Caitlin Clark had always been known for her incredible talent and unrelenting drive on the basketball court. After an outstanding collegiate career, she entered the WNBA with all eyes on her. Her rookie season was filled with promise as she stepped into the professional league, bringing an influx of new fans and record viewership numbers. Fans, analysts, and players alike were eager to see how the young star would adjust to the physicality and speed of the WNBA. What no one could have predicted, however, was the unwarranted scrutiny and challenges she would face from the very officials entrusted with ensuring fair play.
In the world of sports, officiating is a crucial part of the game, and fairness is supposed to be the baseline for every call. But for Caitlin Clark, it soon became apparent that this baseline had been drastically skewed in her case. As the season went on, it became clear that Clark was being treated differently compared to other players, not just in terms of missed calls, but in the physicality and blatant fouls that were consistently ignored.
The first clue came early in the season. Fans and analysts alike began to notice that Clark was getting far fewer free-throw attempts than she should have, given the amount of contact she was enduring on the court. For a player with her offensive workload—driving to the basket, drawing defenders—one would expect her to be at the line multiple times each game. But instead, Clark averaged just 3.7 free throws per game, a shockingly low number for someone who had such a high usage rate. Comparatively, rookies with similar styles of play were regularly getting to the line nearly twice as often.
The discrepancy between how Clark was officiated versus other players was not just about missed calls; it was about a glaring double standard. During one game, Clark made a routine dribble move only to have the whistle blow for an offensive foul. The commentators were baffled, questioning how that could possibly be an offensive foul. As they reviewed the footage, they pointed out the minimal contact that took place. The call didn’t make sense, and it wasn’t an isolated incident.
The officiating against Clark was becoming a consistent issue. Opponents quickly realized that they could get away with more physicality when defending Clark, knowing that the referees wouldn’t penalize them for it. This allowed defenders to bump her on drives, invade her landing space on jumpers, and hand-check her without fear of consequence. And as the season wore on, it became more apparent that Clark’s game was being disrupted by the lack of protection from the referees.
One of the most glaring examples came during a game in which Clark drove to the basket and was completely flattened, yet there was no whistle. The commentators were in disbelief, calling out the clear foul that had just taken place. They were stunned when the referees continued to stand by without blowing the whistle, allowing the play to go uncalled. This wasn’t an isolated event either—Clark was knocked to the floor multiple times in one game without any fouls being called. It was like watching someone walk a tightrope with no safety net, every player knowing they could get away with hitting her.
As fans and commentators alike expressed their frustration, it became evident that this issue was bigger than just a few missed calls. It was part of a pattern—a pattern that seemed to target Clark specifically. And it wasn’t just the players on the other side; it was the officiating that allowed it all to happen.
The WNBA referees were under investigation, but the damage had already been done. The frustration that had built up among fans and players reached its peak with an incident involving DJ Carrington. During a play, Carrington hit Clark in the face while attempting to steal the ball. Clark went to the ground, but again, the officials did nothing. They swallowed their whistles and let the play go. When a second angle of the incident surfaced, fans were quick to point out that Carrington’s actions seemed intentional, but the referees still didn’t make the call.
What followed was another example of how Clark was treated differently than her peers. During another game, Clark was preparing to shoot a three-pointer when she was clearly pushed by a defender, making contact during her landing space—a violation that is explicitly against the rules. But once again, the whistle stayed silent. This was a call that would have been made for other players in the same situation, but not for Clark. The same pattern continued to unfold throughout the season, making it clear that Clark was receiving different treatment from the referees compared to other players.
And then there was the technical foul that pushed the issue into the spotlight. After missing a shot, Clark, frustrated with herself, lightly tapped the backboard in frustration. For many players, this would have been a normal reaction—a sign of competitiveness. But for Clark, it was deemed “disrespectful to the game,” and she was given a technical foul. Fans were outraged. They pointed out that other players could scream at referees, throw towels, and make dramatic gestures without penalty. Yet Clark, for the simple act of hitting the backboard in frustration, was penalized. The double standard was clear to anyone watching, and it became a symbol of how unfairly Clark was being treated.
The situation with Clark wasn’t just about missed calls or bad officiating—it was about the broader implications of how the WNBA was treating its most marketable and exciting star. Clark had brought in record viewership and excitement for the league, but the referees weren’t protecting her in the same way they would protect other superstars in the league. It wasn’t about special treatment for Clark—it was about basic fairness and safety. Players like Clark deserved the same protection every other superstar in the league received. Instead, the league’s officials seemed to turn a blind eye to the clear fouls committed against her.
The statistics painted a damning picture. Clark received 177% of the WNBA’s flagrant fouls during her rookie season, and 80% of those flagrant fouls came from the Chicago Sky. This wasn’t just a matter of Clark being a rookie or adjusting to the physicality of the game; this was about referees consistently failing to call fouls that were obvious to everyone else. It was putting Clark’s safety at risk, and it was allowing the physical play to escalate unnecessarily.
In the end, it wasn’t just about the missed calls or the frustration Clark felt on the court—it was about the larger issue of how the WNBA handled its officiating. If the league wanted to protect its superstars and continue growing the sport, they needed to address this problem head-on. The Indiana Fever had done their part in improving the team, but nothing would change if the referees didn’t start calling the game fairly.
The question now was whether the league would address this problem or let it persist. Would they finally hold the referees accountable for their bias against Caitlin Clark, or would the league continue to ignore the safety and fairness that every player deserved? The future of the WNBA, its players, and its growth depended on getting this right. Caitlin Clark had proven herself to be one of the most talented players in the game, but without fair treatment, even the brightest stars could be dimmed. It was time for the WNBA to do better—for Clark and for the future of the game.
Officiating Caitlin Clark? Outside refs weigh in on heated dynamic: ‘We’re pros. Not perfect’
INDIANAPOLIS — The bruises on Caitlin Clark’s forearms and knees have been on the knees and forearms of WNBA rookies for decades, long before Clark burst onto the professional basketball court making waves the women’s sport has never seen. Bo Boroski is sure of that.
The treatment the Indiana Fever rookie superstar — dubbed by some as the savior of women’s basketball — is getting on the court is par for the game. The rough shoves and swipes and sometimes scratches and smacks are nothing new, and nothing any rougher than other newcomer to professional sports has endured.
Even the flagrant foul to Clark’s head when Angel Reese was going for a block in last month against the Sky. Even the Chennedy Carter hip-check flagrant foul against Clark two weeks before that. People seem to forget those fouls have happened plenty of times in the WNBA — and on every other court across the world from youth to pro men’s.
“I think what’s changed is the amount of focus due to the explosion in popularity of the sport,” said Boroski, who spent more than 20 years as a basketball official, finishing his career refereeing three straight men’s NCAA Final Fours. “So, you’ll never convince me the level of physicality in any sport has changed as much as the public would like to believe.”
Where the calls and the plays against and for Clark gets compounded is when other variables are brought into the equation, such as social media and other players within the league, he said.
“And it compounds into a, ‘We’ve never seen this before’ moment,” said Boroski. “We have seen it. And by the way, she’s handling it with extreme grace.”
After the flagrant foul to Clark’s head by Reese in the Fever win against the Sky, Clark said it was “just a part of basketball. It is what it is. Trying to make a play on the ball, get the block. It happens.”
Reese said the foul was not intentional, calling it a “basketball play.”
The way Clark is being officiated, the calls and non-calls, the three technical fouls she’s accumulated, the flagrant hits, the grabs and the flopping from both sides has been scrutinized in a way no other player in the WNBA has been subject to before.
“I don’t think this is some new phenomenon. I think she’s being challenged because of who she is and the talent she is,” said Boroski. “And from an officiating focus, I think the WNBA has the appropriate mechanisms in place to make sure that it is taken care of.”
As Boroski sees it, there are three opportunities for Clark’s opponents to be held accountable.
“The most obvious mechanism is during real time when they witness acts against her, they have the opportunity. They also have the opportunity in-game at the replay monitor,” he said. “And then the league has a third mechanism to right any wrongs as it relates to flagrant acts.”
After that, all that’s left is the armchair referees in their living rooms making their own calls on whether Clark is being officiated fairly or not.
‘We hold our officials accountable’
The criticism of WNBA officials by fans — many now watching the league for the first time because of Clark — comes with plenty of misnomers about their training, pay and ability. In reality, the path to becoming a WNBA referee is just as stringent as landing in the NBA, said Monty McCutchen, the NBA’s senior vice president of referee development and training.
The league’s scouting department looks at more than 3,500 officials a year, then narrows the pool down to the top 100 candidates, which attend a grassroots camp. Out of that camp, the NBA takes the top 48 to 50 officials to a mid-level camp where 30 are chosen for an elite camp. At that camp, only a handful of finalists are chosen to officiate the NBA’s developmental G League.
Once in the G League, about one in five officials will make it to the NBA or the WNBA, said McCutchen.
“The norm is that you are in our pipeline for several years, two, three, four years, before you ever make the G League,” said McCutchen, a former NBA official. “Our referees have heard our messages of training for five, six, eight, nine years before they ever see a WNBA player. To suggest that they aren’t trained is not accurate.”
Once in the league, the average years of service for WNBA officials is eight, with more than a third having more than 10 years of experience, McCutchen said. Beginning salary is about $1,500 a game and, for more experienced officials, reaches more than $2,500.
“We’re pros,” said McCutchen. “But being a pro does not make you perfect. And most certainly, we at every level make mistakes. And when we do, we hold our officials accountable.”
One thing McCutchen wants to make very clear is that nothing has changed with WNBA officiating just because Clark has come into the league.
“We don’t referee any individual player any different than any other individual player,” he said. “The idea that we would ever separate a player out would go to the heart of what our integrity-based work is all about.”
‘A big part of refereeing is perception, unfortunately’
Take a peek at social media during a Fever game and one of the trending topics is inevitably the state of the officiating of the game. Some allege Clark continually gets hammered with no foul called. Others say she’s getting away with committing fouls. Still others say she is getting tick-tack fouls called against her, that she whines to the officials too much, that she flops.
“At any higher level of officiating, you have public perception and then you have the inner workings,” said Cory Furman, a men’s college basketball official at the Division II level. “And sometimes the perception is not always right. But a big part of refereeing is perception, unfortunately. And that’s just the world we live in.”
As of June 28, Clark had 54 total fouls, an average of 2.8 per game, three of those technical fouls, and she had made 88 of 77 free throws (88.3%). After the Carter flagrant foul, Clark spoke out about the physicality.
“I think everybody is physical with me, they get away with things that probably other people don’t get away with,” she said. “It’s tough, but that’s just the fact of the matter. This is a very physical game, and you’re going to get pressure. This is professional basketball.”
As a men’s college basketball official, Furman said he and his colleagues receive multiple memos from the powers that be outlining points of emphasis in officiating games.
“I can tell you that at that level, every play is critiqued, every game is analyzed regardless if you’re talking about Caitlin Clark or anybody else, each play is heavily scrutinized by leadership,” said Furman. “I guarantee you her name has come up in the memos sent out to the WNBA officials but, at the same time, they have to be careful because they don’t want to officiate her any differently than anybody else. There’s got to be some equity there. And obviously, public perception doesn’t feel that way.”
Furman said he can’t imagine the pressure the officials feel when Clark’s on the court.
“You’ve already got a difficult league to officiate (due to abilities among the players) and now you put all these eyeballs and the storylines around Caitlin Clark, and you can almost start playing mind games with yourself at times as a referee,” he said. “When you think about, ‘If this was player XYZ, I know I’ve got to make this call, but gosh, it’s Caitlin Clark …’
“And then you really can’t do that as a referee. You’ve got to officiate the game, no matter who’s on the floor, no matter what jersey’s out there.”
