Public Service Announcement

[runningblind]

The refs aren't out to get Nebraska, or any B1G team,  or any team at all.  They are human, and make mistakes. Guess what? So do you.  All fans dislike the refs, and no they didn't cause us to lose the game, the team and coaches did that.   Get over it. These arguments make you sound dumber than you are. 

[LostMyPassword]

It's always been something I've wondered about, because after all, refs are human, but I wonder how much a bias about a team affects how officials see things on the field. 

Like I think Minnesota has this reputation of being a disciplined team. And so, when it comes to things that might be questionable, how much does that affect a refs decision to throw a flag.

No there's not a grand conspiracy against Nebraska, but human decision making is flawed.

[UniversalMartin]

1 hour ago, LostMyPassword said:

It's always been something I've wondered about, because after all, refs are human, but I wonder how much a bias about a team affects how officials see things on the field. 

Like I think Minnesota has this reputation of being a disciplined team. And so, when it comes to things that might be questionable, how much does that affect a refs decision to throw a flag.

No there's not a grand conspiracy against Nebraska, but human decision making is flawed.

As a former ref, albeit HS basketball, there was not one time I cared about who won...with that said, it's not big time or just College in general. I just know refs and a vast majority on the HS level I worked with just wanted to call a good clean game.

[LostMyPassword]

Right, but winning losing is irrelevant to what I'm talking about. Like if you have experience officiating a team who is disciplined, how much does that impact what you see the next time you officiate that team?

[ndobney]

2 hours ago, runningblind said:

The refs aren't out to get Nebraska, or any B1G team,  or any team at all.  They are human, and make mistakes. Guess what? So do you.  All fans dislike the refs, and no they didn't cause us to lose the game, the team and coaches did that.   Get over it. These arguments make you sound dumber than you are. 

True but Vegas does rig games big time

[ndobney]

14 minutes ago, ndobney said:

True but Vegas does rig games big time

And to be honest we have lost 26 games in less than 5 years by one score or less almost every single one of them came down to a 50/50 call be a ref. We have this discussion almost every time the Huskers loose to have that many 50/50 calls go against us like that the probability is 0.0000000149. So I don’t know what’s going on but that would be the odds if you were to flip a coin 26 times and it landed on heads that many times in a row.

 

I believe the 50/50 calls even out over time until they don’t and right now they don’t with  0.0000000149 Being the odds of loosing that many times on 50/50 calls there is something going on not sure what exactly but something is up

[secretasianman]

No, refs are out to get us.  Oh.. dang there’s one now, gosta go!

[thexyz]

49 minutes ago, LostMyPassword said:

Right, but winning losing is irrelevant to what I'm talking about. Like if you have experience officiating a team who is disciplined, how much does that impact what you see the next time you officiate that team?

 

Perhaps losing teams or those with unimpressive records are more often viewed as flawed and therefore are judged more critically? Their errors are anticipated. If I tell a person that I'm not particularly good at something they're more likely to pay attention to what I'm doing. It might not be terribly different though affected no less. I could even be accused of something that I wasn't guilty of committing and that accusation be more believable even though it was hearsay.

 

Maybe the ref's self-interest is at play. He'd better pay attention to the team that is seemingly more likely to commit errors, teams with losing records and histories as that might seemingly  reflect upon his competence. Might not seem rational however, we do care about our reputations and how we are perceived and, reputations of teams could theoretically affect our judgement. 

 

Another possibility is the relationship the referee might have with that team. Has he experienced a particularly bad experience with players or coaches previous? Even while he might intend to fulfill his obligations accurately, is there something going on on a subconscious level? Possibly. 

 

All said, I do think that the vast majority of referees aim to be fair, accurate and impartial. There likely isn't an associated agenda or conspiracy (though not entirely out of the question). Some of it could have to do with the training of referees and the quality of referees available as well. You work with what you have.

[C-4]

It's not the refs. We've just been reckless under Pelini, Riley, and particularly Frost. Watch any other FBS team and the difference in attention to detail is night and day. 

 

Have none of our recent regimes:

- Practiced situational football? We show no situational awareness (on the field or from the coaches).

- Allocated extra practice time to fundamentals in lieu of scheme? Reports were that almost all time went into the latter with Frost; it feels like the same could be said for all the regimes mentioned.

- Made an emphasis to limit mistakes? We know about Frost wanting the players to not fear about making (many) mistakes, and Riley's Diaco wanted to shower the players with love... and now Rhule let's the practice fumbler tote the rock late in the fourth quarter of a tied game.

- Brought in QB's (and other players) who exhibit smart play? Rhule brought in the FBS's leading turnover machine and people expected something different than the 3 INT fiasco. We've been handing the keys to turnover-stricken prospects under all these regimes: Martinez, Lee, Martinez 2.0, Sims... Jesus did they all lead the nation in TO's in one of their years? Armstrong, McCaffrey and others were no less reckless with the ball.