Fouling Out
By Gee Kane
March 27, 2008
Roy Hibbert was called for his fourth foul during the Georgetown-Davidson game with almost 12 minutes left on the clock. He played less than half of his last game as a Hoya because of foul trouble. Somebody ask Tim Donaghy if he thinks it is possible that some college referees are linked to illegal gambling. In a Tee’s Weekly exclusive, I have evidence that referees in that game made calls for money.
Some of you may know that the refs are in their own elimination tournament similar to the 65 schools that play in the NCAA tournament. They are evaluated on their performance in a subjective fashion much like figure skaters. If they are deemed to have had a good game they get to move on to the next round and the game check that comes with it. This fact makes the refs act strangely during tourney time.
Referees in the NCAA tournament aren’t just judged like figure skaters, they have poses and pirouettes like Dorothy Hamill and Brian Boitano. Their performances can be as flamboyant as a medal stand at an Olympic men’s competition. The same way figure skaters end their performances by flailing their arms and holding a pose while looking at something in the stands is the same way the official signaled Roy Hibbert’s fourth foul. It is a complicated five-step move.
First you raise one arm straight in the air and blow your whistle as loud as you can. Next, you point to the 7’2” guy and take a little hop towards him. Then you throw one arm behind your back like you a trying to smack a biting mosquito to signify a hooking foul. Then you take two hops towards the other end of the floor and get ready for the big finish. You flash all 10 fingers to the scorers table to denote the Roy’s jersey number 55.
This big finish, like the last spin of a Michelle Kwan performance, jolts the crowd to its feet as they roar with approval. I was taught from a very young age that the mark of a good referee is that you don’t even notice him—he maintains control over the game without making the game about himself.
The way the NCAA rewards referee performances in the tourney makes the referees do the exact opposite of the first rule of officiating. It makes them do things like call 47 fouls in 40 minutes of the Georgetown-Davidson game. It makes them do things like make over-exaggerated charging calls (a morally-bankrupt NINE offensive calls on the Hoyas) that play to the national television audience and the home crowd (don't get me started on Davidson playing its two first round games in their own backyard).
Roy Hibbert fouled out of zero regular season games this year mostly because Coach Thompson doesn’t allow him to play with two fouls in the first half. But also because in four years of Big East play he has learned what a foul is. Then the Hoyas draw an official like Tom O’Neill, who had reffed 88 games this year before coming to the RBC in Raleigh, NC, for the tournament. None of O’Neill’s 88 games were Big East games and zero games this year were on even on the east coast. A foul in the Pac 10 or the Big 12, where O’Neill does most of his work, is considered a love tap in Big East play. Also, take note of O’Neill’s Irish last name, like that of his former disgraced referee colleague Tim Donaghy. I’m not saying my ancestors like to gamble, but (to paraphrase James Joyce) you try crossing Dublin without crossing a Paddy Power sports book.
The officials are not the worst part of the rules of basketball. Recently Dick Vitale argued that there should be no such thing as fouling out. I couldn’t agree more. How is it in the interest of any sport to not have its star players deciding the final minutes of its biggest games? Did Joe Montana not finish one of his Super Bowls because he committed too many false starts? Did Derek Jeter have to worry during the two World Series he’s lost this century about missing a crucial at bat in the ninth inning because he had been disqualified from the competition for too many foul tips?
I can understand removing a player from the game for throwing a punch or questioning the referee’s sexuality by calling him a certain 10-letter magic word, but it doesn’t make sense to remove him for a quantity of routine non-malicious violations.
Soccer is a sport with an even worse set of rules for ejecting a player from the game. A player can receive a yellow card for standing too close to a free kick and then receive a second yellow card and ejection from the game for something rather innocuous like grabbing a jersey or using bad language. What’s even worse is that the player’s team doesn’t get to replace the player on the field AND the player is deemed ineligible for the next game. This policy, like any that eliminates a player from a game for a non-malicious foul, is cruel and unusual punishment.
Is my suggestion that there be no such thing as fouling out really just sour grapes from a Georgetown fan? Hell yes. However, I don’t believe allowing players an unlimited number of fouls will hurt the game. I think it will only allow basketball to showcase its biggest stars and make the punishment fit the crime.