A lot to unpack in this thread, but a few thoughts from a long-time coach here (20 years at HS level, Eastern Iowa):
1. Most officials are fine. Not great, not terrible, but do a satisfactory job as well as they can. Much like most coaches and players.
2. Fans are getting terrible and aren't helping players, teams, or officials.
3. As far as "what can a coach say?" I think a coach is entitled to an answer if he asks a legit question. I also think good, quality officials rarely, if ever, have to give a technical foul. They absolutely don't give T's for what's said unless it's a cussing situation, which is an automatic No-no. I've gotten 5 T's in 20 years, and deserved 3. They were all called by incompetent guys who were in over their head. I've probably only seen high-quality guys give a T 2 or 3 times.
4. CIML makes some good points to be sure. My biggest quibble is his use of the word "judge" and "judgement." Officials assume entirely too much power of judgment. An official should never have to "judge" an advantage, or "judge" players' relative strength (which what they are saying when they talk about contact creating advantage). If we have a good big, and the defender keeps drilling him and he doesn't move (i.e., not "displaced"), it's still a foul. The handcheck rule, for example, explicitly states that placing an arm bar on a player is a foul (10-6-12 for those wondering; I used to keep a copy of it and remind officials of its language should they forget
or keeping a hand on him is a foul. Nowhere does it state that a foul is contingent on a perceived advantage. If a guy drives on a guy, and the forearm hits him (or his hips and gut hit him), that's objectively a foul. No interpretation is necessary.
Likewise, if a shooter gets hit, it's a foul. Had a kid's arm he drilled at rim this year; official said, "I didn't think contact made him miss." I about lost it. That's not an official's job to judge that. if a shooter gets hit, it should be a foul.
Honestly, all an official needs to do to be good at his/her job is to call basic fouls as fouls, and call travels, travels. Traveling is woefully mis-called in HS basketball. Kids travel on the catch all the time, and it's rarely called, but any quick shot-fake move is basically an automatic steps.
5. As far as tournament officiating and assignments, I have to disagree with CIML: there is no objective or standardized process by which tourney officials are assigned. This si coming straight from the Boys and Girls Associations to our IBCA board. The biggest requirement is that officials ask to be considered. There's no evidence to suggest that officials selected for tourney games and state play are considered high-quality. I'm not saying they aren't good, but there's no evidence that a standard of excellence criteria is used. We had a guy in our district championship game who has effectively been ousted from our conference for example. He gets perpetual 4's from our coaches, but he has an "in" and winds up doing tourney games. My father-in-law is a long-time official, and he and his crew normally get a tourney game or two. His partner got asked to sub in a district game because a guy got sick several years ago, and now he gets assigned to big games every year. He laughs and admits the only reason he gets an extra game is because he subbed in once. They honestly have no clue what the criteria is to be selected.
6. On the whole, though, the state of HS officiating is not great in Iowa. I would say it's deteriorated significantly in past 10 years. As someone mentioned, every game is so different as to what's a foul or not. It shouldn't be that way. Watch four straight state tourney games, and you'll see four wildly different games being called. We likewise have too many "physically unfit" officials for the job. The issue is there's no consistent or standardized training. I've advocated for film based rules meetings and trainings, for officials AND coaches, to clearly define what a foul or travel is, and then everyone has that reference and expectation. We have a couple phenomenal guys in our area, who always request a copy of the film and any feedback, and it's no coincidence that they're some of the best around. We have a "Conference Pool" on Hudl where all games get uploaded. I would advocate for an officials' access to that pool as well. I think we have some great crews, but there's no impetus to improve really. Someone mentioned 2-man crews. I would have zero problem going back, and I think many coaches would feel the same. I think 2 men crews were more assertive, hustled more, and fought to get calls right. I never heard a 2-man crew member utter the words, "That wasn't call," or even worse (and this got me a T once), "I agree it was a foul, but it's not my call." That's just egregious incompetence. I'm not saying 3-man is a disaster or necessarily needs to be changed, but I see no evidence that the game is better.
7. Last note on the money of officiating. Here's the deal: most officials make more money than basketball coaches. I have little sympathy with the "sacrifice" card pulled by officials. Now, I appreciate their time and efforts, I do, but they're making much more money per hour and in aggregate than a typical coach. My father-in-law will make upwards of $3000 more than I will as a head coach (counting high school dates and spring, summer, fall shootouts, etc.). He doesn't do it "for the money" per se (he was a former player and coach for several years himself). Some officials, however, absolutely do it for the money though.
Officiating is tough, and so is coaching and playing. We just want everyone to have an impetus to improve and have some standards and accountability to ensure we all improve.