Kentucky at Texas A&M Game Thread.

[Wonderstruck]

This isn't a question asked to antagonize, but I'm simply curious, and have been for a while: How is it that referees never have to answer any questions from media? It seems everyone and their mother is forced to face the media except them. Why is that? If players and coaches are forced to endure post game questioning, shouldn't the refs have to also, especially after a huge, huge call like that? I want to hear what they have to say.

Transparency is rarely a bad thing.

[George]

This isn't a question asked to antagonize, but I'm simply curious, and have been for a while: How is it that referees never have to answer any questions from media? It seems everyone and their mother is forced to face the media except them. Why is that? If players and coaches are forced to endure post game questioning, shouldn't the refs have to also, especially after a huge, huge call like that? I want to hear what they have to say.

Transparency is rarely a bad thing.

That's a very good question. However, I think if refs did have to face questioning after games, you'd see a dramatic change to officiating that might not lead to a better product. In such a case, I could easily see refs try to compensate in one direction or the other. Someone's going to be unhappy no matter what.

[Joneslab]

How was Matthews one of the top-rated high school SGs at one point? I'm assuming he wouldn't have earned that ranking without some semblance of an offensive game. How do a guy's skills vanish like that?

I think he was always seen as kind of an unskilled athlete. His shooting problems were well-documented. The one thing that I saw keep coming up was UK fans asking how he was ranked so low.

Fantastically bad shooter, and doesn't have the strength yet to compensate. But neither did Deandre Liggins as a freshman. He was a trainwreck. Think Matthews' ceiling is Ligginsesque.

[Joneslab]

Anthony Wireman ‏@awireman 4m4 minutes ago
The Southeastern Conference will review the technical foul that was called on Isaac Humphries last night: http://www.allkyhoops.com/2016/02/southeastern-conference-will-review.html…

[Wonderstruck]

You know it's a bad call if even Jeff Goodman is showing sympathy towards Cal/Isaac/UK.

[Wonderstruck]

That's a very good question. However, I think if refs did have to face questioning after games, you'd see a dramatic change to officiating that might not lead to a better product. In such a case, I could easily see refs try to compensate in one direction or the other. Someone's going to be unhappy no matter what.

This is fair. To counter that, the players and coaches have to face tough questions based on their performance every game, and we don't necessarily see any resonating change because of being questioned. But we do tend to learn what was going through their heads during the game. That's all I want to know from officiating.

You're right, someone's always going to be unhappy either way. I'm just dying to know what Pat Adams saw through his eyeballs that made him call the T.

Another thing I wonder is about Pat Adams himself. Kentucky fans have long memories. Wonder if he's going to be at Rupp anytime soon, or if he'll get the Sirmons treatment and kept away from UK games for a while?

[KevinHall]

I haven't watched the game yet. But I did see the call that everyone is talking about. It was absolutely horrendous. I saw too one of our buddies,Pat Adams called it. I have said on here for two years he is one of the worst officials in the college game today. If you see he is doing a game you know something strange involving the refs is going to happen. The NCAA desparately needs to overhaul their official. I can think of at least four that need to be replaced as soon as possible, Adams, Tony Greene, Karl Hess and Doug Sirmons. All four are an embarrasment to the game and need to be done away with.
As far as the loss in the end it didn't really hurt UK much. They are still a game ahead of everyone in the SEC. Also should not have lost any confidence as they seemed to have played well and it took a very bad call by a bad official to beat them.

[Wonderstruck]

I assume part of the thinking behind not questioning the refs is that, since they are to be impartial, they wouldn't want a referee to ever imply bias; questioning can be tough, and I'm sure the media would be quick to pounce on the subject.

[justford]

This game was decided in the first half due to our lack of rebounding. The technical foul was not justified as Humphries was not upset at any official or opposing player and was just happy. A delay of game warning seems the more appropriate call in that situation. How is what Humphries did any worse than a player screaming or walking around flexing after a dunk? Just a little common sense by the official would have been nice. Let the players decide the outcome of the game.

[Joneslab]

How is what Humphries did any worse than a player screaming or walking around flexing after a dunk? Just a little common sense by the official would have been nice. Let the players decide the outcome of the game.

This is in line with what I was saying above.

If Humphries had dunked the ball there at the end of the game on a crucial possession and flexed, it would have to be horrendous to draw a T because of the time left in the game and how important the possession was.

Flexing/taunting/etc. is worse than what Humphries did, I think anyone can agree. So in that way I don't understand the call.

I think Adams might argue that it was unclear that Humphries wasn't taunting. It could've been construed as taunting (or at the very least unsportsmanlike) even though there were no TAMU players around him.

I wouldn't agree with that, but Adams seemed determined to take the ball from Humphries and was hovering around that scrum like a hawk for some reason. He was oddly close to what was going on even though TAMU players had walked to the other end.

It was just a really strange play and I've never seen anything like it in all my years of watching.

[Joneslab]

The SEC attempts to give something of an explanation.

http://www.courier-journal.com/story/sports/college/kentucky/2016/02/21/sec-sort-explains-technical-uks-humphries/80707124/?from=global&sessionKey=&autologin=

[teamchemistry15]

I, unlike many others, fail to see the difference in Briscoe doing it compared to Isaac. Murray just threw down a nasty dunk, Briscoe was fired up, the game was well out of hand, Briscoe starts screaming and slams the ball. To me, it could be viewed more as taunting for Isaac because that rebound and him getting fouled potentially wins us the game. He was excited, screaming, and slammed the ball while, short of two missed free throws and a full court trip with a shot in nine seconds, securing the win. In my opinion, that was more along the line of taunting because it was a close game. Neither did it towards an opponent, both just out of excitement.

[Joneslab]

I, unlike many others, fail to see the difference in Briscoe doing it compared to Isaac. Murray just threw down a nasty dunk, Briscoe was fired up, the game was well out of hand, Briscoe starts screaming and slams the ball. To me, it could be viewed more as taunting for Isaac because that rebound and him getting fouled potentially wins us the game. He was excited, screaming, and slammed the ball while, short of two missed free throws and a full court trip with a shot in nine seconds, securing the win. In my opinion, that was more along the line of taunting because it was a close game. Neither did it towards an opponent, both just out of excitement.

I guess the only difference is that Briscoe's happened while South Carolina's players were in the vicinity. Isaac's happened while there was nobody around but Kentucky players...and the official.

I still am not sure the technical would've been called had Adams not been standing there asking Isaac to give him the ball.

[KCKUKFan]

The SEC attempts to give something of an explanation.

http://www.courier-journal.com/story...ey=&autologin=

Doesn't seem like much of an explanation to me.

Facts are facts: with nine seconds left to go in a one point game, you let the players decide the outcome, unless something egregious happens.

What Humphries did wasn't egregious; it wasn't done in bad sportsmanship; he was an excited kid who just made two huge plays.

You might make that T call in the first half with 14 minutes to go, but you DO NOT make it in that situation. Pat Adams should be ashamed, but I'm sure he's not.

[catfaninin]

Personally I have no problem with the T. That call is pretty well automatic. The looks on the face of Ulis and Humphries tells the story for me. They knew what was coming.

And just to add. I prefer it being an automatic technical. Slam the ball like that and get T'd up. End of discussion. If you start adding in what if's and but's, making it where officials have to either read a kids mind or make a judgement call that's when things get sketchy.