Tim Donaghy talks about this years playoff calls by the refs

[bayareaspursfan]

A very interesting insight about how the refs officiate. It kinda takes the thrill out of this years playoffs.

http://www.yahoosportsradio.com/nba/tim-donaghy-fouled-out-25251/

[Spursfan092120]

It kinda takes the thrill out of this years playoffs.


Donaghy is an idiot..even so, why would we watch this if that was the case?

[SA210]

:pctoss

[GSH]

In the past, the league has done this. Not maybe. Absolutely, 100% this.

They talked about certain calls they want the refs to crack down on - then they use one player as the sole example, in a series of videos. It was the next thing to outright telling them "call this foul more, on this player". And whether or not it was their intention, that's the way it worked.

I had thought (and hoped) that it had stopped when they changed who is in control of the officiating. But I have heard that he still exercises "significant control" in that area. I'm not suggesting that the league rigs games for a particular team to succeed. Never have. But bias exists. The bias in favor of the media superstars is undeniable. The bias against young players (because they haven't earned "respect") is also undeniable. And the technique of singling out a player as an example, during video "training sessions" also undeniably causes officiating bias.

If it's still happening, then Donoghy has a point. I hate to admit it, because he's such a tool. But there are other ways to "educate" the refs, that would result in the calls being more evenly distributed.

[Keepin' it real]

A very interesting insight about how the refs officiate. It kinda takes the thrill out of this years playoffs.

http://www.yahoosportsradio.com/nba/tim-donaghy-fouled-out-25251/

How the heck does this interview take the thrill out of the Spurs' success this postseason?

[T Park]

The league with their all LA series clearly proved that.

Oh wait....

[JR3]

If it takes the thrill out of the playoffs, i'm not reading it. There is far too much to enjoy this year. Thanks though....

[spursfaninla]

In the past, the league has done this. Not maybe. Absolutely, 100% this.

They talked about certain calls they want the refs to crack down on - then they use one player as the sole example, in a series of videos. It was the next thing to outright telling them "call this foul more, on this player". And whether or not it was their intention, that's the way it worked.

I had thought (and hoped) that it had stopped when they changed who is in control of the officiating. But I have heard that he still exercises "significant control" in that area. I'm not suggesting that the league rigs games for a particular team to succeed. Never have. But bias exists. The bias in favor of the media superstars is undeniable. The bias against young players (because they haven't earned "respect") is also undeniable. And the technique of singling out a player as an example, during video "training sessions" also undeniably causes officiating bias.

If it's still happening, then Donoghy has a point. I hate to admit it, because he's such a tool. But there are other ways to "educate" the refs, that would result in the calls being more evenly distributed.

Counter-example, Leonard, rookie with no real cred, has yet to get more than 1 foul called on him guarding the leading scorer in the league...

[ploto]

Calling the moving screen on Perkins to start Game 2 was obviously because of this when they never called another one the entire night-- and players do it on both sides.

We all know Van Gundy paid a huge fine for revealing this in the past when it happened to Yao.

[DesignatedT]

guy just wants attention

[Beanzamillion21]

Counter-example, Leonard, rookie with no real cred, has yet to get more than 1 foul called on him guarding the leading scorer in the league...

Its called solid D bro.

[KaiRMD1]

What's his angle if not attention. Does he expect anybody to really take his word seriously?

[LoneStarState'sPride]

If it takes the thrill out of the playoffs, i'm not reading it. There is far too much to enjoy this year. Thanks though....

This, I'll pass as well.

[Dr Cox]

I love Duncan, but he gets alot of calls that younger post players do not usually get.

Same with Dirk, Kobe, Durant, Lebron and even harden.

[biskvito]

Hum... what else is new? NBA is a bit of a circus business, it's not the Olympics, as long as your team is not the one being killed by the refs you chug another beer and smile.

[FromWayDowntown]

What's his angle if not attention. Does he expect anybody to really take his word seriously?

He's working for a site that advises gamblers about how to place bets on NBA games -- apparently; he references the site multiple times during the interview, so I'd say that he's selling the site. I tend to think that he's willing to say just about anything in order to convince people that he has inside information that will benefit those who wish to gamble on games.

I find him to be completely incredible and hear nothing in this interview that makes me think otherwise. He's demonstrably wrong about at least one thing. His claim that the league makes reactive referee assignments based upon the way a series is going is historically inaccurate unless the league has some incredible ability to predict the future at the beginning of a series. There's plenty of data to suggest -- particularly now -- that the league has a prescribed rotation of officials and makes assignments before each round starts, staying true to the rotation.

I think the thing that leads me to doubt Donaghy the most is that he called 20 playoff games over the course of 7 seasons from 2001 through 2007 and never called a game after Round 2 (of his 20 playoff games, 17 were first round games and 3 were conference semifinal games). Overall, he was in the league from 1994 through 2007 and would have called hundreds of games during that time. When he offers his systemic criticisms of NBA officiating, he always confines his analysis to a narrow field of games, all of which have been publicly debated well before the Donaghy scandal broke or to player/referee feuds (like Javie v. Iverson) that had been public record for quite some time. In other words, he doesn't bring anything new or unique to the table -- he seeks to establish credibility by simply "confirming" things that people were already speculating about. Even at that, he adds nothing new to the story; he simply trades on the fact that he was an official to try to validate the theory. Further, with most of the things that he relies upon again and again and again, he clearly has no first hand knowledge of the alleged shenanigans -- he basically does little more than contend that he thinks the theory is correct. Hearsay is rarely a valid basis to support any kind of accusation.

I'd find him much more credible if he said something like "You know, I called Game 2 of the Miami/New Jersey conference semi in 2006. New Jersey had shockingly won Game 1 in Miami and the league was worried that if the Nets won Game 2, it would be risking a Nets v. Pistons conference finals. So, the series supervisor told us that we should let some things go to allow Miami to better defend in game 2 and we did just that, explaining why New Jersey shot so terribly and Miami shot so well." I'm not suggesting there was anything odd about that game, but if Donaghy came out with something like that -- something new and specific -- I'd be much more willing to hear him out.

I'm not here to defend the officials, but I'm also not quite willing to buy the rehashed story of a deceitful felon who is seeking to capitalize on his own misdeeds.

[CitizenDwayne]

Yes Donaghy is certainly the man to trust.