No, it WASN'T a lecture.
Just like criticizing pitt and officiating appear to be hot button items for you, illegal screening and how inconsistently college basketball is officiated are two of mine.
Nothing drives me more nuts on this board than seeing posts [yours above doesn't fit into this category--just speaking generally] that confuse how complaining that refs cost you the game is different than pointing out that games are officiated poorly. Because there is a major difference.
As a former player, I think that complaining that the refs cost you the game is bush, because even if it were true it is such a rare thing. In recent years, I guess maybe you could levy that complaint about that game @ Duke where they called a charge on CJ, applying the rule wrong. And in a macro sense, that OSU game in 2012 where the refs allowed them to shoot a whopping 45 free throws. But in general, games don't come down to one call.
But the product at the collegiate level has suffered as a function of poor officiating, at is has been getting steadily worse for YEARS. Jay Bilas rails against it, and he is right. When the NBA game was suffering through similar difficulties, they changed the rules and the way the game was officiated, and their product is better off today for it.
Last season, a poster who is a known referee talked bout how refs intentionally / situationally choose what to call, because they don't want to bust the flow of the game. That reveals the level of subjectivity that has really hampered the college game, and let many contests devolve into scrums.
Again, not calling you out specifically, but when I see posts that pretend that these things aren't an issue, it pushes my buttons. Not a lecture, just a response about issues I feel passionately about.
Have a nice weekend.
