"This game was a very physical game by both teams. One team was not dirtier or more physical than the other. The thing I did notice was Clover seemed to be the team questioning every call and non call especially in the 2nd half, and that was something their coach should have handled. Lancaster, on the other hand, seemed to be playing hard and keeping their mouths shut. Perhaps in the end that was the biggest difference in this game"
"Realist did not say anyone was "whining". He said they were the team questioning calls or no-calls"
Agreed....he did NOT say they were whining. That was my choice of language, but I think it pretty accurately reflects his thoughts, given his choice of words and "compare and contrast" logic.
What is a "neutral party" anyway? Hunter S Thompson once wrote that the only type of objective journalism he knew of was a box score or an obituary.
I don't mean any disrespect to you or Realist or Hurst or my own son or anyone else who is a referee......but IMO, to assume someone is neutral party is lunacy. Everyone has preferences and opinions that color their judgement.
Obviously this was no garden variety dispute of an officials call. For a series of people who were there to get on a public forum and talk about what happened with such disbelief....well, I can't chaulk that up to normal complaining about a call or a non-call.
The integrity of the game is being called into question and I would think that would have folks concerned.
