reedny
Flame Resistant
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2011
- Messages
- 10,614
- Like
- 15,212
The losing team in a close game is always going to point to the refs. If you want to advance, you need a little luck, but you also can't put yourself in a position for the game to be decided by one or two calls.
OSU was the better team sans Melo. The refs were a huge distraction and altered the flow of the game, but pound for pound OSU was the better team that night. With Melo, that completely changes the conversation and the refs would have called the game more straight up, but you play with who you've got.
While it's often true that sore loosers blame the officials (see UNC Ashville), and it is definately true that Melo's absence hurt us in the middle, the reffing was stupendously bad in the OSU game.
I'm sure you remember that the refs called 48 or 49 fouls (depending on the box score you read). Of these, 28 or 29 of them were called on SU, the great majority by one official. This is beyond overkill; it was just a criminal hatchet job. All the whistles would have affected any game. And I hardly blame our guys for becoming gun-shy ... they couldn't score (or defend) withouth being called for some ridiculous infraction (one of the worst was the guy that slid over and under BT to draw a "charge", lol).
SU actually had more fieldgoals in the game than OSU -- the free throws (from all the calls) were the difference. Therefore, as a fan, while I have no resentment for OSU, I certaintly can't say OSU was the "better" team that day. If this sounds like poor sportsmanship, sorry.