Another possible explanation for differences is overtime games. These stats are not adjusted to fouls per minute played.

So Perth has the biggest home court advantage when it comes to foul calls.

This lines up with the stats I remember reading earlier in the season.

No surprises there.

Clearly this shows that whenever the Wildcats travel refs favor the home team ;)

Notable Wildcats aren't at either extreme for fouls called on either home or away teams.

The whole concept makes no sense. If you're alleging bias on the part of the NBL and its refs, that would apply wherever they played.
So, interesting that one team, not only has by far the lowest fouls at home, but even on the road gets less fouls called than all the other teams at HOME.
And that team just happens to be owned by associates of the guy who runs the league.

As for teams committing more fouls on the road, that's just one aspect of saying that teams play better at home.

FWIW, I tend to agree with Dazz. There's a home court advantage that probably plays out as an extra foul called on the away team and one less foul called on the home team. That seems to be consistent for most teams. In any set of numbers like this, there are always outliers. As my original post suggested, I do wonder if the outlying teams (at each extreme) may be related to presence or absence of crowd pressure.

Yeah, my first instinct upon seeing those numbers was to urge Hawks fans to be louder, and Crocs fans to actually attend home games.

United were the flashiest / most talented / softest team so I'd expect them to have the least fouls called on them. No surprises there.

NBL refs are shit. No doubt about that. Zero consistency over a qtr, games, series and makes it infuriating to watch.

So let me get this right, teams get called for more fouls away than home.

Gee what a surprise, at a guess i'd say if you studied the stats from previous NBL seasons same result would apply. Home cooking from refs umpires happens regularly in all sports, why would NBL be any different.

Really only partial data and not valid for a creditable conclusion.
There are so many factors that come into this argument that need to be allowed for.

1) All teams but Sydney were fairly dominant at home in regards to the win/loss ratio. So there could be a substantial number of fouls attributed to the away teams needing to foul in order to try and catch up late in the game. Also, with the home teams dominant at home it may be a fair argument to make that they are executing and shooting better therefore fouling less?

2) Style of play. Hawks and Crocs play a very aggressive full court style of D. Wildcats and NZ typically play more physical. Therefore having higher foul counts.
MU not known for their D so lower foul count.

3) Matchups. Some teams have better matchups against other teams and this dictates what style they may play. Your not going to sit in a zone against Hawks and you have to aggressively defend the 3pt line. This might lead to more fouls against them?

So long story short, I can see the relationship between fouls called and the home/away venue. But I don't see that a bias to the home team is the reason for this...