official calls and signals “Charge” nearly simultaneously. Hence, a “BLARGE” may result."
"You automatically go to that rule," Simpson told the media pool reporter after the game. "You can't pick one. You don't pick one. You have to go to the rule."
"Cop out," said Dick Vitale, who was broadcasting the game for ESPN. "That's a cop out call."
It's safe to say most fans for either team, at least in the moment, would have preferred a decisive block-or-charge ruling.
If the play is ruled a block, Bryant's shot counts, he goes to the line for an and-one opportunity that could have cut Purdue's lead to two and he would've stayed in the game while Swanigan fouled out. If the play is ruled a charge, Bryant's night is over and Purdue gets the ball with Swanigan still in the game.
Unfortunately, the rule, which was administered correctly by the officials, allowed the officials to hedge on making a unanimous decision, highlighting a larger issue regarding how the rulebook is written, as well as the definition and application of block-charge calls, when two officials can witness the same collision and provide conflicting rulings.
"I have a problem with that call," Vitale said.
I think we all do, Dickie V.