I have been reading and watching a lot of people say how lucky UCLA has been lately and how maybe there is some grand conspiracy out there to push us further and further in the tournament.  

I understand that to the outsider, things have looked a little fishy lately but there is more to the situation than meets the eye.

Stanford:  DC draws a foul that allows him to make 2 free throws and push the game to overtime.  All the media pictures show the play from the head up, completely ignoring the fact that the ref called the foul for Body Contact.  Later, it comes out that there was a foul but the call was inappropriate, what?  Are referees only supposed to call fouls when the game is not in the balance and ignore everything during the final minute of the game?

Cal: A foul is not called in the corner giving UCLA the ball with time for Josh Shipp to make his circus shot over the corner of the backboard.  This one has been addressed by several people already and even Cal fans have noted that the play in the corner was clean.  As for the shot, it did violate the written rules but the referees allowing it is not unprecedented (thanks Oregon).  Here, I think we did get lucky.

Texas A&M: Josh Shipp blocks a shot that could have tied the game and pictures show that he got a good helping of arm along the way.  A&M fans are screaming all over that this should have been called a foul and that the tournament's worst free throw shooting team would have tied the game up and possibly won in overtime.  Watching this game live, I wasn't sure but I thought that this was a clean block, especially since the refs had been swallowing their whistles all game.  The refs let the players play and it got rough several times inside the paint and there were plenty of instances where I screamed at the television about fouls that were not being called.

So it was a loosely called game and the play was hard to see so quickly.  But more importantly, didn't we learn in the Stanford game that referees aren't supposed to make calls like that in the final seconds of a game?  Didn't ESPN go on a rampage about how, even if it was a foul, it was close enough and important enough that the referees should have not called anything.  Now all of a sudden, because following the rules they had been spewing all week would benefit UCLA, referees are supposed call close fouls late in the game.  There were 3 players in position to block that shot and Shipp made a great play to get it first.

People who scream loudly about bad refereeing need to remember that referees watch television and read about sports on the internet too.  Instead of complaining about them taking your advice when your team gets hurt, think of the irony and laugh.  You may have influenced the game and helped eliminate what you loudly called bad officiating, only to have your recommendations beat your team.  Everyone should be so lucky.  Here at BN we have been trying to get something done about the terrible referees that plague the PAC-10 for years.  

Now, if I am totally off base and this has been a giant conspiracy to get UCLA another championship, I will happily swear off complaining about referees for the next 5 years and only say positive things about the tireless, selfless, and all around wonderful human beings who work so tirelessly to make sure that athletic contests are played fairly (I'm not sure I could last any longer than that).

As to the question about whether we have been lucky, I think we have.  But I am not sure that we would not have won these games anyways.  This team is always prepared and Howland's teams have always shown their ability to win close games after it looks like all hope has been lost.