Ripping the refs
I noticed a post on the blog today wondering why I wasn't more critical of the officials during the game last night. You won't see that from me. Sure, some officials are better than others, but they do the best they can in a very difficult job. I asked Mick Cronin about the fouls that were called last night and he chose not to comment. If he wants to rip the refs or one of the players wants to, I'll report what they say, but I will never blame the officials for costing UC a game because then I'm crossing over into being a fan. Were there some bad calls last night? Sure. There are bad calls in every game and not just for one side. UC lost that game because it couldn't take care of the ball against UConn's press and because it missed three of four free throws in the final minute. Maybe Deonta Vaughn got fouled on that last play. Maybe he didn't. But there's no guarantee he would have made that shot even he was able to get it off.
39 Comments:
UC lost last night by giving up 12 points in 5 minutes. Good Big East game and we are still in the hunt to compete for a top 4 finish in the Big East conference. I think it will take a 13-5 finish to win the Big East this year and I see UC at somewhere between 9-9 and 11-7. Go Bearcats.
Bill, I dont think you need to comment on the officiating but more personal opinions during the live blog will be nice. We can get updates and even play by play at espn.com and many other sites. However, we cant get opinions of people there in real time other than you. You can save your journalistic objectivity for your articles that appear in the paper but it would be nice if the blog was a little more personal.
Tell us how the crod is reacting, whether its slow arriving, if the food is any good in the press room, stories about conversations you had with the visiting newspaper guy. These items by themselves would be boring and irrelevent but can help spice up the blog some. Stupid stuff that we would never read about in the newspaper article. Personal touches and opinions along with game updates is why we come to this blog and not read the play by play on espn.com. It also allows people who were at the game to come here and read the blog to get a different perspective then the one they had while at the game. This is how you can make your blog different then what we read in your article in the paper the next morning.
Blaming the refs does nothing but make one look like a brat. UC turned the ball over too much and missed free throws at the end.
Readers asking for more personal opinions from Bill should realize something...
Yes, doing a blog offers the "luxury" of being able to give personal opinions to a writer such as Bill.
But, when it comes time to write an unbiased game article, for example, some people may have a hard time distinguishing the difference between the two writing styles.
In other words, Bill gives opinions A, B and C in a blog about a UC basketball game. Then we writes an article covering the game. Two completely different styles of writing.
Some reader(s) may say, "Well, he didn't state this in his game article because he said this in his blog."
So where does a writer like Bill draw the line?
That's why some writers don't warm up to blogs, because they're afraid that their blogs may affect their reputations as writers.
Columnists aren't necessarily faced with the same issues, simply because the columns they write, like their blogs, are often opinion-based.
Game articles, features on UC players...they are not.
the era of objective news reporting is history. Every reporter now is fighting for ratings and notoriety. Reporters want to influence opinions, not just columnists.
Paper and TV "reporters" are more newsmakers and personalities today. The public no longer expects objective reporting because we have been blasted with biased and subjective reporting since the 70's. That's just the way it is.
Amen to that brother/sister. Even the old-timers’ cherished reporter Walter Cronkite, once “the most trusted man in America”, is as openly and liberal opinionated as anyone.
Here's something readers of this blog need to understand about the in-game blog: Unlike Josh when he did this blog, I have morning newspaper deadlines to make. I also have to write a story for the web site while the game is going on. That means that I'm writing during the game so that I can send those stories as soon as the game ends. It's a struggle for me to even write the snippets of what's happening during the game, much less offer instant analysis and opinion. As the game nears it's end, I have less and less time to blog. That's why the in-game blog is as bare-bones as it is. After the game, again unlike Josh, wh wrote for an afternoon paper, I'm on deadline writing for the paper.
You know, boys and girls, woth the time crunch he has, it's hard to fault Billy Boy on this one.
You wouldn't have to worry about the blog interfering with your deadline duties, which I think we all understand, if you would have one game thread but check in every once in a while to make a quick post within that thread and then move out.
Now that you're allowing real time open discussion, why would you extend extra deadline work upon yourself by opening a new thread every few minutes of a game?
Just post a quick update message inside one game thread and move on.
After all, the SID people hand you a play by play. How often does play by play come into account in game story writing? Usually only the final crucial moments.
"Maybe Deonta Vaughn got fouled on that last play. Maybe he didn't. But there's no guarantee he would have made that shot even he was able to get it off."
Yeah, no guarantee on that, but Vaughn was hot and he would have made at least one FT.
OK, maybe you guys can help me out here. I don't pretend to be an expert on blogging and one thing I never really understood is the in-game blog. To me, if you're interested in the game, you're watching it on TV or listening on the radio. So who's reading a blog while the game is going on anyway? And what are you hoping to find out? Why would you care how the food is in the press room (often I don't even eat it) or about my conversations with other writers (which in my mind are private)? What difference does it make if it's a late-arriving crowd or an early-arriving crowd?
Bill, you must be seriously kidding. You just can't be that Old School. There's no way.
Rosecrans was getting upwards of 500 posts a night on Reds games, with many people listening to radio, being at work and using the Internet for staying atop the game, or sitting with their laptops in front of their TVs. I have a home office so I can watch the games and work at the same time as the kids are winding down for the night.
You might also like to know that MLB.TV allows people to watch and listen to the games on their computers. They've only made around $600 million off this little venture the past couple of years. Obviously people are using their computers to get their sports info.
Living in the Washington DC area, Redskins games gain almost 50 percent of the TV audience and WashingtonPost.com gets almost around 1000 posts per game thread.
It's part of today's sports culture. You are there in person and surely you see things and hear things and observe things that are interesting and relevant outside of the score or the play-by-play. Surely.
If not, why wouldn't the paper just give us the Associated Press story? What's the need of a human on site? You're supposed to be an expert and experienced observer.
That's what we expect from live in-game blogging. Things you don't have room or relevancy for in your stories? Use it on the blog.
You can be opinionated ("boy, 37 foul shots for UConn???") or voice an observation ("Mick is really, really hot right now about the ticky-tacky fouls") or something of color ("Villanova's pep band outright sucks") without crossing any ethical boundaries.
Don't worry--the police won't arrest you for making a factual observation and posting it on the blog.
Blogging while the game is on is like being in a bar with your buddies discussing the game. It's not hard and it's really, really a big part of today's sports culture.
I can't believe a sportswriter in today's age would actually ask "If you're interested in the game, you're watching it on TV or listening on the radio. So who's reading a blog while the game is going on anyway?"
"Don't worry--the police won't arrest you for making a factual observation and posting it on the blog."
A factual observation? Give me a break!
What you really want is for the hometown newspaper reporter to be a "homer" and confirm (the hometown fan's opinion) that the home team lost because of bad breaks, poor referring, etc.
If Bill had observed that Vaughn was not fouled, it was a good call, there would have been a bloody purge of this site.
Gawd, what's the deal? A bunch of you guys are acting like a pack of immmature crab arses. Tone down the whining and know it all crap. please. Let this thing evolve. Give Bill a little time to figure out how he wants it to be. Bill admitted he was's new at this when it started, and asked for some patience. I see him giving a lot of effort, I think largely because he recognizes the importance JK's blog had to UC fans and the loss it represents. Jeez Louweez.... cut the guy some slack. None of you know it alls seem to have much history as a professional journalist and all it entails, but it hasn't kept you from whining and crying about the all his failing, not to mention the refs, huggs firing, and last night's game. You're beginning to sound just like the UC fans in Huggs days, a bunch of apologists for UC's crazy player problems and underachievement in the tourney every year.
Is there anyone here who understands the term constructive criticism? The jerks who keep calling him Billy Boy, well maybe we oughta call you Jerky Boys. Or Good Ole Jackarses.
Everybody needs to settle down and be civil and observe some basic rules of conversation. THe obvious point is that this is new to the author, and he's actively offering insights and feedback on how it's going, Beats the days when we had very little access to the unpublished thoughts of writers. I like this and all the other blogs, and hope the rest of you realize they're a great resource, imperfections and all. Give the man a break.
Agree with the "personalized angle" comments...Living away, I get little of the TV/radio and follow when I can on the net. While I care little about the food, I do find myself wondering about the crowd (big? loud?) and other tidbits...Other than that, I think Bill is doing yeomans work considering the deadlines etc.
The secret is thinking outside the box of the score. So much happens in a game that dictates the final result besides running up and down the court. But it's also about bringing the color, emotion and atmosphere of the game and arena to the readers.
Not everyone who follows UC can see or hear the games. Many of us live outside the area. If you place us there during the game, be our eyes and ears and interact every so often then your game thread will explode with activity.
at 10:14 PM oldtimer said...
"Gawd, what's the deal? A bunch of you guys are acting like a pack of immmature crab arses."
They are not acting.
When exactly was the age of objectivity? If things changed in the 70's, it wasn't the 1970's, it was the 1470's, shortly before the invention of the printing press.
Sometimes it's good to step back and look at our own attitudes, as they affect our perceptions of others. When I look at discussions up in Connecticut, I see a whole different focus. We question certain plays and think that the refs were against us. They discuss how banged up their players were, with an inference that the refs were letting UC players bang their players around (Dyson was still woozy after the game from a blow to the head from a UC player; Adrien had a big gash in his neck from another blow, etc.) Both groups think they were harmed by the refs, both groups see news media not telling things striaght from their side and think there's something wrong.
It boils down to coaching. UC has had a nice roll despite Sippin Mick's lack of skills.
The kids have overcome for the most part.
Bill,
You're doing just fine with the blog, and your reporting has always been excellent.
The fact is that this blog is filled with a lot of people who:
1) Don't have the guts to post with any kind of "name" but would rather hide themselves behind "anonymous" while they rip you, UC, Mick Cronin, Nancy Z., Mike Thomas, etc.
2) MUST have their "very important" opinions show up IMMEDIATELY on the blog.
3) Can't even offer anything constructive in their criticisms because that would expose their lack of knowledge of college basketball or journalism.
Personally, I don't care what the "atmosphere" is at the game, what your opinions are concerning the officiating, or anything else for that matter. Some observations are welcome, but having seen/heard/read about the game, I will draw my own conclusions.
Take the criticisms for what they're worth. Some may be valid and thought-provoking, but most of the "anonymous" ones are not worth your or anyone else's time.
Sippin' Micks lack of skills?
You're the one sippin' something alcoholic.
Just another Huggs-lover bashing the present and much more talented head coach. Mick is and will coach circles around "One-way" Bobby Huggins who doesn't know what an adjustment is. All he does is yell at everyone when he should be doing X's and O's, but he has no clue what they are, much less the ability to spell or diagram a play. Huggs is a great motivator, but Mick is a very good game coach and makes great adjustments.
The problem with the team is youth and learning from their mistakes. They have been in every Big East game except the Notre Dame game and that one just got out of hand.
The officating was bad, but there is probably more to take from this loss than had we won and not deserved it.
"Maybe Deonta Vaughn got fouled on that last play. Maybe he didn't. But there's no guarantee he would have made that shot even he was able to get it off."
I personally do not think a foul should have been called in that situation, unless blatently obvious, ie. Bishop's late foul.
I am a logical thinker. Bill, are you saying, as referenced above, that a foul should not be called unless it is obvious he is going to make the shot? You may want to watch your wording.
At times you make sense to me and then there are times you lace your comments with a negative.
I am definately not a Bill Koch fan, but we need to cut him some slack regarding how he handles his blog.
This is his blog and not Josh's. I liked the other style better, but Bill is doing his best as a nubbie.
Josh had a different style. He seemed to not just be a reported, but actual fan of UC athletics. Bill has a different style. I am sure as he gets more comfortable with this medium he will make some changes.
Bill,
My reading of these comments bought back a couple of questions I had. I am just trying to gain some additional information.
Are you a graduate of UC? If so, does this affiliation cause you to be harder on the University or more objective as you previously stated?
I have read the Enquirer and in the past offered suggestions on articles regarding UC Athletics. My impression has always been that other local teams garner more respect and admiration from the Enquirer staff. I have read other cities publications, ie Columbus, Norman, East Lansing, Birmingham, and really seem to love their Universities. They on a regular basis seem almost homerish. Why does the Enquirer not go that route? Thanks.
I couldn't disagree with you more, Bill.
Your job is to be an impartial analyst of the game of basketball. The game includes the refs.
If they are incompetent, off their game, biased, drunk --whatever --then you are negligent not to report it.
It's like a news reporter saying he can't report on untrained or corrupt police.
They'd laugh that guy out of town!
Report, Bill. Tell us all of it -- warts and all.
Just my opinion but I don't think Bill wants to do this blog in the first place. I't just sounds like he came into it with an attitude
Bill Koch:
Please make your life easier, and our reading more interesting, by asking someone else (with more time and passion) to do this job. Bill, you have a lot to do and clearly your heart isn't in the work.
I think Bill would rather cover something other than The University of Cincinnati. Actually, the Enquirer as a whole acts like it is such a chore to cover UC. the attitude comes out through the writing and content.
The Post's reporters were so passionate and excited to be covering UC. At least it came out in Josh's/Wheeler's blog, the reporter's columns/articles, and interesting stories.
I would take Wheeler/Josh over the Daugherty/Koch combo any day. I long for the days when DeCourcy and Sullivan were covering UC stories.
Some of you still don't understand what being a newspaper reporter is all about.
It is not to be an "impartial analyst" as UCfan79 claims. In the first place, the term impartial analyst is an oxymoron. To analyze requires that you form certain opinions, based on what you see or hear, to support your conclusion and/or analysis. Someone else might "analyze" the same event in a different way, so impartial analysis is a misnomer.
Anyway, that's not Bill's job. That's Paul Daughtery's job. He's a columnist, and as such is paid to give his opinion/analysis.
Bill's job, on the other hand, is to "report the facts" (yeah, I know, that is old fashioned). If the coach says the refs were drunk or the police chief says the cops were corrupt, Bill's job is to report that and the circumstances, according to the coach or police chief, that led to that conclusion.
As I said before, what many of you really want is for the media person to support your biased opinions.
5:33, there is some basis in what you say. However, it astounds me that you believe you know what WE want. I don't know what everyone else wants, but I would like someone who loves, or at the very least really likes the Bearcats and that I have the sense that he/she is actually happy with UC BB and FB success. GO BEARCATS!!!!
Anyone who "loves" or "roots" for the Bearcats and is "happy for their success" would not be allowed to cover the team at any newspaper of any reputation.
As a UC grad, I honestly don't want that person doing the reporting. I want a completely objective viewpoint. Homerism is for the amateurs, for the high-schooler journalists.
This is not the UC News-Record. The Enquirer is a historic paper owned by the biggest newspaper chain in the country and, just like major markets and major beats--whether they be city hall, education, business, politics or sports--any upper management worth its salt will not allow those reporters to cover beats in which integrity and objectivity can be compromised by their favoritism.
Covering a hard news beat is not the same as voices from the Op-Ed pages. That's why they are titled "Opinion" and "Editorials." If you look closely, any story that offers such outside of the columnists and Op-Ed pages usually has an "analysis" tag.
I'll never understand how 10 people can read a straight news story and all 10 will come up with a different slant of what the story is saying. Truly unreal.
I dont have any complaints and think you are off to a good start at this. Some of the suggestions sound very interesting to me and could make this a really cool blog. I watch most of the games alone and that sucks. Never thought about blogging while watching but sounds intriguing. I even have a satellite feed to my media computer.I think I will I make my first in game visit this sunday about noonish.
Mick Cronin has to take some responsibility for the bearcats loss also. Had it not been for his technical foul, the cats might have won the game.
5:33, you couldn't be more wrong. First, the idea you propose that there's no such thing as an impartial analyst is pure sophistry. You confuse imperfection with intention.
Any sports reporter is like any other reporter. Tell the facts. And, if the reporter can see that the ref is drunk and doesn't say so, then he's leaving out an important fact.
Now, to the less than thoughtful poster who says that the Daugherty/Koch team is weak: "Put down the beer and stay away from sharp objects."
They are among the best in the business, and, honestly, Daugherty is the best writer in town, bar none. He might be the best sports writer in the nation, and he has the awards to justify my comments.
Koch is thorough, insightful, and entertaining. I know I'm getting good stuff whenever I read him. (I do disagree with him about the ref thing, but if that's his belief, then I hope he changes his mind.)
Above all else, both Daugherty and Koch are outstanding in the area of prediction. And if they predict outcomes and directions better than I do, then they are better at this Cincy sports thing than I am.
And they do. And they are.
And while I'm on this rant: the "Sippin'" thing makes me laugh each time I see it. It's proof that some folks get one idea and simply can't get another one to save their lives. I keep thinking, "New material; get some new material."
But, they don't let me down....nothing makes it through the dense force field they've constructed to prevent new ideas from penetrating their brains.
dude - you are way behind the slam curve. It's Cronin's crys now - after every loss.
Get with it UCfan!
Bill please don't worry about the 50 UC fans left in Cincinnati. They are all bitter and jealous. It's just not a relevant University anymore. Nobody cares about a terrible basketball team and a football team that wins ten games once in a generation.
Other than Huggins there wasn't/isn't much going on with UC sports. The only thing we have is a bunch of babies that are bitter and jealous of Ohio State. So bitter they make up symbols like O$U and actually try and make fun of a team for losing in the championship game haha.
Being the TINY stepsister just doesn't sit well for the 50 true UC fans. Most people in UC only are about the sports programs when they are winning. Major front runners.
1:10, you once again prove the point that OSU fans are completely envious of the other schools in Ohio, UC and x.
UC football is strong and UC basketball is on its way back. I can understand your frustration.
Heck, OSU basketball has one good season in 30 years and your on that badnwagon. I remember going to Value City arena and seeing all 200 fans sitting on their hands.
UC will continue flourish as it always has and I will enjoy it even more knowing your in your mother's basement gritting your teeth at the thought.
* Our online blogs currently are hosted and operated by a third party, namely, Blogger.com. You are now leaving the Cincinnati.Com website and will be linked to Blogger.com's registration page. The Blogger.com site and its associated services are not controlled by Cincinnati.Com and different terms of use and privacy policy will apply to your use of the Blogger.com site and services.
By proceeding and/or registering with Blogger.com you agree and understand that Cincinnati.Com is not responsible for the Blogger.com site you are about to access or for any service you may use while on the Blogger.com site.
<< Home