GDT: Bonaventure Round 2

[BilliesBy40]

51 minutes ago, AnkielBreakers said:

I am not going to lie, I will wait for someone else to post the stats on a yearly basis. You seem pretty committed to your argument.

Also, public screaming makes a difference. Otherwise, Majerus would not have done it. It probably has a bigger effect on the refs in a league than a coach yelling during the actual games. Which is probably why Majerus didn’t yell at the refs. The refs are paid by the league. If the league notes complaints and investigates them, then the refs will start acting with care in their job. It happens in all customer service professions. 

Majerus wanted to play in a different conference so traveling would be easier. He wasn’t trying to influence anyone associated with the A10.

[AnkielBreakers]

1 hour ago, slufan13 said:

Speaking up about potentially unfair officiating is fine. Blaming it on being the western most team in the conference is laughable and loses credibility. 

I really don’t think this is the reason why we are getting bad officiating this year. However, I am surprised that so many people think this concept is ridiculous. Here is the simple basis of the argument:

The A10 conference has employees, maybe 10-100, who knows. Those employees have an equal duty to those members. On paper, and in applying the black letter of the rules, that duty is applied equally. However, in every action or duty, there is wiggle room. Let’s call that wiggle room the gray area. Schools can obtain advantages in the gray area by: 1) having alumni or fans working at the A10 office, 2) by being the squeaky wheel and complaining a lot, 3) by being more valuable to the organization than other members, or 4) by establishing close ties with the organization. There are more, but these are the ones on the top of my head. It does not take much arguing to note that being an extra 400 miles from the home office would affect numbers 1 and 4. Also, 2 might be easier if we were closer. Number 3 is something that doesn’t depend on proximity and should benefit us, but we tend to overthink our importance to the league. In fact, it is not clear from my experience that the A10 sees us as an important member, I have always had the impression that we were middle of the pack in its view.

[Pistol]

Trying to put myself in the shoes of an outsider popping in here to see our conversation and it's an argument that refs are biased against us because of our geographic location relative to our conference. It's not a great look. What would you guys think if you saw that on Tigerboard? They can make the same case based on location.

Majerus didn't like the A10 because of the travel burden. I'm not sure we've ever had a coach who worked the refs less than he did, either. I don't agree with Rammer's connection there (just like I don't agree with SLU needing to be in a Midwestern bus league).

College refs are independent contractors. They aren't league employees. They set their own schedules and become favored by leagues over time as they gain experience with one another. Power conferences pay more and are generally getting better officiating for that reason. Once a ref starts working some of a given conference's games and doing a good job, he/she gets asked to do more games for them. There are almost 360 D-I teams so it's possible that there would be 150+ games on a single day, meaning there are at least 500 or so refs active at any given time and the number is probably closer to 1,000 because not all refs work as much as others, most have other jobs, families, etc.

Point being that it's pretty much a structural impossibility to organize a conspiracy against a given program in officiating.

The simpler, more boring, and real answer is that given how many refs there are, a lot of them just aren't very good. They're human beings who can be influenced by a multitude of external factors during a game. They arrive a little over an hour before a game and they're out as soon as humanly possible after a game, often coming from or heading straight to airports. They have their own locker room and talk at halftime, leading to overcorrections in the second half. It's a mercenary job without a lot of accountability because of the independent nature of their work. I think officiating can and should be better for a lot of reasons, some of which have to do with the NCAA's basketball rulebook.

Instead of tying red strings to pushpins on a corkboard wall, we should be looking at how SLU plays, given the reality of NCAA officiating. The FT rate change from non-con to conference play is interesting. Why do our guys get called for so many charges, knowing how these refs love to call charges? Why aren't they getting more calls in general? Watching Bona's players sell calls the past couple games, it seems like something our guys don't do.

tl;dr We sound crazy, there's no conspiracy, most refs aren't very good, and SLU needs to focus on the things that can be controlled - i.e. how we play within the game as it exists.

[Soderball]

1 hour ago, Pistol said:

Trying to put myself in the shoes of an outsider popping in here to see our conversation and it's an argument that refs are biased against us because of our geographic location relative to our conference. It's not a great look. What would you guys think if you saw that on Tigerboard? They can make the same case based on location.

Majerus didn't like the A10 because of the travel burden. I'm not sure we've ever had a coach who worked the refs less than he did, either. I don't agree with Rammer's connection there (just like I don't agree with SLU needing to be in a Midwestern bus league).

College refs are independent contractors. They aren't league employees. They set their own schedules and become favored by leagues over time as they gain experience with one another. Power conferences pay more and are generally getting better officiating for that reason. Once a ref starts working some of a given conference's games and doing a good job, he/she gets asked to do more games for them. There are almost 360 D-I teams so it's possible that there would be 150+ games on a single day, meaning there are at least 500 or so refs active at any given time and the number is probably closer to 1,000 because not all refs work as much as others, most have other jobs, families, etc.

Point being that it's pretty much a structural impossibility to organize a conspiracy against a given program in officiating.

The simpler, more boring, and real answer is that given how many refs there are, a lot of them just aren't very good. They're human beings who can be influenced by a multitude of external factors during a game. They arrive a little over an hour before a game and they're out as soon as humanly possible after a game, often coming from or heading straight to airports. They have their own locker room and talk at halftime, leading to overcorrections in the second half. It's a mercenary job without a lot of accountability because of the independent nature of their work. I think officiating can and should be better for a lot of reasons, some of which have to do with the NCAA's basketball rulebook.

Instead of tying red strings to pushpins on a corkboard wall, we should be looking at how SLU plays, given the reality of NCAA officiating. The FT rate change from non-con to conference play is interesting. Why do our guys get called for so many charges, knowing how these refs love to call charges? Why aren't they getting more calls in general? Watching Bona's players sell calls the past couple games, it seems like something our guys don't do.

tl;dr We sound crazy, there's no conspiracy, most refs aren't very good, and SLU needs to focus on the things that can be controlled - i.e. how we play within the game as it exists.

Great post.

[Major Majerus]

23 minutes ago, Soderball said:

Great post.

 

[Major Majerus]

It comes down to the ethics of the ref - can he make the call without any outside influences.

[majerus mojo]

Did the board just do a complete 180 on A-10 referee biases? I'm dead. I mean there's probably not some big conspiracy (bummer), but this has been a long-running complaint and we're just going to abandon it altogether (while mocking those posters!), due to some silly (not silly) percentages? Rough in these streets. 

For the record, Deandre Jones was in *perfect* position to take a charge with 38 seconds left around mid-court. Thanks for nothing, A-10

[thatskablamo]

23 minutes ago, Major Majerus said:

It comes down to the ethics of the ref - can he make the call without any outside influences.

Exactly; look at the refs who called the Malice at the Palace game. One of them may absolutely shock (or not shock) you. 

[Cowboy II]

1 hour ago, Pistol said:

Trying to put myself in the shoes of an outsider popping in here to see our conversation and it's an argument that refs are biased against us because of our geographic location relative to our conference. It's not a great look. What would you guys think if you saw that on Tigerboard? They can make the same case based on location.

Majerus didn't like the A10 because of the travel burden. I'm not sure we've ever had a coach who worked the refs less than he did, either. I don't agree with Rammer's connection there (just like I don't agree with SLU needing to be in a Midwestern bus league).

College refs are independent contractors. They aren't league employees. They set their own schedules and become favored by leagues over time as they gain experience with one another. Power conferences pay more and are generally getting better officiating for that reason. Once a ref starts working some of a given conference's games and doing a good job, he/she gets asked to do more games for them. There are almost 360 D-I teams so it's possible that there would be 150+ games on a single day, meaning there are at least 500 or so refs active at any given time and the number is probably closer to 1,000 because not all refs work as much as others, most have other jobs, families, etc.

Point being that it's pretty much a structural impossibility to organize a conspiracy against a given program in officiating.

The simpler, more boring, and real answer is that given how many refs there are, a lot of them just aren't very good. They're human beings who can be influenced by a multitude of external factors during a game. They arrive a little over an hour before a game and they're out as soon as humanly possible after a game, often coming from or heading straight to airports. They have their own locker room and talk at halftime, leading to overcorrections in the second half. It's a mercenary job without a lot of accountability because of the independent nature of their work. I think officiating can and should be better for a lot of reasons, some of which have to do with the NCAA's basketball rulebook.

Instead of tying red strings to pushpins on a corkboard wall, we should be looking at how SLU plays, given the reality of NCAA officiating. The FT rate change from non-con to conference play is interesting. Why do our guys get called for so many charges, knowing how these refs love to call charges? Why aren't they getting more calls in general? Watching Bona's players sell calls the past couple games, it seems like something our guys don't do.

tl;dr We sound crazy, there's no conspiracy, most refs aren't very good, and SLU needs to focus on the things that can be controlled - i.e. how we play within the game as it exists.

-good points, hoping this isn't picking nits (and nothing intended with nit as in where we might end our season)

-using our games as my basis I'm not sure that I agree with the general point that a lot of the refs just aren't very good, it is a very fast game and mistakes will be made, I do wonder about their evaluations but this is a guess that they are reviewed -- does a specific ref or two or three always or is more than likley to give the questionable call to a certain team's benefit? I don't know but would be a very interesting, and time consuming, project to determine--there is some method the NCAA uses to select the refs for the Tourney and how refs advance in the Tourney so somewhere there is some evaluation of referee talent

-correct that refs are contractors and not employees of the leagues, but they get paid by the league, follow the money, could they be swayed? I think possible but I am not saying it is happening against us, but to rule it out for the close to 1,000 refs is a bridge too far for me

-one thing about officiating that makes me wonder are the games where in one half there are 8 total fouls called and then in the first 4minutes of the second half there are 8 fouls called, we had at least one of these this season, if an action is a foul 5 seconds into a game it is a foul with 5 seconds left in the game and at every point in between

-all I want from a ref is consistency, game to game, half to half, play to play and I think too many vary from that, are they crooked or just bad? I hope just bad

-I remember Spoon talking about Cinn back in the day, where refs would get tired of calling fouls because there could be a foul on literally every play, see consistency and latter day Havoc

-on Friday Travis got upset when during a timeout two refs had a lengthy (I saw at least 10 seconds, not the beginning, which in the context of a timeout in a basketball game to me is lengthy) exchange with Osuni, I did not witness any such exchange with a Billiken and two officials

-your comment about selling calls takes me back to Blake Ahearn's days at DeSmet with his almost constant head bob trying to sell calls, he got a bunch of calls doing that, I wasn't a fan of that part of his game but it was effective a lot of the time

-if your words of 'how we play within the game as it exists' means we need to not foul 3pt shooters or commit other what I will call stupid fouls, all in on this, but tough for the players to adapt game to game on what is a foul and what isn't

-this got more wordy than I intended

[jonny karate]

All I know I have been having a great time this year going to games and watching this team. It's a fun team to watch

[RiseOfTheBillikens]

22 minutes ago, jonny karate said:

All I know I have been having a great time this year going to games and watching this team. It's a fun team to watch

This. Win, lose, or draw I enjoy watching this squad. They play with heart and make some crazy exciting plays. Just need to grow together.

[HoosierPal]

1 hour ago, Cowboy II said:

-good points, hoping this isn't picking nits (and nothing intended with nit as in where we might end our season)

-using our games as my basis I'm not sure that I agree with the general point that a lot of the refs just aren't very good, it is a very fast game and mistakes will be made, I do wonder about their evaluations but this is a guess that they are reviewed -- does a specific ref or two or three always or is more than likley to give the questionable call to a certain team's benefit? I don't know but would be a very interesting, and time consuming, project to determine--there is some method the NCAA uses to select the refs for the Tourney and how refs advance in the Tourney so somewhere there is some evaluation of referee talent

-correct that refs are contractors and not employees of the leagues, but they get paid by the league, follow the money, could they be swayed? I think possible but I am not saying it is happening against us, but to rule it out for the close to 1,000 refs is a bridge too far for me

-one thing about officiating that makes me wonder are the games where in one half there are 8 total fouls called and then in the first 4minutes of the second half there are 8 fouls called, we had at least one of these this season, if an action is a foul 5 seconds into a game it is a foul with 5 seconds left in the game and at every point in between

-all I want from a ref is consistency, game to game, half to half, play to play and I think too many vary from that, are they crooked or just bad? I hope just bad

-I remember Spoon talking about Cinn back in the day, where refs would get tired of calling fouls because there could be a foul on literally every play, see consistency and latter day Havoc

-on Friday Travis got upset when during a timeout two refs had a lengthy (I saw at least 10 seconds, not the beginning, which in the context of a timeout in a basketball game to me is lengthy) exchange with Osuni, I did not witness any such exchange with a Billiken and two officials

-your comment about selling calls takes me back to Blake Ahearn's days at DeSmet with his almost constant head bob trying to sell calls, he got a bunch of calls doing that, I wasn't a fan of that part of his game but it was effective a lot of the time

-if your words of 'how we play within the game as it exists' means we need to not foul 3pt shooters or commit other what I will call stupid fouls, all in on this, but tough for the players to adapt game to game on what is a foul and what isn't

-this got more wordy than I intended

One piece missing in your post is that there are three refs to each squad.  Those squads change daily.  Yes, the A10, ACC, Big East and CAA are in a consortium, so you would think that eventually refs would get to know each other and how each sees the game.

I re-watched the St. Bonnie game particularly the second. I will call our three refs, the white ref, the black ref and the masked ref.  The white ref had the St. Bonnie baseline in the second half.  When the Bonnies had the ball, he was on the baseline.  When the ball came down to the Bills end, he was more or less at the top of the arc on the side closest to the TV view.  The masked ref did the opposite.  The black ref ran the score table side of the floor, stopping more or less at the foul line.

So you have the white ref calling fouls under the basket for the Bonnies and the masked ref calling them for the Bills. Does each see the game the same? Likely not.  Will each make the same call, highly unlikely.  The ref team should communicate (particularly at half) discussing calls that may have been questionable to them.  Do they do this?  I have no idea.  Hopefully the black ref was making consistent calls, but I didn't study his whistle that much.

The point is a referring squad is a team.  You can have two great teammates, but the third might pull the team down.  If they don't communicate, sure the game may be called inconsistently.  All refs are evaluated routinely.  They get feedback.  If they are, as you posted, crooked as in taking money, they will be quickly dismissed.

[almaman]

1 hour ago, jonny karate said:

All I know I have been having a great time this year going to games and watching this team. It's a fun team to watch

agree

[TheChosenOne]

3 hours ago, majerus mojo said:

For the record, Deandre Jones was in *perfect* position to take a charge with 38 seconds left around mid-court. Thanks for nothing, A-10

Definitely more of a 50/50 type call (the question being whether he let the guy land, right?), but that was not with 38 seconds left. I think you have the wrong Jones foul. The block in the middle of the court was around the 3+ minute mark. The foul call I had more of an issue with was the foul called on Okoro on our last offensive possession.

[Old guy]

5 hours ago, Pistol said:

Trying to put myself in the shoes of an outsider popping in here to see our conversation and it's an argument that refs are biased against us because of our geographic location relative to our conference. It's not a great look. What would you guys think if you saw that on Tigerboard? They can make the same case based on location.

Majerus didn't like the A10 because of the travel burden. I'm not sure we've ever had a coach who worked the refs less than he did, either. I don't agree with Rammer's connection there (just like I don't agree with SLU needing to be in a Midwestern bus league).

College refs are independent contractors. They aren't league employees. They set their own schedules and become favored by leagues over time as they gain experience with one another. Power conferences pay more and are generally getting better officiating for that reason. Once a ref starts working some of a given conference's games and doing a good job, he/she gets asked to do more games for them. There are almost 360 D-I teams so it's possible that there would be 150+ games on a single day, meaning there are at least 500 or so refs active at any given time and the number is probably closer to 1,000 because not all refs work as much as others, most have other jobs, families, etc.

Point being that it's pretty much a structural impossibility to organize a conspiracy against a given program in officiating.

The simpler, more boring, and real answer is that given how many refs there are, a lot of them just aren't very good. They're human beings who can be influenced by a multitude of external factors during a game. They arrive a little over an hour before a game and they're out as soon as humanly possible after a game, often coming from or heading straight to airports. They have their own locker room and talk at halftime, leading to overcorrections in the second half. It's a mercenary job without a lot of accountability because of the independent nature of their work. I think officiating can and should be better for a lot of reasons, some of which have to do with the NCAA's basketball rulebook.

Instead of tying red strings to pushpins on a corkboard wall, we should be looking at how SLU plays, given the reality of NCAA officiating. The FT rate change from non-con to conference play is interesting. Why do our guys get called for so many charges, knowing how these refs love to call charges? Why aren't they getting more calls in general? Watching Bona's players sell calls the past couple games, it seems like something our guys don't do.

tl;dr We sound crazy, there's no conspiracy, most refs aren't very good, and SLU needs to focus on the things that can be controlled - i.e. how we play within the game as it exists.

There may be 500 refs active at this level of basketball competition, but there are thousands of them trying to get into thie D1 level of college competition, upgrading from high school level. This is a tough business to get into and it gives those that are in lots of opportunities to do "favors." The coach community is a tight and pretty well closed community which can live by its own rules. I am not interested in advancing conspiracy theories, but these people hold other jobs and may not be particularly well paid which makes them open to outside influence.

However, and I think this is a valid question, if the A10 was trying to get rid of SLU because of its Western location, why in heavens would they  have accepted Loyola Chicago as a new member? This makes no sense in terms of wanting to get rid of LU because of its Western Location.

[Taj79]

Refereeing is all about positioning and sight lines.  What they see.  What they think they see.  And what the secondary emotions (head jerks, slapping sounds, etc.) tell them.  It's a tough job I wouldn't want.  Having said that, my biggest complaint is when a ref makes a call he assumes to be correct because there was no way he saw it. Two cases in point:

#1) at Duquesne, Spears was headed to the basket and Yrui undercut him cleanly.  He ran by Spears hoping to distract him.  It did not work and Spear made the basket.  The ref, comign down the court on the far side, blew a whistle for an And-1 with a foul on Yuri.  My contention is that from his position, he saw NOTHING.  So do nothing; let th ebasket stand and move on.

#2) Last night, the black ref under the basket had Thatch's back to him as he covered Adaway.  Behind Adaway was Collins.  So the ref has not one, not two but three bodies to see through and he calls a foul.  On Collins.  Okay, maybe Thatch but he passed Thatch and decided, with a completely obstructed view, that it was Collins.  These are the issues I have with the refs.

There were also two calls where Osunniyi mugged Okoro, and there is no way a 6'0" pg pushed a 6'10" center to the floor with such ease.  TWICE.  That is a flop.  TWICE.

I don't believe it is bias at all but it sure is amazing to me how it SEEMS to go the other way.  We will just have to eliminate it on our end.

 

[Cowboy II]

3 hours ago, HoosierPal said:

One piece missing in your post is that there are three refs to each squad.  Those squads change daily.  Yes, the A10, ACC, Big East and CAA are in a consortium, so you would think that eventually refs would get to know each other and how each sees the game.

I re-watched the St. Bonnie game particularly the second. I will call our three refs, the white ref, the black ref and the masked ref.  The white ref had the St. Bonnie baseline in the second half.  When the Bonnies had the ball, he was on the baseline.  When the ball came down to the Bills end, he was more or less at the top of the arc on the side closest to the TV view.  The masked ref did the opposite.  The black ref ran the score table side of the floor, stopping more or less at the foul line.

So you have the white ref calling fouls under the basket for the Bonnies and the masked ref calling them for the Bills. Does each see the game the same? Likely not.  Will each make the same call, highly unlikely.  The ref team should communicate (particularly at half) discussing calls that may have been questionable to them.  Do they do this?  I have no idea.  Hopefully the black ref was making consistent calls, but I didn't study his whistle that much.

The point is a referring squad is a team.  You can have two great teammates, but the third might pull the team down.  If they don't communicate, sure the game may be called inconsistently.  All refs are evaluated routinely.  They get feedback.  If they are, as you posted, crooked as in taking money, they will be quickly dismissed.

-typically there is a rotation throughout the game of the refs to the different spots on the floor

[Pistol]

19 hours ago, Cowboy II said:

-good points, hoping this isn't picking nits (and nothing intended with nit as in where we might end our season)

-using our games as my basis I'm not sure that I agree with the general point that a lot of the refs just aren't very good, it is a very fast game and mistakes will be made, I do wonder about their evaluations but this is a guess that they are reviewed -- does a specific ref or two or three always or is more than likley to give the questionable call to a certain team's benefit? I don't know but would be a very interesting, and time consuming, project to determine--there is some method the NCAA uses to select the refs for the Tourney and how refs advance in the Tourney so somewhere there is some evaluation of referee talent

-correct that refs are contractors and not employees of the leagues, but they get paid by the league, follow the money, could they be swayed? I think possible but I am not saying it is happening against us, but to rule it out for the close to 1,000 refs is a bridge too far for me

-one thing about officiating that makes me wonder are the games where in one half there are 8 total fouls called and then in the first 4minutes of the second half there are 8 fouls called, we had at least one of these this season, if an action is a foul 5 seconds into a game it is a foul with 5 seconds left in the game and at every point in between

-all I want from a ref is consistency, game to game, half to half, play to play and I think too many vary from that, are they crooked or just bad? I hope just bad

-I remember Spoon talking about Cinn back in the day, where refs would get tired of calling fouls because there could be a foul on literally every play, see consistency and latter day Havoc

-on Friday Travis got upset when during a timeout two refs had a lengthy (I saw at least 10 seconds, not the beginning, which in the context of a timeout in a basketball game to me is lengthy) exchange with Osuni, I did not witness any such exchange with a Billiken and two officials

-your comment about selling calls takes me back to Blake Ahearn's days at DeSmet with his almost constant head bob trying to sell calls, he got a bunch of calls doing that, I wasn't a fan of that part of his game but it was effective a lot of the time

-if your words of 'how we play within the game as it exists' means we need to not foul 3pt shooters or commit other what I will call stupid fouls, all in on this, but tough for the players to adapt game to game on what is a foul and what isn't

-this got more wordy than I intended

I think in terms of refs being "swayed" by leagues it's a matter of staying in a league's good graces to keep getting booked for that league's games. No one from A10 HQ is calling a crew up to say "Bonaventure needs to win this game" or whatever. If that were true, the outcomes of this year's games would be way different, as not much that has occurred this conference season has been beneficial to this league putting teams in the NCAA Tournament.

Sure, individual refs or crews could be "gotten to" - it's happened before. It's virtually impossible for large groups of them to be carrying out the will of a league or leagues in some kind of coordinated effort, though.

Hoping for consistency from game to game is wishful thinking, given how many different refs we'll see over the course of a season. Hoping for consistency within a game is perfectly reasonable and refs should be better at this. The truth is the answer to your fifth bullet is just bad, not crooked (with a small chance there's a tiny percentage of the latter).

Having been around refs up close for years, I can't stress enough how uninterested they are in communicating with anyone. It's all about making travel schedules on time and getting as many games a season as possible. They get in, they do the job, they get out. They're a species unto themselves.

[HoosierPal]

41 minutes ago, Pistol said:

I think in terms of refs being "swayed" by leagues it's a matter of staying in a league's good graces to keep getting booked for that league's games. No one from A10 HQ is calling a crew up to say "Bonaventure needs to win this game" or whatever. If that were true, the outcomes of this year's games would be way different, as not much that has occurred this conference season has been beneficial to this league putting teams in the NCAA Tournament.

Sure, individual refs or crews could be "gotten to" - it's happened before. It's virtually impossible for large groups of them to be carrying out the will of a league or leagues in some kind of coordinated effort, though.

Hoping for consistency from game to game is wishful thinking, given how many different refs we'll see over the course of a season. Hoping for consistency within a game is perfectly reasonable and refs should be better at this. The truth is the answer to your fifth bullet is just bad, not crooked (with a small chance there's a tiny percentage of the latter).

Having been around refs up close for years, I can't stress enough how uninterested they are in communicating with anyone. It's all about making travel schedules on time and getting as many games a season as possible. They get in, they do the job, they get out. They're a species unto themselves.

Wow, you mean there is not a league memo saying call against the Bills?  Hmmm.  Some on this board and our radio team might disagree.

If you ever get the chance to sit in courtside seats, you will see how difficult it is to ref a game.  The players are all physical specimens, are fast, and there is constant contact.  I'd either whistle every single contact, or let everything go.  It is almost an impossible job.

[willie]

20 minutes ago, HoosierPal said:

Wow, you mean there is not a league memo saying call against the Bills?  Hmmm.  Some on this board and our radio team might disagree.

If you ever get the chance to sit in courtside seats, you will see how difficult it is to ref a game.  The players are all physical specimens, are fast, and there is constant contact.  I'd either whistle every single contact, or let everything go.  It is almost an impossible job.

Come on. I have never missed a call from my seat. 

[thetorch]

On 2/15/2022 at 7:58 PM, HoosierPal said:

One piece missing in your post is that there are three refs to each squad.  Those squads change daily.  Yes, the A10, ACC, Big East and CAA are in a consortium, so you would think that eventually refs would get to know each other and how each sees the game.

I re-watched the St. Bonnie game particularly the second. I will call our three refs, the white ref, the black ref and the masked ref.  The white ref had the St. Bonnie baseline in the second half.  When the Bonnies had the ball, he was on the baseline.  When the ball came down to the Bills end, he was more or less at the top of the arc on the side closest to the TV view.  The masked ref did the opposite.  The black ref ran the score table side of the floor, stopping more or less at the foul line.

So you have the white ref calling fouls under the basket for the Bonnies and the masked ref calling them for the Bills. Does each see the game the same? Likely not.  Will each make the same call, highly unlikely.  The ref team should communicate (particularly at half) discussing calls that may have been questionable to them.  Do they do this?  I have no idea.  Hopefully the black ref was making consistent calls, but I didn't study his whistle that much.

The point is a referring squad is a team.  You can have two great teammates, but the third might pull the team down.  If they don't communicate, sure the game may be called inconsistently.  All refs are evaluated routinely.  They get feedback.  If they are, as you posted, crooked as in taking money, they will be quickly dismissed.

Referees don't have territories where they make calls.  For instance a referee at the top of the key can make a call on a post play even though there is a ref along the baseline who is closer.  They don't split up areas.  If they are decent refs they also don't care if another ref calls something which was right in front of another ref.