Quote:
Originally posted by iamaref
I was merely sayin that they had there "own agenda" in call selection. Maybe trying to control the game to much. Not by any means cheating... or tryin to affect the outcome.
|
That's a better explanation of what you meant. At least now it's discussable, imo, whether we agree or not.
What we don't know, and probably never will, is what direction these officials were given before the game. These guys are usually pre-gamed by one of the NCAA officials' supervisors on things that they should be aware of, or problems that they might face. I don't know whether any of these guys had done any previous Duke or UConn games, but the usual procedure is to try and have fresh faces out there, if possible. Somebody might have said before the game- "look guys, there's been too much contact let go with these 2 teams, and we want you to clean it up. Make 'em play ball". If that's what happened, then that's the NCAA's agenda and not the official's agenda. I just can't see solid, experienced and very capable officials like these guys going into any game with their
own pre-conceived ideas of how they're gonna call the game. I think that, at this level, the officials usually let the game come to them, and not vice-versa. That's why I personally don't like judging individual performances.