Shots at OU

Bob Knight is not known for being the most level-headed, thoughtful guy before he opens his mouth. So, it comes as little surprise that he's chiming in on the OU v. UO game, bring up a loss by his TTU Red Raiders that he attributes, at least partially, to the officiating in Norman. Knight, apparently, wanted OU to forfeit the game after replay revealed that the clock had started a little bit late at the start of the possession when OU tied it at the end of regulation; the Sooners won the game in OT.

I'm not sure what Knight is trying to accomplish with these comments. I also don't know the exact specifics of the situation his team was involved in. Was the clock operator affiliated with the University of Oklahoma or the Big 12? I'm almost certain that when the clock started isn't reviewable in college basketball. At that time, I doubt they had replay on anything ... possibly whether or not a player got a shot off before the end of a half. Clock operators are notorious for providing a little bit of assistance to the home team. Maybe this bias factored in to the result that day. Maybe it was an honest, split second reaction mistake. I'm sure if you looked at a lot of replays on when the clock started, it would be off a lot of the time. It's much harder to determine, and react, in real-time to when a player first touches the ball (and have the electronics work with you) than it is to figure out who should be awarded an onsides kick. But, even more than that, the onsides kick play was reviewable. I don't think the play Knight is questioning was.

Perhaps Bob Knight knows that there isn't any real basis for his comments and that the situations aren't really that closely related. Non-reviewable calls change the outcomes of many basketball games at the end. Whether or not to call a foul is often a sticky subject in crunch time. The one thing I won't do is go Bill Plascke on TTU and Bob Knight and say that they should have done more before that point to win the game. The officials may well have cost them the game, but it's much more difficult (according to the Pac-10 commish) to officiate in real-time on the field than in a replay booth. Knight should be lobbying to have those types of plays made reviewable. Then, if he had a complaint about a clock operator and the review of clock operation, he'd have a leg to stand on.

So, assuming Knight realizes his bball story has little to do with what happened in Eugene, there are a few alternative explanations for him talking to the Oklahoman: a) it's been a while since the Red Raiders' last game and the ESPN reality show, Knight School, and Knight thinks he needs to be back in the media spotlight; b) Knight enjoys taking shots at Big 12 South rival Oklahoma; or c) Knight wants to shed light on the problems with officiating/timing in college basketball before the season begins.

One last reason the error in Eugene trumps the error in Norman by a couple orders of magnitude: OU got screwed over in football. I'm not saying football is more important than basketball. My athletic glory was achieved on the hardwood, not the gridiron. But, because of the idiotic BCS system employed in college football, losses (especially very questionable ones) are much harder to swollow in football than in basketball. In basketball, all 12 Big 12 teams make the conference tournament. The winner of said tournament gets a shot at the national title, although they are one of 64 (or 65, depending on when you actually think the tournament starts) teams. That is a last chance entry. Solid teams from major conferences usually get into the tourney, so one or two losses won't kill you. In football, the winner of the Big 12 South plays in the Big 12 Championship game. Sure, the Oregon loss has no bearing on conference play. However, a few years back OU lost in the Big 12 Championship and still played for the title in the Sugar Bowl. But, this year, winning the Big 12 is no guarantee for a shot at the championship, especially if the winner has a loss (which will be the case with Texas, OU, and Nebraska all having losses on their record now, though OU shouldn't). An undefeated Oklahoma team has a much better shot at the national title than a one-loss OU team. Whether Bob Knight's Red Raiders have 10 losses or 11 doesn't matter near that much.