The refs just gave it to Duke. Yeah, suuuure...

In My Humble Opinion
1

Okay, it’s been barely a day and the grips are flying in from all over. Duke got penalized way less than their opponents. Favoritism. Robbery. Horrible injustice. Corrupt refereeing. Etc.

Now, let me make it clear that I despise officials stealing victories and allowing horribly unjust outcomes to stand (which has become a freaking pandemic in the Olympics). That said, I have a hard time believing that Duke’s been getting special treatment. This is a powerful ballclub, like Kentucky, Gonzaga (let’s not kid ourselves anymore, okay?), or, yes, Arizona. Note that while this is their third championship, they’ve gone far into the playoffs on many other occasions without winning. If there really is “favoritism”, why was it only for this year? Same tradition, same coaching staff…nothing’s changed much in such a short time span.

Furthermore, I’m always extremely skeptical when anyone claims that the refs stole a game. Officials make bad calls, yes, but an occasional bonehead blunder is not the same as deliberately making bad calls for an entire game.

And if Duke got a free pass, why not North Carolina? To me that’s like favoring the Cowboys but not the 49ers. Well, in the early 90’s.

So, anything to these rumors? I don’t want to dismiss it as sore loser whining out of hand, but it sounds mighty suspicious.

2

I wouldn’t be surprised if Duke got the benefit of the doubt here or there. I mean, when Michael Jordan was playing, he could take 10 steps without getting nailed for traveling. But Duke’s Mike Dunleavy Jr. didn’t nail all of those three-pointers because the refs helped him do so.

The story about allegedly biased refs is, honestly, a story that a competent journalist could write about almost every basketball game that has ever been played. No game goes by without a call that could be questioned, and if that questionable call goes the other way, the game’s complexion will probably change. This story just got a little more play because it was the NCAA title game.

3

For what it’s worth, under Coach K, Duke has made it to the NCAA finals seven times, and they’ve lost the championship game four of those times. One thing’s for sure- if the refs HAVE been trying to hand the championship to Duke, they’ve been doing a lousy job of it!

Let’s face it: in every sport, there’s always one elite team, a team that seems to stand for excellence and class. In baseball, it’s the Yankees. In the NFL, it’s the Dallas Cowboys. In college football, it’s Notre Dame. In the NHL, it’s the Montreal Canadiens. In the NBA, it’s the Celtics. And in college basketball, it’s Duke.

The teams in that position are admired, sure, but they’re also the object of irrational hatred. Even when those teams are terrible, even when they’re in the cellar, their opponents psych themselves up to play them, as if it were for the Super Bowl! I mean, you’d THINK it would be no big deal to beat a team as weak as the Celtics are now… but everyone is sky-high for a game against the Celtics (even if you’re beating a bad team, it FEELS as if you’re beating Havlicek and Cousy and Larry Bird).

Well, Duke is just another of those teams that rubs people the wrong way. In SOME cases, I suppose it’s understandable (Christian Laettner WAS pretty obnoxious at times). But msot of their top players over the years have been intelligent men, solid citizens, and class acts- that’s exactly what people SAY they want in a college athletic program, but then people have been known to lie!

What provokes HATRED of a team, as opposed to mere dislike? I suspect that, once again, it’s based on an irrational suspicion, a FEELING, rather than on anything a team has done. People never resented the Steelers of the 1970s for winning 4 Super Bowls, but many resented the Cowboys of the 1970s (“Look at them, they think they’re so great. America’s Team? What arrogance! And that Staubach, eh acts like such a goody-goody…”). Nobody resented the dominant Philadelphia Athletics of the early 1930s, but they loathed the Yankees of the 1950s.

It all comes down to an unsubstantiated, unproven, FEELING… a feeling that says, “Those guys think they’re better than me.”

4

Hold up. The COWBOYS promote CLASS??? Not anymore they don’t.

As for why I hate them…one, I’m a Redskins fan. I’m required to. Two, I was never a fan of their flashy “we’re so much better than you, so let’s shove that in your face” style that started when I started watching football. Bleh.

5

Cowboys? Class? Uh… Sure. Right. Whatever.

That’s like saying the Raiders behave themselves on the football field. Like saying Strawberry is an excellent example of living the drug free lifestyle. Like saying the Cubs have been the dominant force in Baseball in the last decade. Like…
Well, you know what I mean.

6

Did any of you actually watch the game? Jason Williams should have fouled out on two occasions and Duke overall drew many ticky-tack fouls that should’ve been no-calls from the way they called it at the other end. That’s not to say they didn’t make some bad calls in Arizona’s favor but overall I would say that the refs were pro-Duke. Heck, the phantom 5th foul on Lonny Baxter in the Maryland game should be evidence enough. I think the Jordan anology is best. Fouls called against players guarding him were not consistent with what he himself would be called for.

This should not take anyting away from Duke- they outplayed Arizona, who should not have had Josh Wessel in the game at all and Walton very sparingly. However, I hate it when the refs affect the outcome by making inconsistent calls.

7

Williams got away with one foul that should have been called, but a few of the fouls called on him were questionable. I hate to see make up calls, even in favor of my team, but that might have been what happened.

Disclaimer: I am far from unbiased in any matters involving Duke