The idea that refs do not contain human emotion that can affect decisions is total BS. When same ref can call a reach in 45-feet from the basket on Fox and then turn around and call nothing when Fox gets hammered before the half or when Monk gets knocked to the ground by Jackson, shows that he likes to pick and choose what to call when it benefits what he wants.
I'm telling you that players would do better calling their own fouls than NCAA refs. But you cannot deny a common denominator when four NCAA Tournament losses contain the same official and your winning percentage is about 50 percent less when this guy is the referee. Every game he called resulted in horrendous officiating and controversy that cost us the game each time.
If you were an employer and four bad incidents occurred and one employee was the common factor in all of these, is that not suspicious?
I'm telling you that players would do better calling their own fouls than NCAA refs. But you cannot deny a common denominator when four NCAA Tournament losses contain the same official and your winning percentage is about 50 percent less when this guy is the referee. Every game he called resulted in horrendous officiating and controversy that cost us the game each time.
If you were an employer and four bad incidents occurred and one employee was the common factor in all of these, is that not suspicious?