Basketball On The Internet.

BOTH our elite men's and women's national leagues like to erroneously claim the mantle as the world's #2 competitions. What world is that? Uranus? Because that's such a load of crap and the biggest single reason now is because our officiating has not kept pace with our playing standards. And there is zero public accountability.

That's if there's any privately. The regular appointment of the same people suggests otherwise.

This past round in the WNBL saw Melbourne Boomers suffer the same officiating fate against Bendigo that unfashionable smaller market teams such as New Zealand Breakers, Cairns Taipans, Illawarra Hawks and Adelaide 36ers routinely cop in the NBL.

The WNBL round's biggest clash - the type which can determine careers, futures and even a club's viability - was in jeopardy of becoming a farce when late in the first quarter the foul count was a glaring Boomers six, Spirit none.

Someone on the Melbourne bench dared inquire about the disparity and immediately was hit with a tech foul. Fabulous. That's the type of positive interaction the game needs, right?

Wrong. (Top ref Vaughan Mayberry telling South East guard Ben Ayre to talk to him without swearing is the type of interaction the sport needs more of.)

Fast forward to the third quarter and once again Melbourne has six fouls before Bendigo has one. Not to mention a flop warning issued and the ball then erroneously awarded to the Spirit, or out-of-bounds calls being over-ruled.

You start to scratch your head over what you are witnessing.

It's one thing for a ref or a crew to have a bad day, but the destruction that can wrought should not go unseen or blind-eyed by the WNBL's administration or the NBL's.

If Basketball Australia can issue fines and/or suspensions to players and coaches, how is it officials are so precious and protected from consequences when they fall short of what should be acceptable?

Not only that, why is it admin personnel go ducking for cover when an offficiating issue is raised, given it is the last genuine concern preventing the game from truly going forward?

When you have no dog in the fight but still become enraged by what is being perpetrated, you wonder why the most regular administrative edict is "zero tolerance" of referee criticism.

That works a treat, doesn't it? Does BA, the NBL and WNBL understand that doing the same thing while expecting a different outcome is the definition of insanity?

How about this? Why not try something new such as there also being zero tolerance of poor refereeing? You know, maybe a consequence for missing a blatant goal-tend that perhaps costs a team a game. And with it a playoff berth. And maybe its coach.

There are livelihoods at stake and frankly, both our elite women's and men's leagues cop a capital F for Fail when it comes to officiating. You cannot fix the problem until you at least acknowledge there is one.

Hate flopping?  You know EVERY coach claims to - it's a blight on the sport blah, blah - except, of course, when one of their own draw a foul through doing it. Then it's look-the-other-way time.

So for years the solution has been obvious. At even the first suggestions of a flop, be it a Tahjere McCall 30-foot slide or a Nathan Sobey throw-the-head-back-when you feel defensive contact exaggeration, give the offending player's coach a tech foul.

Bingo. Coaches immediately stop their players doing it and it is no longer an official's issue.

But administrations don't seek solutions. They'll rattle on instead about officiating development programs, perhaps about numbers being down, the need to look after our whistle-blowers.

Well by all means, we need to nurture and develop good referees. But shielding them from responsibility, accountability or consequence for their impact on games when they do perform below par - instead fining a coach for even cleverly venting his/her frustrations - is not the answer. 

The embarrassing performance in Bendigo sits comfortably alongside a recent one in Wollongong.

Will it cost a referee a game or two on the sidelines? We can only hope. But then, as already stated, doing the same thing and expecting a different outcome is the definition of insanity.