What takes this sequence of officiating from being bad to downright absurd, is that the ref is directly responsible for letting play continue while Hunter is on the ground, because he doesn't make a call either way. Thus meaning he has to take that into account if there's any contact involving the player on the floor, which naturally will happen with that many bodies around Hunter, and officiate what happens with an appropriate amount of reason. And yet he completely ignores his responsibility in that and calls Hunter for a foul for incidental contact. It truly is unfathomable how he believed the first contact between them didn't warrant a whistle, but the contact on the second action, which is miniscule in comparison, did.
To show a complete lack of basketball sense like this is inexcusable. Referees at this level should not be getting it wrong like this.
What takes this sequence of officiating from being bad to downright absurd, is that the ref is directly responsible for letting play continue while Hunter is on the ground, because he doesn't make a call either way. Thus meaning he has to take that into account if there's any contact involving the player on the floor, which naturally will happen with that many bodies around Hunter, and officiate what happens with an appropriate amount of reason. And yet he completely ignores his responsibility in that and calls Hunter for a foul for incidental contact. It truly is unfathomable how he believed the first contact between them didn't warrant a whistle, but the contact on the second action, which is miniscule in comparison, did.
To show a complete lack of basketball sense like this is inexcusable. Referees at this level should not be getting it wrong like this.