[RuralFan]

Having been an official for a sport (a very long time ago) I'm going to go against the grain on this topic.  I find it very hard to believe refs have any intent other than to call the game the best they can.  There were coaches and teams I really didn't like for one reason or another but it never crossed my mind to make a call based on that. 

At this level the refs' careers are on the line.  They are constantly reviewed and evaluated.   With all the cameras nothing is going to be missed. 

I understand the big differential in fouls called on teams might imply something nefarious is going on.  I understand fouls apparently called in some situations and not other similar situations might be viewed as suspicious.  I just don't believe the refs are intentionally making calls for reasons other than doing the best they can do.

Maybe someday some start-up company coming out of Stanford will develop a system of machine vision to call the game taking away the human (imperfect) factor.

I have done a little referring in basketball, although a very long time ago and at a very elementary level.  I would like to have faith that what you have posted is correct.  I truly know how difficult it can be to distinguish between a charge and a block.  But I just can't make any sense out of watching the Championship Game.  Why was there such a large discrepancy between the foul calls against Stanford and Arizona?  What was Stanford doing wrong and Arizona doing right.?  Now it doesn't matter because the outcome of the game is not going to change.  On the other hand, it matters a lot on how teams will be taught to play.  Is the future of women's basketball Stanford style or Arizona style?

[RuralFan]

Having been an official for a sport (a very long time ago) I'm going to go against the grain on this topic.  I find it very hard to believe refs have any intent other than to call the game the best they can.  There were coaches and teams I really didn't like for one reason or another but it never crossed my mind to make a call based on that. 

At this level the refs' careers are on the line.  They are constantly reviewed and evaluated.   With all the cameras nothing is going to be missed. 

I understand the big differential in fouls called on teams might imply something nefarious is going on.  I understand fouls apparently called in some situations and not other similar situations might be viewed as suspicious.  I just don't believe the refs are intentionally making calls for reasons other than doing the best they can do.

Maybe someday some start-up company coming out of Stanford will develop a system of machine vision to call the game taking away the human (imperfect) factor.

I have done a little referring in basketball, although a very long time ago and at a very elementary level.  I would like to have faith that what you have posted is correct.  I truly know how difficult it can be to distinguish between a charge and a block.  But I just can't make any sense out of watching the Championship Game.  Why was there such a large discrepancy between the foul calls against Stanford and Arizona?  What was Stanford doing wrong and Arizona doing right.?  Now it doesn't matter because the outcome of the game is not going to change.  On the other hand, it matters a lot on how teams will be taught to play.  Is the future of women's basketball Stanford style or Arizona style?