I don't disagree that we've had some bloody awful referees, but...
1. Chicken and egg question: have they been terrible just because they're terrible and/or biased so Cook then losses his sh*t with them, or are they terrible and/or biased because Cook lost his sh*t with them?
I appreciate as professionals they shouldn't let their personal feelings affect their judgement, but in the real world, if you don't like someone, you don't do them any favours... Referees are human, and if you keep pissing them off, they're still going to develop a bias against you, even if not consciously so
2. In the last game, Cook got a yellow after 5 minutes, after nothing happened. There hasn't been an incident that warranted him protesting, so why the hell did he start running his gob? He must know that's not going to win any friends...
That suggests to me that he's just having a go constantly even when there's nothing of any significance to have a go about, which is only going to annoy officials. What does he think he'll gain for us by doing that? I can't think of any good thing that can come from pissing the officials off... Especially when there's no reason (yet?) to do so.
I think Cook being on the touchline is just doing even more harm to our cause. He tips scales of marginal decisions against us, and in such a competitive league with such close margins involved in winning and losing, surely even the slightest bias from officials, conscious or unconscious, is going to be damaging to us. Surely Cook can see that and should wins his neck in.