Bear Down Wildcats

Beachcat97 wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:Nobody outside of TJ played 30 minutes/game last year. No way that Ryan Anderson does that IMO. More minutes for Tollefsen and Ristic.

Don't you think it depends on RA's production? If he's the backbone of our offense, it's easy to imagine him getting 30, especially if he's good about not picking up fouls.

TJ was only player who got more than 30 mins last year, and that team wasn't as deep as this one. Anderson will be close, but I also think it is far more challenging to keep a big on the floor for more minutes than a guard.

Olsondogg wrote:

Beachcat97 wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:, but I also think it is far more challenging to keep a big on the floor for more minutes than a guard.

Usually, yes. Since I really haven't seen RA play, it's hard to say what kind of defensive player and what kind of stamina he has. Sorta feel like these two factors will determine his minutes.

You can watch him play, he played for 3 years at BC. He wasn't particularly foul prone there, and averaged over 30 minutes a game for them.

However, that doesn't mean the same here. This is a deep team this year, and one of the big challenges that Miller has is the distribution of minutes for the benefit of the team, and to keep __________ happy with his role on the team.

Olsondogg wrote:You can watch him play, he played for 3 years at BC. He wasn't particularly foul prone there, and averaged over 30 minutes a game for them.

However, that doesn't mean the same here. This is a deep team this year, and one of the big challenges that Miller has is the distribution of minutes for the benefit of the team, and to keep __________ happy with his role on the team.

Miller will figure this out. Not worried. You always wonder about the freshmen, who've yet to have their egos checked, but the guys who deserve floor time will get it. This is always how it goes.

catgrad97 wrote:Anderson's not going to get that level of minutes because the Pac-12, IMHO, won't allow it in conference.

Hopefully Miller has a second lineup just as effective for when the tweeting refs get Anderson into foul trouble. And it will happen.

1.Williams-Goss, Nigel-WASH SO 30 1104 36.80
2.Young, Joseph-ORE........ SR 36 1322 36.72
3.Randle, Chasson-STAN..... SR 37 1347 36.41
4.Alford, Bryce-UCLA....... SO 36 1307 36.31
5.PaytonII, Gary-OSU....... JR 31 1125 36.29
6.Brown, Anthony-STAN...... SR 37 1320 35.68
7.Wallace, Tyrone-CAL...... JR 33 1152 34.91
8.Duvivier, Malcolm-OSU.... SO 31 1080 34.84
9.Powell, Norman-UCLA...... SR 36 1244 34.56
10.Hamilton, Isaac-UCLA..... SO 36 1222 33.94

Plenty of players get that many minutes with Pac-12 refs. But no bigs in the Top 10.

Those minutes for Tollefsen and Ristic are low. Tollefsen should easily be in the 20s now, especially with Smith out and his ability to move to the 3. I'd be shocked if Ristic isn't around 20 either, so you can take that out of Comanche's minutes most games, as well as several of the guards/wings.

If Ryan Anderson is really the 27th (or whatever he was ranked) player in the country per the experts at ESPN and our best player, I don't think 29 or 30 minutes a game in conference games (non blowouts) is out of the question unless the refs interfere with that.

Lot's of people underestimating, or maybe forgetting, what is PAC 12 officiating...

Olsondogg wrote:Lot's of people underestimating, or maybe forgetting, what is PAC 12 officiating...

Is there a single conference whose fans are pleased with the officiating?

Beachcat97 wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:Lot's of people underestimating, or maybe forgetting, what is PAC 12 officiating...

Is there a single conference whose fans are pleased with the officiating?

No.

Arizona whistled for 17.9 fouls per game in 2014, 16.6 in 2013. Tied with UCLA in 2014. Two more per game on road vs. home. Only USC and Utah committed fewer fouls. More than half the teams around the nation called for more fouls. But most bunched tightly.

https://www.teamrankings.com/ncaa-baske ... s-per-game" target="_blank

We notice, because it's our team, and they're all bad calls!

It's really no harder to get 30 minutes in the Pac-12 than elsewhere.

gumby wrote:

Beachcat97 wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:Lot's of people underestimating, or maybe forgetting, what is PAC 12 officiating...

Is there a single conference whose fans are pleased with the officiating?

No.

Arizona whistled for 17.9 fouls per game in 2014, 16.6 in 2013. Tied with UCLA in 2014. Two more per game on road vs. home. Only USC and Utah committed fewer fouls. More than half the teams around the nation called for more fouls. But most bunched tightly.

https://www.teamrankings.com/ncaa-baske ... s-per-game" target="_blank

We notice, because it's our team, and they're all bad calls!

It's really no harder to get 30 minutes in the Pac-12 than elsewhere.

We also notice because there was an actual documented bias against Arizona from PAC officials in the past.

Olsondogg wrote:

gumby wrote:

Beachcat97 wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:Lot's of people underestimating, or maybe forgetting, what is PAC 12 officiating...

Is there a single conference whose fans are pleased with the officiating?

No.

Arizona whistled for 17.9 fouls per game in 2014, 16.6 in 2013. Tied with UCLA in 2014. Two more per game on road vs. home. Only USC and Utah committed fewer fouls. More than half the teams around the nation called for more fouls. But most bunched tightly.

https://www.teamrankings.com/ncaa-baske ... s-per-game" target="_blank

We notice, because it's our team, and they're all bad calls!

It's really no harder to get 30 minutes in the Pac-12 than elsewhere.

We also notice because there was an actual documented bias against Arizona from PAC officials in the past.

I actually noticed last year more calls going in our favor that I thought were total horseshit.

I don't mind players being whistled for fouls . . . when there are actual fouls. And I don't mind the refs letting players play on after contact . . . . . if the foul didn't affect anything. But mostly, what I'm looking for is consistency. What's a foul in the first five minutes cannot be a no call in the last five minutes. It's infuriating no matter who they blow the whistle on.

The complaining has been from time immemorial, not just the arrival of Miller. And the complaint has been about the entire conference, not just our team.

Our players aren't among the league leaders in minutes by design.

Good luck finding a fan base that thinks it's sitting pretty on officiating.

I will always think officiating sucks, cause it mostly does.

I have a problem when there is documented bias in the past...

I also have a problem with things being called inconsistently. Now, I have heard that it is going back to the model of the year before last, where there is more freedom for the offensive player in and around the basket.

As long as the calls are the same at the beginning of the game (or season) as they are at the end, I don't have a problem.

Chicat wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:

gumby wrote:

Beachcat97 wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:Lot's of people underestimating, or maybe forgetting, what is PAC 12 officiating...

Is there a single conference whose fans are pleased with the officiating?

No.

Arizona whistled for 17.9 fouls per game in 2014, 16.6 in 2013. Tied with UCLA in 2014. Two more per game on road vs. home. Only USC and Utah committed fewer fouls. More than half the teams around the nation called for more fouls. But most bunched tightly.

https://www.teamrankings.com/ncaa-baske ... s-per-game" target="_blank

We notice, because it's our team, and they're all bad calls!

It's really no harder to get 30 minutes in the Pac-12 than elsewhere.

We also notice because there was an actual documented bias against Arizona from PAC officials in the past.

I actually noticed last year more calls going in our favor that I thought were total horseshit.

I don't mind players being whistled for fouls . . . when there are actual fouls. And I don't mind the refs letting players play on after contact . . . . . if the foul didn't affect anything. But mostly, what I'm looking for is consistency. What's a foul in the first five minutes cannot be a no call in the last five minutes. It's infuriating no matter who they blow the whistle on.

Totally agree. Seems like they actually let them play more in the first half, then clamp down at the beginning of the second half. Kinda the reverse of what I'd expect.

That makes adjusting practically impossible.

Frybry02 wrote:Did I miss something? I thought the opener was versus Pacific on 11/13. However the website has it as TBD.

Exhibition against Chico St Sunday. Doesnt count towards the record but it counts in our hearts.

Lets not talk about 2011...

Pacific is 7:30 11/13. Ya weird that AZAth says TBD

The conference refs are just brutal in general, but I don't think even that masks the fact that we get the crappy end of the stuck more than any other team I have watched. There were more bizarre calls in our favor I noticed last year. I chalked that up to things evening out for us. But as said above, there is documented bias and a cover up.

I agree, my biggest beef is with the consistency throughout the game, or for team to team. We get whistled for playing physical defense because we have elite defenders who know how to be physical. The other teams don't have elite defenders and are playing physical and downright holding guys because that is the only way they can stay in front of their man. We get whistled, they don't. And then the second biggest is the fouls that have absolute no bearing on the play and a lot of the time are ticky tack. Like Tarc hedging a point guard 35 feet from the basket and grazing him with his hip.

What will the officials do about putting Tarc in foul trouble now that they know there's a sophomore Ristic ready to take the floor? Will they just say, "Eh, never mind, might as well wait to call fouls when fouls actually happen"? Or will they say, "Okay, now we've got two legitimate bigs who we've got to put in foul trouble - let's blow this whistle early and often!"?

Longhorned wrote:What will the officials do about putting Tarc in foul trouble now that they know there's a sophomore Ristic ready to take the floor? Will they just say, "Eh, never mind, might as well wait to call fouls when fouls actually happen"? Or will they say, "Okay, now we've got two legitimate bigs who we've got to put in foul trouble - let's blow this whistle early and often!"?

They'll reflexively call the fouls on Ashley.

I honestly can't believe we're complaining about the refs before a single game has been played. We've won three Pac titles in the last six years, and two straight. Great play will overcome shitty refs.

What is this 'documented bias' against Arizona that a couple of you are talking about? The Rush incident? That was a one off from what was documented. I haven't seen anything implicating the refs in a consistent bias against Arizona.

In fact, I can't imagine PAC12 refs being able to pull off anything consistently.

I believe if one were to poll the Pac-12 coaches about home court bias that eleven of them would answer McKale Center - or at least they would have up until a couple of years ago.

Puerco wrote:What is this 'documented bias' against Arizona that a couple of you are talking about? The Rush incident? That was a one off from what was documented. I haven't seen anything implicating the refs in a consistent bias against Arizona.

In fact, I can't imagine PAC12 refs being able to pull off anything consistently.

One off. Classic Puerco.

Digital Media Guide: http://read.turntext.com/t/115456-arizo ... 8498eda800" target="_blank

Red Outs: ASU & Stanford

Stripe Out: Oregon

Anyone notice the sponsor on Game 8 tickets? US border Patrol...

Jefe wrote:Anyone notice the sponsor on Game 8 tickets? US border Patrol...

They have always had a presence on campus. whats the big deal?

Cheez Its next to it too lol. Big bucks to get on those tickets I would think

Olsondogg wrote:

Puerco wrote:What is this 'documented bias' against Arizona that a couple of you are talking about? The Rush incident? That was a one off from what was documented. I haven't seen anything implicating the refs in a consistent bias against Arizona.

In fact, I can't imagine PAC12 refs being able to pull off anything consistently.

One off. Classic Puerco.

Seems so. Have you read the document? Or are you referring to something else that documented bias?

http://a.pac-12.com/wp-content/uploads/ ... public.pdf" target="_blank

Regarding the UCLA game:

Arizona's Head Coach describes the game as a “very good, physical game.” Arizona’s Head Coach, Arizona’s assistant coaches, and the Athletics Director all consider the game solidly officiated. According to the Head Coach, the officiating wasn’t “really poor officiating or great officiating,” and the officials were not “one-sided or cheating Arizona.” Even in regard
to the controversial (incorrect upon video review) double-
dribble violation called against Arizona with 4:37 remaining in the game, the Head Coach agrees that there was no “conspiracy to make Arizona lose.” Similarly, Arizona’s assistant coaches describe the officiating as “fine,” “typical,” “unbiased,” and "involving good calls and bad calls on both sides.” The Athletics Director notes that the disparity in free throws, which favored UCLA, is something that “just
happens sometimes."

In any event, the controversy was about enforcing "bench decorum" -- making sure coaches don't stray onto court, etc.

That has no bearing on how this discussion began. Namely, that Arizona would be lucky to have a guy play 30 minutes per game due to the refs. The "documented bias" is about the coach, not the players.

Unless, of course, you're referring to something else. The coordinator was fired. He's not around to make sure RA gets two quick fouls.

Jefe wrote:Cheez Its next to it too lol. Big bucks to get on those tickets I would think

Fairly educated guess is 4 grand

No chance redshirt.

RA has won gold jersey six straight weeks. Can't tell if that's good news or bad news.

Main Event wrote:No chance redshirt.

As a long time pessimist on this issue, tonight I get to celebrate internet glory.

gumby wrote:RA has won gold jersey six straight weeks. Can't tell if that's good news or bad news.

It can't be all good. Otherwise, he'd have won it every week last year, too.

Longhorned wrote:

gumby wrote:RA has won gold jersey six straight weeks. Can't tell if that's good news or bad news.

It can't be all good. Otherwise, he'd have won it every week last year, too.

Ugh. Just as I feared. He goes unchallenged this year, but not last. And all of those players are gone.

gumby wrote:

Longhorned wrote:

gumby wrote:RA has won gold jersey six straight weeks. Can't tell if that's good news or bad news.

It can't be all good. Otherwise, he'd have won it every week last year, too.

Ugh. Just as I feared. He goes unchallenged this year, but not last. And all of those players are gone.

We're scuuuuurooooooooooooooooooooood.

gumby wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:

Puerco wrote:What is this 'documented bias' against Arizona that a couple of you are talking about? The Rush incident? That was a one off from what was documented. I haven't seen anything implicating the refs in a consistent bias against Arizona.

In fact, I can't imagine PAC12 refs being able to pull off anything consistently.

One off. Classic Puerco.

Seems so. Have you read the document? Or are you referring to something else that documented bias?

http://a.pac-12.com/wp-content/uploads/ ... public.pdf" target="_blank

Regarding the UCLA game:

Arizona's Head Coach describes the game as a “very good, physical game.” Arizona’s Head Coach, Arizona’s assistant coaches, and the Athletics Director all consider the game solidly officiated. According to the Head Coach, the officiating wasn’t “really poor officiating or great officiating,” and the officials were not “one-sided or cheating Arizona.” Even in regard
to the controversial (incorrect upon video review) double-
dribble violation called against Arizona with 4:37 remaining in the game, the Head Coach agrees that there was no “conspiracy to make Arizona lose.” Similarly, Arizona’s assistant coaches describe the officiating as “fine,” “typical,” “unbiased,” and "involving good calls and bad calls on both sides.” The Athletics Director notes that the disparity in free throws, which favored UCLA, is something that “just
happens sometimes."

In any event, the controversy was about enforcing "bench decorum" -- making sure coaches don't stray onto court, etc.

That has no bearing on how this discussion began. Namely, that Arizona would be lucky to have a guy play 30 minutes per game due to the refs. The "documented bias" is about the coach, not the players.

Unless, of course, you're referring to something else. The coordinator was fired. He's not around to make sure RA gets two quick fouls.

I'll leave this for ya Gumby.

The Coordinator of Officiating] started screaming, 'The first guy that runs him, I'm going to give him $5,000.' He says, 'If I can't give him $5,000, I'm somehow or someway, I'm going to find a way to get him something. I'll give him a round- trip airfare and lodging.'"
One official reports that the Coordinator offered an extra reward if the ejection occurred the following season during a game in Tucson.

Typical. ODogg, do you not understand the term one-off? You've provided evidence, which we've all seen before, of a single instance where the head of officiating wanted Miller to get teed up. Until you give us something else, it's a one-off.

Cats are deep.

However, at a press conference on Thursday, Sean Miller said that Chance Comanche will not be redshirting this season. The reason Miller gave was that Comanche is farther ahead in his development than the coaching staff thought he'd be.

http://www.azdesertswarm.com/basketball ... his-season" target="_blank

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

Main Event wrote:No chance redshirt.

As a long time pessimist on this issue, tonight I get to celebrate internet glory.

Pretty sure it was you and I that got into this topic, and all I have to say is congratulations on being on the correct side of the argument, but I still think it's ridiculously stupid to not redshirt a guy who is only capable of playing one position and has two guys ahead of him at that position. I don't know if it was Chance's decision or Miller's, but either way it's stupid and lacks foresight. I guess he gets to keep that redshirt year if he eventually transfers now, boy that sure does benefit us! Then again if he proves to be a NBA talent in a few years then it's meaningless. I hope that happens.

Longhorned wrote:

gumby wrote:RA has won gold jersey six straight weeks. Can't tell if that's good news or bad news.

It can't be all good. Otherwise, he'd have won it every week last year, too.

He didn't practice every week of the season last year due to recovering from shoulder surgery and even when he was he was still 1. Learning a new system and 2. Recovering from shoulder surgery. I think the points for the gold jersey are cumulative any ways and there's pretty much no way for a guy who practiced late to garner enough points to overtake a guy who participated in every practice.

Also RA's primary competition for the gold jersey tore his ACL and the secondary competition has been sitting out with an ankle injury.

Puerco wrote:Typical. ODogg, do you not understand the term one-off? You've provided evidence, which we've all seen before, of a single instance where the head of officiating wanted Miller to get teed up. Until you give us something else, it's a one-off.

Yeah, he's picking cherries to make apple pie.

Coordinator gone. Teeing up a coach (jokingly or otherwise ) has no bearing on a discussion about the PT for players. Coach doesn't see a conspiracy. Arizona not called for an inordinate number of fouls over the course of a season.

All the evidence is against the proposition that Arizona players have an uphill slog to log 30 minutes because of the refs.

P.S. It baffles me that people choose to follow passionately any endeavor they believe to be corrupt to the core. "They're all against us -- refs, media, conference commissioner, tournament directors, selection committee, pollsters -- but I still think we have a shot!"

ChooChooCat wrote:

Longhorned wrote:

gumby wrote:RA has won gold jersey six straight weeks. Can't tell if that's good news or bad news.

It can't be all good. Otherwise, he'd have won it every week last year, too.

He didn't practice every week of the season last year due to recovering from shoulder surgery and even when he was he was still 1. Learning a new system and 2. Recovering from shoulder surgery. I think the points for the gold jersey are cumulative any ways and there's pretty much no way for a guy who practiced late to garner enough points to overtake a guy who participated in every practice.

Also RA's primary competition for the gold jersey tore his ACL and the secondary competition has been sitting out with an ankle injury.

That is correct. More than just learning the system, as part of recovery he literally wasn't on the floor competing for the gold jersey. He was no-contact.

gumby wrote:

Puerco wrote:Typical. ODogg, do you not understand the term one-off? You've provided evidence, which we've all seen before, of a single instance where the head of officiating wanted Miller to get teed up. Until you give us something else, it's a one-off.

Yeah, he's picking cherries to make apple pie.

Coordinator gone. Teeing up a coach (jokingly or otherwise ) has no bearing on a discussion about the PT for players. Coach doesn't see a conspiracy. Arizona not called for an inordinate number of fouls over the course of a season.

All the evidence is against the proposition that Arizona players have an uphill slog to log 30 minutes because of the refs.

P.S. It baffles me that people choose to follow passionately any endeavor they believe to be corrupt to the core. "They're all against us -- refs, media, conference commissioner, tournament directors, selection committee, pollsters -- but I still think we have a shot!"

I believe in psychiatric circles it's unofficially known as paranoid homer syndrome. I unfortunately know a few sports fans with PHS, and it makes watching sports with them difficult. They're downright embarrassing to be seen with in public.

In the name of full disclosure, I had a close bout with PHS myself while watching a particular late season basketball game against Duke while living in North Carolina back in 2001.

Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're NOT out to get me!

Go Cats!!

Puerco wrote:

gumby wrote:

Puerco wrote:Typical. ODogg, do you not understand the term one-off? You've provided evidence, which we've all seen before, of a single instance where the head of officiating wanted Miller to get teed up. Until you give us something else, it's a one-off.

Yeah, he's picking cherries to make apple pie.

Coordinator gone. Teeing up a coach (jokingly or otherwise ) has no bearing on a discussion about the PT for players. Coach doesn't see a conspiracy. Arizona not called for an inordinate number of fouls over the course of a season.

All the evidence is against the proposition that Arizona players have an uphill slog to log 30 minutes because of the refs.

P.S. It baffles me that people choose to follow passionately any endeavor they believe to be corrupt to the core. "They're all against us -- refs, media, conference commissioner, tournament directors, selection committee, pollsters -- but I still think we have a shot!"

I believe in psychiatric circles it's unofficially known as paranoid homer syndrome. I unfortunately know a few sports fans with PHS, and it makes watching sports with them difficult. They're downright embarrassing to be seen with in public.

In the name of full disclosure, I had a close bout with PHS myself while watching a particular late season basketball game against Duke while living in North Carolina back in 2001.

Oh, I have my moments of rage. We all do. And I get the psychology of "prove them wrong" and "nobody thought we could do it."

Just can't fathom the reason we'd be targeted year after year. Arizona? Really? Because if we do win, the refs (or whoever) lose something?

ChooChooCat wrote:

Longhorned wrote:

gumby wrote:RA has won gold jersey six straight weeks. Can't tell if that's good news or bad news.

It can't be all good. Otherwise, he'd have won it every week last year, too.

He didn't practice every week of the season last year due to recovering from shoulder surgery and even when he was he was still 1. Learning a new system and 2. Recovering from shoulder surgery. I think the points for the gold jersey are cumulative any ways and there's pretty much no way for a guy who practiced late to garner enough points to overtake a guy who participated in every practice.

Also RA's primary competition for the gold jersey tore his ACL and the secondary competition has been sitting out with an ankle injury.

I'm not really serious about being concerned. Looks like he's a relentless rebounder and the hardest worker Miller has had.

http://www.todaysu.com/pac-12-today/ari ... -transfer/" target="_blank

“Ryan is an unbelievable basketball player,” said fourth-year starting center Kaleb Tarczewski. “We kind of all saw toward the end of last season. His work ethic is unlike any I’ve ever seen.”

But this is exactly why the Ed Rush situation was such a scandal. It feeds the false perception that the referees aren't objective, and that's about the last thing you need in spectator sports. The fact that it isn't true that the officials are biased against Arizona isn't enough. Arizona fans know that Byrne felt slighted by the conference decision against Miller. That mess will take a long time to overcome, and it's hard to see how Larry Scott is making any real effort to overcome the perception by controlling the message and showing up at Arizona games like he does other conference games, particularly when it involves milestones. As if the conference administration has no leadership role to play in any of this. Personally, I don't think the league and the officials are out to get Arizona, but there's more to it than that.

Longhorned wrote:But this is exactly why the Ed Rush situation was such a scandal. It feeds the false perception that the referees aren't objective, and that's about the last thing you need in spectator sports. The fact that it isn't true that the officials are biased against Arizona isn't enough. Arizona fans know that Byrne felt slighted by the conference decision against Miller. That mess will take a long time to overcome, and it's hard to see how Larry Scott is making any real effort to overcome the perception by controlling the message and showing up at Arizona games like he does other conference games, particularly when it involves milestones. As if the conference administration has no leadership role to play in any of this. Personally, I don't think the league and the officials are out to get Arizona, but there's more to it than that.

Was going to bring up the bolded. The bias may or may not be there, but are people really going to stone someone for thinking it's there with the whole Rush incident and looking at the totality of everything else besides that? And it was only handled when a particular sports writer made a big deal about it and ESPN and all the other news outlets caught on? What does that tell the average person? Larry didn't want that stink on the conference? Or he knew about it or had some influence?

And I also thought certain people in the conference were tired of Miller's "complaining" about the officiating in the conference before that? And wasn't Miller's direct words, "F---k this conference" after the UCLA tourney loss? Not the officials, not rush, THE CONFERENCE. I mean, maybe I am wrong here and have my own biases, but are there any other conferences out there who don't love that one program in their conference that is the breadwinner of the conference? The team that consistently pulls everyone else when they are struggling, the team that is the face of that conference, the team that benefits the other teams because of their success? I'm not expecting hand jobs or anything, but our program has been completely ignored multiple times by Larry. It's flat out disrespectful and to me, it appears things are at minimum awkward.

And in the Miller era alone, how many times have we significantly won the going to the line battle vs being on the other end, or the fouls called in general? I noticed last year, we were on the winning end of that more than prior years. But that is expected. We have the most elite, athletic, and well coached athletes in the conference. We got to the line A LOT last year, and there is a reason why. We are superior offensively. We are also superior defensively to any other team in the conference, and a lot of our foes spend time dribbling in circles, tossing meaningless passes around the perimeter, and chucking up prayers because of that, things that all should not be conducive to drawing fouls. It isn't like our team presses, is taught to reach and be super aggressive to force turnovers, our bigs arent taught to leave their feet on the interior in an effort to put up godly shotblocking numbers. That is a battle we should be winning almost every game if things are truly being even, and many games by a very significant margin. Whether it is bias, or a case of the refs feeling bad and trying to even things out, who knows.