Game 1 he had a single foul
Game 2 he had a single foul
Game 3 he had 2 fouls.

@Op - just shut up!! Martin had his fair share of calls go against him. Did you not see that clean block that was called a goal tend. Take you x-files conspiracy BS elsewhere.

So, the OP is surprised that Martin is Good at what he's good at?

You don't become the best defensive player in the league by fouling every time you put your hand out.
He is exceptionally good at getting his hand cleanly onto the ball.

To look at it another way, if he wasn't, he probably wouldn't be playing NBL, (or at least not starting.)

I don't think the relevant question is "how many fouls did Martin get?"

The better question is "if the refs called the same fouls on Martin that they were calling on the Breakers, how many fouls would Martin have got?"

Seeing as the Breakers got pinged for 51 fouls combined in games 1 and 3 and some of them were soft as all shit (including the Cedric Jackson's 4th which forced him to sit), I think that question is a very fair one.

As a neutral fan who just wants to see a good game, its extremely frustrating watching, for example, Charles Jackson and Pledger getting soft fouls in quick succession to send the Cats to the line, then seeing Webster drive to the hoop on the next play and not get a call. And so on and so on.

As a neutral fan who just wants to see a good game

ROFL

Jackson has been getting in foul trouble since the day he landed. That's probably why he starts on the bench. He fouled out in both games against MU.
Is that Perth's fault as well?

Of course Perth were the better team and *probably* would have won the series even if the refs hadn't called 16 fewer fouls on them than their opposition across their 2 home games.

Perth is a great team who plays unselfish team basketball and are very impressive defensively.

But my point is, I would have liked to have seen a good basketball game with less home cooking.

I would have loved to see the pre eminent superstar of the Last 5 years of the NBL given the opportunity to dig NZ out of their 15 point deficit. Instead, he sat on the bench as Perths lead grew to an unassailable 25, all because he dared lightly Stroke Damian Martin with an errant pinky finger while Martin drove to the hoop.

(Meanwhile Perth were getting away with all sorts of things at the other end. A good spectacle this was not).

So I suppose the fact the Breakers were the highest fouling team all season is thrown out the window because they are playing Perth , therefor the reffing was rigged. Righto

If you look at the foul counts (and exclude the deliberate fouls in the last minute)
in Game 1 it was Perth 19, NZ 20.
In Game 2 it was 21 all.

So absolutely no basis for suggesting unevenness.

The "discrepancy" in game 3 can be easily explained. Firstly by the obvious point that NZ were knackered and extremely sloppy, and secondly Perth really didn't have to try that hard after 3/4 time.

The best basis for suggesting unevenness is found in the myriad of examples from today's game.

Just watched a minute or two of the replay on right now.

Abercrombie obviously and clearly had his *singlet grabbed* with 2 minutes left in the first.

No wonder the Cats players quickly realised they could get away with a few shifty ones. 16 fouls for the game, what a joke.

LV: "As a neutral fan"

Holy balls, man, just ... I suppose you might be fooling someone visiting this site for the first time, but for everyone else you're just putting us in dangerous of suffocating through hysterical laughter.

LV wanted to see a good game and by that he means he wanted to see Perth lose.

give the man another box of Kleenex, clearly the last box was used when United got pummelled by Breakers.

"myriad of examples"
Like when Martin clearly got the ball before the glass and it was called a goal-tend?

Not exactly relevant but I recall in Kevin Lisch's last season in Perth his stats were he had 17 fouls called on him in 16 games... Not sure what he got by seasons end and I know it was called differently back then but it does feel that there are players they protect even when they try to foul.

I was so into the game that I didn't really notice anything other than the crowd going ape shit all day and an even display from the Wildcats... Oh and Cedric had his worst NBL game ever

Correction to the above. It was Jackson's third foul, 5:53, 3rd that was soft as all shit.

+1 for anon #080

Congrats to Perth players for winning, and to Perth fans for their fanatical support. I switched it on just after the start but could only stand 15 seconds of the basketbrawl before I turned it off.

Call it intimidated reffing or poorly-instructed refs but what I saw was shit reffing allowing play which brought the game into disrepute. If you want a reason for why our great game doesn't get the viewing audience it deserves, this game gives a good example. Attacking skills never stood a chance.

NBL bosses, after a great season you blew it at the end.

Congrats to the Wildcats- they play team basketball, they play good defense. They were the best team all season and thoroughly deserved to win.

But -this thread is about the reffing.

The inconsistency of it all is just shit.

We had tight reffing earlier in the year which resulted in a great spectacle. Offense flourished and it was an exciting product.

Fast forward to the Grand Final and you have Abercrombie getting his singlet grabbed by Redhage, Webster getting mugged on multiple occasions, Jawai hacking at Vukona with no call, Knight bumping cutters and pushing people out on rebound contests, etc etc.

OK well, if you want to change the tone and let it go, well you can do that if you really want to - it does impact the spectacle but it's still *fair* as long as it's happening at both ends.

But then you see 140kg Nate Jawai being bailed out in the low post with Pledger and Charles Jackson getting some very soft or non existent fouls, and then another one on Mr NBL, Mr Championship Cedric Jackson. And you just think "What gives?". This is not only inconsistent from what we've seen earlier in the season but it's inconsistent from end to end and it's advantaging one team.

Very good call Anon #582080.
As in, very good call not putting your name to that embarrassing pile of garbage.

whatever Damo gets paid, its not enough.

But -this thread is about the reffing.

No, technically it's about you having a whinge that the Wildcats get favoured treatment from the refs, while other teams, or more specifically in this instance, the Breakers were innocent...

Have you addressed Cedric's clear push of Damo right in front of the refs to clear space? Or the push offs that Damo cops (that the commentators, I think Heal? said that you have to do if Damo is pestering you) or all the stuff that Nate actually cops and because he's so much bigger than anyone else, no whistle is called? Mika is one of the smartest bigs out there as he learnt from one of the best sneaky bigs in Pero Cameron, so he's no innocent school girl...

If you're going to expand your comments out to the entire season, I completely agree that Perth get away with obvious home cooking, but the standard of reffing has dropped so much this season, that it isn't limited to them, so suggesting that it's just them, is ridiculous and really shouldn't belong in this topic, as there are huge problems that are just not because Perth gets a good run with the refs...

As I have mentioned before, my biggest gripe with the Refs is that sometimes out of the 3 refs, it will be the one with the worst view who calls what he thinks happened and almost never do the other refs step in and overrule.
They are certainly imperfect, and yes IMHO there's a lack of "internal consistency".
But to suggest that they are biased in favour of Perth is laughable.

"numnuts trying to justify and quote stats"

Here is 2 for you:

28% FG percentage... has nothing to do with the Refs, that good D and poor shooting, you won't win many shooting 28%.

13090...thats the crowd figure, that many screaming fans will influence a ref.

"But then you see 140kg Nate Jawai being bailed out in the low post" whats his weight got to do with it? he was hacked from the first minute of game 1 by pledger, what, because he's big he should get 0 calls from a whak to the elbow?

It's been alluded to in some posts above. I do observe that a guard driving the lanes brushes against an opponent and draws a foul, whereas a big guy under the basket can get his arms absolutely hacked on the way up and not get a call. But on balance that has been the way the NBL is called for years. BUt at the end of the day, Jawai, Jervis, Parther and Beal all drew 4/5 fouls each, despite the big guys ostensibly copping more contact. Again, certainly no evidence of bias.

28% = good D and poor shooting, eh?

How about we add in the 'no calls' on grabbing, shoving, holding, hacking, bumping and shirt-pulling? Or are they all considered as 'good D'?

I don't have an axe to grind with either finalist; they did what they could get away with. The best two teams got to the GF. I'm just really pissed that the refs let them get away with such crap and ruined what should have been a really exciting game.

"But to suggest that they are biased in favour of Perth is laughable."

Straw man.

The comment that has been continually made in this thread, and was implied by the commentators during the broadcast yesterday, is that the refs favoured Perth *during the deciding Grand Final game*.

LV, you are the straw man. And I don't know which of these anons is the Tin Man to your Scarecrow, but Nick Marvin is not your Wicked Witch of the West, lol.

Look, at the end of the day, you cannot attempt to make the topic about an individual game and be taken seriously, because you are at the topic continuously.

This was not just the NBL's best crew, but a crew whose members have Gold Medal matches under their belt. At some point you're going to have to come to one of three possible conclusions. Either:

a) the Perth Arena crowd is more intimidating than anything Aylen and co have faced internationally.
b) the NBL actually does have a tinfoil hat pro-Wildcats conspiracy that has infected the refereeing department.

Or, and this is my personal favourite and I strongly recommend it to you:

c) You are simply not an objective observer of anything related to the Perth Wildcats and refereeing, and the sooner you stop commenting on it, the more fruitful and profitable your life will be.

At risk of repeating myself, anybody that believes the refs had any impact on game 3, has a severe mental problem and should seek medical help.

LV's peppered angus is still throbbing.

This was not just the NBL's best crew

In the NBL's opinion.

but a crew whose members have Gold Medal matches under their belt.

How much does that really mean, though?

I also think a) is a fair chance of being true. Olympics and World Cups are held in neutral venues for the vast majority of games.

I don't think I've ever seen anyone say the NBL refs are of an acceptable standard.

No one ever says the officiating is of an acceptable standard.

Anywhere.

Ever.

Regardless of league, sport, nation, etc.

But you know what, koberulz? This is what we've got. And apparently its enough to get atop a pile of refs from other countries with comparable leagues. Do we have refs who are able to stay uninfluenced by 10k+ crowds?

Apparently not.

Here's the rub: nothing but experience with that level of intensity can help referees. Further problem: we don't have anything like the US NCAA crowds as a lower level to train referees on before they hit the top-flight. The only place in Aus that you will experience that sort of atmosphere *is* Perth Arena at a Wildcats home game.

Aside from that, we may as well agree to revisit the topic when we manage to build robo-referees or something.

But this thread and the constant threads like it are nothing more than sour wankery.

No one ever says the officiating is of an acceptable standard.

I'm not just talking about fans, I'm also talking about media, players past and present, etc.

Do we have refs who are able to stay uninfluenced by 10k+ crowds?

Apparently not.

It's very clear that we don't. Hell, no league does. Home court advantage in the NBA was found to consist almost entirely of officiating decisions. To suggest that the NBL's refs are somehow better at blocking that out than the NBA's is absurd.

Here's the rub: nothing but experience with that level of intensity can help referees.

Lots of things can help the referees. Paying them properly so they can work full-time, and you attract good candidates. Not changing up the points of emphasis in entirely contradictory ways every season (charge/block has gone from 'if in doubt, charge' to 'if in doubt, block' to 'if in doubt, take a guess' in the past four years). Getting rid of the refs who have been average or below for years, and shown no sign of improvement, in favour of younger, fresher refs who might get better with NBL experience.

Not that I claim to be some brilliant officiating strategist; the above suggestions have all been made in the media, by people who have a far better knowledge of officiating here and overseas than I do.

Just this season, we've had the officials invent a rule that didn't exist to hand Melbourne a game, review a non-reviewable situation and make a call they couldn't have made even if the situation were reviewable, give Kevin Lisch a continuation after he took a dribble...

I can clearly remember four different occasions in the past four years where perennial ROTY Michael Aylen has reviewed non-reviewable situations, including one in which he should have known the review would be useless, after which he just invented a decision out of thin air.

Trevor Gleeson and Joey Wright have hurled abuse at officials constantly throughout the season with nary a technical. Demopolous should have earned himself a few this year as well. Teams have been given multiple delay of game warnings.

You don't need to be alleging bias in any particular direction, or upset about a result, to see that the officiating in the NBL needs serious work.

And as a Wildcats fan, I have zero reason to be upset by the result of the grand final. Hell, I called for Prather to be ejected in the semis.

Hyperbole overload!!!

It's amazing how the basketball purists come out when the Cats win, complaining about how dirty they are. Here is an idea 'dirty' is experience and knowledge, the cats get away with what they can just like every other team and they push every boundary until a call is made. 'Wagstaff, hire and Redhage are the worst offenders' they are at the core of 3 championships just like Hodge, Mitchell and Lewis who most AFL fans call the dirtiest players in the AFL... But, they win, and winning is all that matters, not appeasing people on a forum who claim to 'just want a clean game'...crap, you want the Wildcats to lose and when they win, it's because the reffs were crap.

"And as a Wildcats fan, I have zero reason to be upset by the result of the grand final. Hell, I called for Prather to be ejected in the semis."

It's okay, everyone has a moment or two of temporary insanity, you're forgiven. ;)

TimberBall, please don't compare Wagstaff, Hire or Redhage with Hodge, Mitchell and Lewis. Wagstaff, Hire or Redhage are role players (albeit dirty ones). Hodge, Mitchell and Lewis are leaders and legends of the game.

Also, if winning is all that matters, what happens when there is no league left to win due to the lack of spectacle the game has become? LV made a very good point comparing the start of the season with the end and the huge discrepancy in the calls refs make and don't make.

Finally, if we're going to compare dirty to playing hard, there are perfect examples within Perth's team. Damo plays hard, tough, fair and with integrity. Wagstaff is just a flog who antagonises, grabs shirts, bumps off the ball and generally has a bad attitude on the court. It would be nice if all referees understood this and made their calls accordingly.

*blows whistle*

"Foul is on red, 24, for annoying people on the internet again."

In 2010 all 3 were starters, in 2012 redhage and Wagstaff were both regular starters, all 3 are leaders (Hire is a co-captain, Redhage is a former captain) Redhage will have his number retired and be endorsed as a club ledgend.

If you feel that a lack of calls by the refs on 1 team are going to be the death of the NBL you're an idiot, the league even endorsed a harder style of play (#hardball). I would much rather have a few bumps and holds be let go than seeing 2 teams at the line 30 times a game.

It's clear you must be a Hawks fan, so once you pick your lip up off the ground and stop crying you can jump on another bandwagon, though seats are limited in the jungle.

"Unsportsman like foul on the Wildcats for daring to play to the way the refs call the game"

Two free sobs and a tissue for the losers.

Seriously buddy, tone down the personal name calling. This is a discussion where we all post opinions about stuff. Critique my opinion all you like but don't get so personal, it's really unproductive and dim-witted.

I was actually referring to the general standard of refereeing over the course of the season and how it has morphed from something that was working to something that resembled the old NBL.

I never said I don't like #hardball. Love Damo and the way he goes about it. A true champion of Aussie ball. I don't understand how you can watch the way Wagstaff plays and tell me he's not dirty. Then put him in the same sentence as Luke Hodge?! Dude, come on.

Without delving deep into research, 2 Luke Hodge moments come to mind, his 'Spoil' attempt on Goldstein and his head high hip and shoulder on the port player into the post. You want to talk Mitchell? Knees. These are just from last season.

I'm not doubting their Ledgend status, but all of the best players and teams walk a fine line between dirty and tactical. The Pistons 'Jordan rules', the Newcastle Knights 'cattle dog' whistle, Ronaldo's Dives, Macanroe's outbursts, they all netted results...that is sport, if it upsets you stop watching any form of competitive sports. Everyone loves to talk nostalgia, how good were the 80s/90s etc, it happened then as well. Teams and players just need to evolve.

In 2010 all 3 were starters

All three of whom? Hire, Redhage, and Wagstaff?

Hire wasn't even in the league.

My mistake, Hire was a DP in 2010, Jesse won ROY

Perth's DPs in 2010 were Joel Wagner, Marko Deric and Jarrad Prior.

Hire wasn't even in the league.

2010/11, but way to harp on the issues there Koberulz

Without delving deep into research

An excellent summation of your problem.

It's a pretty major error if you're claiming a guy started in a league he wasn't even in. Especially if he's never started, with the possible exception of starts due to injury.

You're trying to claim Redhage, Wagstaff and Hire have more significance than just being role players, and your only evidence to support that notion in Hire's case is completely made up. You can't be upset that someone called you on it.

If I were going into nitpick mode, I'd point out that your claim that Hire is co-captain is also false, or that 'ledgend' is not a word.

It is not true that "no one ever says the reffing is of an acceptable standard. Anywhere. Ever".

The NBA reffing is about as consistent and fair as one could reasonably ask for. Of course human error will always exist, and psychology suggests that the crowds will influence decisions that occur in a split second. And refs will inevitably have bad games just as players do. All of this happens in the NBA, and it happens everywhere. But the issues in the NBL go far beyond that. There is a persistent and serious issue with incompetence and home cooking in the NBL that does not exist in say, the NBA. Consider the Goulding/Webster debacle as an example of incompetence. (This admission comes from a United fan).

Dazz, what do you mean by “the refs had an impact”? With 2 minutes left in the first, scores were very tight when Redhage got away with a singlet grab on Abercrombie. Breakers were finding it hard to score and the Cats took a 4 point lead into quarter time. The Breakers began second guessing themselves - in the pressure cooker of Perth Arena, with the ref letting the opposition swing you by your singlet, it makes everything that bit tougher on you. Fast forward a bit: The game was in the balance mid way through the second quarter. Jawai got sent to the line on two soft fouls- one on Charles Jackson who got subbed straight afterwards, and then one on Pledger- then Webster got denied a similar call a minute later. This was when the Wildcats took control of the game for the first time. Then, there were numerous calls that went the Wildcats way during that third quarter- the most devastating one for the Breakers was Cedric Jackson's third foul, gifting Damian Martin an undeserved trip to the free throw line. Jackson sat on the bench whilst the Wildcats put the game beyond doubt late in the third and early in the fourth.

So yes, the Wildcats got help. The refs helped them get the lead, and the refs helped them put the game away. Was it “The difference”? No. Perth were clearly the better team, and thoroughly deserved to win and win comfortably. But if you’re saying that the refs “had no impact” on the game then you’ve simply got no idea about the game of basketball. None.

I thought the Breakers were in worse foul trouble in pretty much all of game 1, yet they lost by just a few points. What does that tell you?

I don't think the NBA reffing is all that flash to be honest.
The main differences to me are that the commentators don't get hung up on disputing calls the way that ours do, and the players & coaches are in general far more respectful towards the officials than ours are. Which is something I would like the NBL to try to emulate.
Basketball is a tricky sport to adjudicate at the best of times, and refs have enough on their plates as it is without having Gleeson types basically insulting them from the sidelines all game.

Lol, the refs are fucked.

Breakers were screwed over as LV has pointed out repeatedly above.

Flophage, Shitstaff and Wouldn'tHire are flogs.

NEXT!!

At the end of the day, this thread is about twisted losers bitching because Perth won another championship, and that is SAD enough.

What is laughable is that you chose to do so by claiming the refs were biased in a game that was never even close, where one team had given up by 3/4 and the other team was coasting.

If you even partially believe the refs had an impact on the result of game 3, then please seek medical help because you are exhibiting symptoms of paranoid schizophrenia.

But you know what is freakin hilarious?
Even if all your crackpot, tinfoil hat conspiracies were true...
and HCA advantage is soley down to the refs, and has nothing to do with travelling 10,000kms, sleeping in your own bed, playing on your home court, in front of 13,000 parochial fans...
SO WHAT???

Whatever the reason, all you're really saying is that "HCA exists." Well Dohhh!!!
Perth have lost two GFs TO NZ because we didn't have HCA. This year, we earnt it by finishing equal 1st.

I don't understand how the refs could possibly NOT have had an impact on game 3, considering some of the decisions they made were conclusively incorrect.
Off to the shrink for me tomorrow I guess.

Get a life anonytroll
There is nothing vicious or nasty about pointing out the truth.
If you want to see "vicious & nasty" I suggest looking in the mirror and at your twisted mates who simple cannot stand to see Perth win, which is all this thread is about.

What's sad is that you choose to be such gutless losers simply because your team didn't win. FFS get a life and get some perspective.
Cats didn't even make the GF last year, went out is straight sets in the semis, and you didn't see me post 20 pages crying & wailing, and blaming the universe, the refs, the CIA, or anyone else.

Luuuc,
The Cats won by 23 points, with the DPs on, and after barely trying in the last quarter.
They did so because NZ were simply knackered.
Cedric shot none from 5, Mika shot none from 8, Webster 3 from 13, and even Crombie took 20 shots to make his score. That wasn't the refs.
Even if you took away half the fouls given to the Cats and gave them to NZ, it wouldn't have made the game even close.
Sure Cedric fouled out, but he wasn't exactly setting the court on fire anyway.
If you want to blame someone, blame the NBL for making them travel half-way around the world and play 3 games in under 5 days.

Now if you want to talk about Game 1 or game 2, different scenario. Both games close, could have come down to a bucket here or there, or a couple of foul calls/ no-calls. In a close game, you can always mount at least the appearance of an argument that reffing had an impact. But game 3 was a whitewash. Blind Freddy could have reffed the game, and it wouldn't have altered the outcome.

When Dazz starts getting personal then it's time to walk away.

I didn't complain that Perth won - I didn't really care WHO won. I complained that poor reffing turned what should have been an exciting game of skill into a bruising brawl. So, yes, the refs had an effect. WHY they did that is for the NBL head honchos to sort out, and I hope they make sure it gets fixed before next season.