Fox Sports: "Did Donaghy fix Game 3 of Suns-Spurs?"

[mavs>spurs2]

I'm gonna have to disagree. While we still had our chances to win, I think most people with eyes who watched the finals saw something really fishy, especially at the end of game 3 and game 5. And i'm not talking about bad calls that went both ways, there will always be plenty of that. I'm talking about blatant phantom calls on Wade and him winning game 5 from the line.

[Findog]

Funny thing is that Miami was 1-6 this last year in games that Donaghy officiated. The Mob must not be Heat fans...

Well I was replying to the poster who asked if as Mavericks fans we felt "cheated" out of a title. Until there's evidence that this is bigger than Donaghy and the 06 Finals were rigged, my answer is no.

[Findog]

I'm gonna have to disagree. While we still had our chances to win, I think most people with eyes who watched the finals saw something really fishy, especially at the end of game 3

What screwed us in G3 was running a box and one and letting the shot clock tick down to 2 on every possession instead of just running our offense and continuing to create shot opportunities. It was akin to a football team running it up the gut 3 straight times and punting in order to run some time off the clock. The Haslem steal off Jet didn't help. Shaq inexplicably making both of his FTs after a foul was huge. I know what we were all thinking, Shaq at the line means we basically got a stop. And then he hit them.


and game 5. And i'm not talking about bad calls that went both ways, there will always be plenty of that. I'm talking about blatant phantom calls on Wade and him winning game 5 from the line

Salvatore butchered that call, and the 25 FTAs were awful. Game Five was extremely one-sided, but we're not the first team to have that happen to us in the playoffs. Throw it out and we're still down 3-2. We still had HCA and the opportunity to take care of business on our home floor.

[sandman]

Well I was replying to the poster who asked if as Mavericks fans we felt "cheated" out of a title. Until there's evidence that this is bigger than Donaghy and the 06 Finals were rigged, my answer is no.

I know, bro. I was agreeing with you in stating that based on Donaghy's actions alone, it looks like the Heat were not the recipient of fixed officiating. Favorable officiating is a whole 'nuther story, but not enough to for the other poster to feel "vindicated" in their conspiracy theories.

[mavs>spurs2]

What screwed us in G3 was running a box and one and letting the shot clock tick down to 2 on every possession instead of just running our offense and continuing to create shot opportunities. It was akin to a football team running it up the gut 3 straight times and punting in order to run some time off the clock. The Haslem steal off Jet didn't help. Shaq inexplicably making both of his FTs after a foul was huge. I know what we were all thinking, Shaq at the line means we basically got a stop. And then he hit them.



Salvatore butchered that call, and the 25 FTAs were awful. Game Five was extremely one-sided, but we're not the first team to have that happen to us in the playoffs. Throw it out and we're still down 3-2. We still had HCA and the opportunity to take care of business on our home floor.

How many times do you see Finals games won off of a non shooting foul when a team is in the penalty? The answer is never, unheard of. In that situation you let the players play. At the end of game 5, Wade ran right by Dirk, shoving him with a forearm as he went by. And Dirk was called for a foul. It was so blatantly obvious at that point that they had just thrown the game. Then of course Wade goes to the line and wins the game.

[sandman]

Was wondering how long it would take Mav Fan to join Sun Fan in drinking the Konspiracy Kool-Aid. Guess we can get the party started now...

[mavs>spurs2]

Was wondering how long it would take Mav Fan to join Sun Fan in drinking the Konspiracy Kool-Aid. Guess we can get the party started now...

You agree that standing still while getting a forearm in the chest merits a foul, especially in the closing moments of a Finals game?

[Findog]

I know, bro. I was agreeing with you in stating that based on Donaghy's actions alone, it looks like the Heat were not the recipient of fixed officiating. Favorable officiating is a whole 'nuther story, but not enough to for the other poster to feel "vindicated" in their conspiracy theories.

My "theory" is that the refs were whistle-happy and the Heat were better able to take advantage of it. Some crews, Dan Crawford comes to mind, tend to just let 'em play.

[41times]

So how many titles do you feel that your team is entitled to based on this situation? Remember, the man has been officiating in the NBA for 12 years, and you clearly stated that fixing and agendas is bigger than this one ref. So how many titles should the NBA retroactively award your team?

Just 1. The 2006 Finals were rigged or fixed or skewed or whatever you want to call them. Games 3-6 were very obviously poorly offiiciated. I think DumbWade shot about 85 free throws in those 4 games and a bunch of those calls were phantom.

Stop and think about it for a minute, the Mavs were the prohibitive favorite in that series. The Mavs had beaten the Heat by a combined total of 49 points in the 2 regular season meetings and Vegas was giving some good odds on anyone willing to take the Heat. So if you wanted a big pay off you could get good odds as much as 8 to 1 if you bet on the Heat.

I'm not blaming it on Donaghy because i don't think he ref'd any of the games but come on people are you niave or too stupid to believe that he is the only official who bets on games!?

So i will take my one title please. And for you Spurs fans maybe you want to take a closer look at those Laker games of the early 2000's?

[Obstructed_View]

As a San Antonio fan, I bet you would.
As someone who thinks the NBA is rigged (but only when your team doesn't win), I'm not surprised you'd say something so ignorant.

Since the Spurs are routinely at the bottom of the playoff list in free throws attempted, and since Tim Duncan gets fouled more than anyone else in the league, I'm not sure how my being a Spurs fan enters into the discussion.


NFL = Instant replay gives you some lattitude with crappy officiating. Many bad calls have no effect on the outcome, due to challenges. Still, some bad or questionable calls do effect outcomes. I'd say officiating in the NFL is comparable to the NBA.
I recall an NFL official once getting the coin toss wrong :lol . If you need more proof than that, ask a Raiders fan about the tuck rule, ask Tony Dungy about the possession rule, or ask any Seahawks fan about the Super Bowl. I agree that instant replay is a good thing, but it became necessary because the officiating was so terribly bad, and it still doesn't cover the mistakes the officials manage to make.


NCAA = Depends on the conference. IMHO, Big Ten and SEC officials are pretty good, but then again, that is the "standard" to which I am accustomed. MVC officials are pretty awful; they call too many fouls, allow the home crowds dictate to them, and do not let the games flow. Overall, officiating is better in the NBA (especially from a consistency standpoint) if you look at all of Div 1 basketball. I suspect a few conferences do a better job than the NBA, however.
I agree. There are a large number of competent officials in the NCAA, and officiating is for the most part very good. However, since the NBA takes the best officials from their ranks, I doubt that an entire conference is better overall. I saw enough missed calls and bad judgments during the NCAA tournament to know that it's an order of magnitude below the NBA.


NHL = I have never really heard of hockey fans complaining. As far as I know, there are no "historically bad" calls that have decided championships, as in some other sports. I don't follow the NHL enough to be qualified to say.
Google "Brett Hull no goal" and see what comes up. :) Hockey fans don't seem to whine as much as basketball fans do. Notice that hockey players don't complain as much either.


MLB = There are a few umpires in MLB, such as Froemming, who are basically perfect. I have never known Foremming to make a bad call or eject someone who didn't deserve it. (Traditionally, you really had to try pretty hard to get tossed from a baseball game.) Some of the younger umpires seem to lack the maturity and gravitas that the position requires, and they are too quick to toss players for arguing balls and strikes. (The rule is automatic ejection. Custom dictates that you can complain to the ump, so long as you don't turn around or otherwise show them up.) Overall, I would say that MLB has the best overall officiating. Strike zones are not identical from ump to ump, but they are usually consistent to themselves. To be brutally frank, a 162 game schedule allows for a lot of mistakes, anyway.
Even if you count the rather simple process of balls and strikes, there are more potential calls of varied types in a single basketball game then in three or four baseball games. Compared to the pace and structure of baseball, basketball is much faster and almost anything can happen. As you mentioned about hockey, I don't follow baseball closely enough to go too in-depth, but the only game I attended this year was decided by a terribly bad call at first base that nobody in their right mind should have missed. It didn't even make the highlights.


FIBA = FIBA officials are sort of like East German figure skating judges. Or is it more like Italian parliamentary cabinets? At any rate, it seems like the FIBA officials see international competition as some sort of demented World's Fair, in which each official's role is to highlight his nation's bizzare or idiosyncratic rules emphases. FIBA has actually gotten better, but it has nowhere to go but up.
On the above, you and I are in complete agreement. I can't even think of a suitable analogy for how bad they are. Yours are pretty good, though. :toast

[sandman]

Just 1. The 2006 Finals were rigged or fixed or skewed or whatever you want to call them. Games 3-6 were very obviously poorly offiiciated. I think DumbWade shot about 85 free throws in those 4 games and a bunch of those calls were phantom.

Stop and think about it for a minute, the Mavs were the prohibitive favorite in that series. The Mavs had beaten the Heat by a combined total of 49 points in the 2 regular season meetings and Vegas was giving some good odds on anyone willing to take the Heat. So if you wanted a big pay off you could get good odds as much as 8 to 1 if you bet on the Heat.

I'm not blaming it on Donaghy because i don't think he ref'd any of the games but come on people are you niave or too stupid to believe that he is the only official who bets on games!?

So i will take my one title please. And for you Spurs fans maybe you want to take a closer look at those Laker games of the early 2000's?

Your logic:

1. Your team had a meltdown of epic proportions in the Finals

2. Officiating in the series favored the other team instead of your team

3. An official that did not work the Finals that your team lost has been indicted on conspiring to fix games

Therefore:

4. Your team was the victim of a fix and should be the rightfull champions

Using that logic, you should be able to claim the championship this year as rightfully yours as well, right? Do you believe that the GS series was fixed as well? You had the best record in the league. You were the odds on Vegas favorite to win the title. Surely you feel as strongly about that series being fixed as you do the Finals?

[Obstructed_View]

Just 1. The 2006 Finals were rigged or fixed or skewed or whatever you want to call them. Games 3-6 were very obviously poorly offiiciated. I think DumbWade shot about 85 free throws in those 4 games and a bunch of those calls were phantom.

Stop and think about it for a minute, the Mavs were the prohibitive favorite in that series. The Mavs had beaten the Heat by a combined total of 49 points in the 2 regular season meetings and Vegas was giving some good odds on anyone willing to take the Heat. So if you wanted a big pay off you could get good odds as much as 8 to 1 if you bet on the Heat.

I'm not blaming it on Donaghy because i don't think he ref'd any of the games but come on people are you niave or too stupid to believe that he is the only official who bets on games!?

So i will take my one title please. And for you Spurs fans maybe you want to take a closer look at those Laker games of the early 2000's?

By that rationale, the Mavs shouldn't have beaten the Spurs to even get to the WCF. I therefore want my title from last year because my team would have actually beaten the Heat.

[mavs>spurs2]

Your logic:

1. Your team had a meltdown of epic proportions in the Finals

2. Officiating in the series favored the other team instead of your team

3. An official that did not work the Finals that your team lost has been indicted on conspiring to fix games
Therefore:

4. Your team was the victim of a fix and should be the rightfull champions

Using that logic, you should be able to claim the championship this year as rightfully yours as well, right? Do you believe that the GS series was fixed as well? You had the best record in the league. You were the odds on Vegas favorite to win the title. Surely you feel as strongly about that series being fixed as you do the Finals?

I thought he was cooperating with the feds and they are now saying he's willing to give the names of other refs involved? Maybe I fell asleep watching sportscenter and dreamed it but I coulda swore I heard it somewhere....anyway regardless I seriously doubt he was the only one involved. You'd have to be naive to totally ignore the possibility.

[Reggie Miller]

Obstructed View:

Actually, I think we are more or less in agreement across the board. My main problem with the NBA is not blown calls, but a large disconnect between the rules on the page and the rules on the floor. In other words, the NBA takes a major hit for all of the non-calls on travelling, palming, moving screens, lane violations, and offensive goaltending. Some of these are stupid rules that need to be eliminated (i.e. offensive goaltending), but the proper procedure would be to change the rule, not to just ignore it.

I agree that the perceived superiority of baseball officiating is mostly a side-effect of the sport's design. In baseball, the action is very isolated. Fielding is really the only component that requires cooperation or synergy. Otherwise, the game is a duel between the hitter and the battery. (It is misleading to forget the catcher's role in this; it's not really hitter vs. pitcher.) In other words, baseball really SHOULD have nearly perfect officiating, as this is a reasonable goal in that sport.

At any rate, NBA basketball is really the only league that has such a major disconnect between the "official" rules and the "enforced" rules. In baseball, blocking home plate is illegal if you are not in possession of the ball or receiving a throw. You don't see that called very much, if at all. I really can't think of another baseball example at the moment, but I could probably come up with another one or two. I'm not aware of any rules that are consistently ignored in the NFL or NHL, excepting the previously unenforced (and virtually unknown) tuck rule.

Terry Pluto refers to this as the "pro call" in his books, and it has been a problem in the NBA at least since the ABA merger, if not much longer.

[41times]

Your logic:

1. Your team had a meltdown of epic proportions in the Finals

2. Officiating in the series favored the other team instead of your team

3. An official that did not work the Finals that your team lost has been indicted on conspiring to fix games

Therefore:

4. Your team was the victim of a fix and should be the rightfull champions

Using that logic, you should be able to claim the championship this year as rightfully yours as well, right? Do you believe that the GS series was fixed as well? You had the best record in the league. You were the odds on Vegas favorite to win the title. Surely you feel as strongly about that series being fixed as you do the Finals?

Nope, not at all. In fact i said 2 weeks before the end of the season that we do NOT want to play GSW. they had beaten us 5 out of the last 6 times we played where as we had Crushed the Heat regularly. So i am not crying foul for this year. GSW beat us fair and square. We got out played and out coached.

But 2006 should be ours man. And i don't want to hear anything about the call against G.nosebleed on Dirk on that shot with 23 seconds left in the WCF's either. That was a foul and i have a giant poster of that shot at home and G.Nob's hand is clearly all over Dirks arm! That was just a brain dead stupid play by GiantNose. Otherwise you guys might be celebrating 3 in a Row!

[Obstructed_View]

My main problem with the NBA is not blown calls, but a large disconnect between the rules on the page and the rules on the floor. In other words, the NBA takes a major hit for all of the non-calls on travelling, palming, moving screens, lane violations, and offensive goaltending. Some of these are stupid rules that need to be eliminated (i.e. offensive goaltending), but the proper procedure would be to change the rule, not to just ignore it.
Travelling is a non-issue. Palming is typically only called when it's used to gain an advantage, and I'm okay with that, unless you want to tell Allen Iverson and Dwayne Wade to learn how to dribble all over again. Everything else you mentioned is called when it's seen as far as I can tell. Complaints about those are by people that don't really know anything about basketball, and those complaints will continue until people find a better ill-informed opinion to blindly repeat.

In addition, fouls are called according to the rulebook more often than most fans realize. They are typically looking in the wrong place on a replay when judging whether a foul occurred. A little familiarity with the ACTUAL rulebook would go a long way, but that's an unrealistic goal. We're on an NBA fan board with people that don't know the rules.

That leads to the biggest problem with the NBA IMO: They spend WAY too much time listening to the complaints of the peanut gallery. The competition committee keeps trying to change the rules to improve scoring and they don't allow the officials to catch up before changing the rules again. They set up points of emphasis based upon the most vocal complaints. They finally decided to clamp down on the complaining by the players, which was a big step. They'll have to stick to their guns for a couple of years until the fans follow suit.

[Findog]

How many times do you see Finals games won off of a non shooting foul when a team is in the penalty? The answer is never, unheard of. In that situation you let the players play. At the end of game 5, Wade ran right by Dirk, shoving him with a forearm as he went by. And Dirk was called for a foul. It was so blatantly obvious at that point that they had just thrown the game. Then of course Wade goes to the line and wins the game.

I agree, but the Heat still had to win a game in Dallas after that. It sucks, it was wrong, but we were eliminated on our own floor. And that can't be pinned on the refs, we collectively sucked in that game.

[Obstructed_View]

What screwed us in G3 was running a box and one and letting the shot clock tick down to 2 on every possession instead of just running our offense and continuing to create shot opportunities. It was akin to a football team running it up the gut 3 straight times and punting in order to run some time off the clock. The Haslem steal off Jet didn't help. Shaq inexplicably making both of his FTs after a foul was huge. I know what we were all thinking, Shaq at the line means we basically got a stop. And then he hit them.



Salvatore butchered that call, and the 25 FTAs were awful. Game Five was extremely one-sided, but we're not the first team to have that happen to us in the playoffs. Throw it out and we're still down 3-2. We still had HCA and the opportunity to take care of business on our home floor.

Dirk missing a free throw to tie the game with three seconds left didn't help.

[Obstructed_View]

I thought he was cooperating with the feds and they are now saying he's willing to give the names of other refs involved? Maybe I fell asleep watching sportscenter and dreamed it but I coulda swore I heard it somewhere....anyway regardless I seriously doubt he was the only one involved. You'd have to be naive to totally ignore the possibility.
I've heard reports that he's going to name names. Any indication whether that's mob figures, people threatening him, fellow refs or NBA players has not been given. You have to be careful with ESPN. One of their anchors kept referring to it as "game fixing" earlier today and someone kept saying "point shaving" yesterday, both of which are completely unsubstantiated. All anyone knows for sure as far as I've heard is that he was under investigation for having bet on NBA games. Any number of crazy things may come of this, but none of it has as of this point.

[Findog]

Dirk missing a free throw to tie the game with three seconds left didn't help.

Yeah, that too.

Still, it's way too foolish to write this team off forever after the last two playoff series. Considering San Antonio is going to stay strong for the next 3 years and Houston just got better, they may not get back, considering how tough the West is.

[Obstructed_View]

Yeah, that too.

Still, it's way too foolish to write this team off forever after the last two playoff series. Considering San Antonio is going to stay strong for the next 3 years and Houston just got better, they may not get back considering how tough the West is.
I agree completely. They just picked two years in a row to peak at the wrong time. They were actually helped by the injuries in 2006 because they didn't get the team together until late in the season.

[Findog]

I agree completely. They just picked two years in a row to peak at the wrong time. They were actually helped by the injuries in 2006 because they didn't get the team together until late in the season.

If the Mavs do win it, it's going to be a year where they're clearly not the favorites and where they don't set the world on fire in the regular season. They've shown being Finals favorites and by going into the playoffs as the #1 Goliath, they don't respond to pressure all that well, which is somewhat understandable, being that this is still a very young team. So I don't think things like "heart" or "courage" enter into so much as it does poise and maturity. Those things can't be fixed through a trade.

The Cardinals and the Colts both won titles after years of amazing regular seasons and disappointing playoff finishes. When they both turned in ho-hum regular season performances, that's when they finally got it done. It just seems that a team like San Antonio really knows how to pace itself for an 82-game season and then four playoff rounds.

[CubanMustGo]

In odd-numbered years, anyway.

[ShoogarBear]

If the Mavs do win it, it's going to be a year where they're clearly not the favorites and where they don't set the world on fire in the regular season. They've shown being Finals favorites and by going into the playoffs as the #1 Goliath, they don't respond to pressure all that well, which is somewhat understandable, being that this is still a very young team. So I don't think things like "heart" or "courage" enter into so much as it does poise and maturity. Those things can't be fixed through a trade.

The Cardinals and the Colts both won titles after years of amazing regular seasons and disappointing playoff finishes. When they both turned in ho-hum regular season performances, that's when they finally got it done. It just seems that a team like San Antonio really knows how to pace itself for an 82-game season and then four playoff rounds.I agree with this. If the Mavs ever do win, it won't be with what people will consider their "best" team. And I still think they'll need to find some kind of traditional low-post presence.

[sandman]

Nope, not at all. In fact i said 2 weeks before the end of the season that we do NOT want to play GSW. they had beaten us 5 out of the last 6 times we played where as we had Crushed the Heat regularly. So i am not crying foul for this year. GSW beat us fair and square. We got out played and out coached.

But 2006 should be ours man. And i don't want to hear anything about the call against G.nosebleed on Dirk on that shot with 23 seconds left in the WCF's either. That was a foul and i have a giant poster of that shot at home and G.Nob's hand is clearly all over Dirks arm! That was just a brain dead stupid play by GiantNose. Otherwise you guys might be celebrating 3 in a Row!

I can promise you that you are the only one who thinks that Ginobili fouled Dirk in the WCF's.

[Findog]

I can promise you that you are the only one who thinks that Ginobili fouled Dirk in the WCF's.

Yeah, it was a foul. The Spurs don't dispute that it was a foul. You at least have four trophies to fall back on. You don't get everything.

[monosylab1k]

I can promise you that you are the only one who thinks that Ginobili fouled Dirk in the WCF's.
:lol we'll see if he gets it. you're right, Ginobili didn't foul Dirk in the WCF's

[sandman]

Yeah, it was a foul. The Spurs don't dispute that it was a foul. You at least have four trophies to fall back on. You don't get everything.

No, there never was a foul committed by Manu on Dirk in the WCF's, because the Spurs and Mavs faced each other in the WCSF. Just having some semantical fun with 41times.

Now in THAT series, there was definitely a stupid Manu foul. In fact, I believe Manu carried that memory as motivation this last year.

[Findog]

No, there never was a foul committed by Manu on Dirk in the WCF's, because the Spurs and Mavs faced each other in the WCSF. Just having some semantical fun with 41times.

Now in THAT series, there was definitely a stupid Manu foul. In fact, I believe Manu carried that memory as motivation this last year.

Doh! Walked right into that one.

[barbacoataco]

If the refs are being PAID BY THE MAFIA to influence games, even if it is only to cover the over/under bets, that means the game is FIXED. If a referee makes a couple of extra foul calls to put both teams in the penalty early in the game ( to ensure they are over the over/under) those calls could influence the game.

Just because we hate Suns fans, I think we need to be careful to not "wear homer goggles" on this issue.

The fact is-- people have questioned the way games are called. (including the Mavs-Heat series) Now there is evidence that the mafia controlled at least one ref. This is not a Spurs-Suns issue, this is a league wide issue.

[justanotherspursfan]

If the Mavs do win it, it's going to be a year where they're clearly not the favorites and where they don't set the world on fire in the regular season. They've shown being Finals favorites and by going into the playoffs as the #1 Goliath, they don't respond to pressure all that well, which is somewhat understandable, being that this is still a very young team. So I don't think things like "heart" or "courage" enter into so much as it does poise and maturity. Those things can't be fixed through a trade.
There are a lot of things that can come up in the playoffs. Bad matchups, trying to find the right adjustments, relaxing when you have a series lead, fatigue, and a bunch of others. Getting enough experience to win a title means learning how to avoid various traps.

I think everybody on the team learned a big lesson this year about how to value regular season wins. I can pretty much guarantee you that they won't ever need to learn that one again. Likewise, I'll bet they'll never again make the mistake of thinking they have the finals in the bag after 2 3/4 games.

If the Mavs are lucky, they'll manage to avoid a 70-win pace and stay below the radar a little better. It definitely makes things a lot easier. Should be an interesting year.

[UV Ray]

I can promise you that you are the only one who thinks that Ginobili fouled Dirk in the WCF's.

Homer Goggle Remover sold here. :sombrero:

[tophy7]

http://espn.go.com/photo/2007/0514/nba_a_ginobili_275.jpg

Picture from Game 3 and no foul was called on Marion
How did Manu respond? by scoring 10 straight points he didn't bitch about it.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Nope, not at all. In fact i said 2 weeks before the end of the season that we do NOT want to play GSW. they had beaten us 5 out of the last 6 times we played where as we had Crushed the Heat regularly. So i am not crying foul for this year. GSW beat us fair and square. We got out played and out coached.

But 2006 should be ours man. And i don't want to hear anything about the call against G.nosebleed on Dirk on that shot with 23 seconds left in the WCF's either. That was a foul and i have a giant poster of that shot at home and G.Nob's hand is clearly all over Dirks arm! That was just a brain dead stupid play by GiantNose. Otherwise you guys might be celebrating 3 in a Row!

No one is crying about the Manu foul on Dirk. That was legit.

But if you're going down this woulda shoulda coulda path and crying about 2006, the Mavs would have never have even gotten by SA if it weren't for the refs bailing out Dirk on a play late in a game where he stepped on Tim Duncan's foot. Dirk got the bailout foul, two FTs, and Tim fouled out.

There was another one where Dirk ran over Bowen (when Bruce had already been set) that should have been clearly a charge, and that was under 10 seconds left, and put Dirk on the line for two FTs that ultimately proved to be the difference in the game.

So if you're playing 'take games back in 2006 due to bad calls', we can play this game all day long and your team never even makes it to the NBA Finals.

[ShoogarBear]

Not to mention the Finley technical in game 4(?) that was rescinded after the game by the league.

The point is, that anybody who tries to say that Donaghy cost the Suns the series has no case.

The Suns cost the Suns the series. And even then, there no reason to be assured they would have beaten the Spurs.

[FromWayDowntown]

Not to mention the Finley technical in game 4(?) that was rescinded after the game by the league.

The point is, that anybody who tries to say that Donaghy cost the Suns the series has no case.

The Suns cost the Suns the series. And even then, there no reason to be assured they would have beaten the Spurs.

The Finley technical in the first half, which would seem to have been significant given that regulation ended with the game tied and given that Dirk hit the ensuing FG after Bavetta's phantom T.

The worse call in that game was a block called on Duncan with about 5 minutes to go in the 4th and the Spurs up 5. Duncan was clearly set and clearly outside the arc, but Jim Clark called the block and pointed to the floor, suggesting that Duncan had a foot on the line. The Spurs not only gave up two FT's to Dirk, but also were assessed a delay of game technical and a 5 point lead shrunk to 2. The Spurs have themselves to blame for losing that game and Game 3, but they certainly didn't get any help from the officials.

What really shocks me -- or actually, what really doesn't shock me -- about the focus on Game 3 is the amount of misinformation concerning Donaghy's role in that game. Listening to the radio today, I heard commentators offering opinions that Donaghy put two questionable fouls on Stoudemire in the first quarter and then had it out for Amare the rest of the night. Neither statement is true, as earlier posts in this thread demonstrate. But anymore, it doesn't really matter what the objective truth is about something like that -- the opinions bandied about in the courts of sports opinion will carry the day, regardless of how ill-informed or incorrect they might be.

Is Donaghy a bad guy who did about the worst thing imaginable? Absolutely. Is there clear proof that he altered the outcome of Game 3? That's debatable.

[timvp]

As I read somewhere, if you are going to fix a game, it's going to be some trash regular season game no one is going to care about. You could win as much money in a Hawks vs. Grizzlies game in December as you could in Game 7 of an NBA Finals. Even Donaghy wouldn't be dumb enough to fix a game in which the whole world is watching.

And really, it's hard for me to care too much either way after watching Game 3 and 4 in Dallas in 2006. Those are the only two Spurs games in the last twenty years that I thought were lost on a large part due to bad calls by refs. If the Spurs get a fair shake in those two games, they'd have won the championship.

If the Spurs got the advantage of the whistle this last playoffs in a couple games, oh well. They were due a break after the travesty of 2006. People can try to taint the championship as much as they want but it's pretty hard to taint a third championship in five years. The Spurs had to be doing something right before that point.

Spurs = 4
Suns + Mavs + Jazz = 0

That's all the matters. :smokin

[Fast Dunk]

As I read somewhere, if you are going to fix a game, it's going to be some trash regular season game no one is going to care about. You could win as much money in a Hawks vs. Grizzlies game in December as you could in Game 7 of an NBA Finals. Even Donaghy wouldn't be dumb enough to fix a game in which the whole world is watching.

And really, it's hard for me to care too much either way after watching Game 3 and 4 in Dallas in 2006. Those are the only two Spurs games in the last twenty years that I thought were lost on a large part due to bad calls by refs. If the Spurs get a fair shake in those two games, they'd have won the championship.

If the Spurs got the advantage of the whistle this last playoffs in a couple games, oh well. They were due a break after the travesty of 2006. People can try to taint the championship as much as they want but it's pretty hard to taint a third championship in five years. The Spurs had to be doing something right before that point.

Spurs = 4
Suns + Mavs + Jazz = 0

That's all the matters. :smokin

It's actually

Spurs = 2
Suns + Mavs + Jazz = 0

I'll give you 2003 and 2005

1999 and 2007 are tainted

[THE SIXTH MAN]

It's actually

Spurs = 2
Suns + Mavs + Jazz = 0
Whats wrong you don't know how to count?

[Fast Dunk]

Whats wrong you don't know how to count?


I'll give you 2003 and 2005

1999 and 2007 are tainted

[THE SIXTH MAN]

1999 and 2007 are tainted
Link ?

[Fast Dunk]

Link ?

You want a link??? :lol

What more do you need to get you to understand?

Games 3 and 5 WCSF

Game 3 NBA Finals.

The truth is out there.

[Obstructed_View]

You want a link??? :lol

What more do you need to get you to understand?

Games 3 and 5 WCSF

Game 3 NBA Finals.

The truth is out there.
What are you talking about?

[THE SIXTH MAN]

You want a link??? :lol

What more do you need to get you to understand?

Games 3 and 5 WCSF

Game 3 NBA Finals.

The truth is out there.
You said that the 1999 and 2007 championships are "tainted". So provide me an official link that says that the 1999 and 2007 championships are officially "tainted". Because if they're tainted only in your little head, then I could live with that because you're just some random kid who hangs out on a spurs forum 24/7 and your OPINION doesn't mean shit.

:lol Your OPINION also wont take away the Spurs championships.

[cornbread]

Whats wrong you don't know how to count?
It's not that Fast Dunk can't count, it's just that Fast Dunk believes 2 is the highest number.

Consequently Fast Dunk also believes:

After 2 years of driving of driving Fast Dunk around, his mom's car has 2 miles on it.
Pluto was recently removed from the list of planets making it no longer the 2nd planet from the Sun.
In a few months Fast Dunk will be celebrating his 2nd birthday, again.
The Spurs have 2 Championship Banners hanging in the AT&T Center

[Fast Dunk]

What are you talking about?

You know what I'm talking about. It's a 3 letter word

[Fast Dunk]

You said that the 1999 and 2007 championships are "tainted". So provide me an official link that says that the 1999 and 2007 championships are officially "tainted". Because if they're tainted only in your little head, then I could live with that because you're just some random kid who hangs out on a spurs forum 24/7 and your OPINION doesn't mean shit.

:lol Your OPINION also wont take away the Spurs championships.

Official records or books or whatever are not going to make it "officially tainted"

People make them tainted.

[mavs>spurs2]

It's actually

Spurs = 2
Suns + Mavs + Jazz = 0

I'll give you 2003 and 2005

1999 and 2007 are tainted

How is 99 tainted because of a shortened regular season? Playoffs are all that matters...

[Obstructed_View]

You know what I'm talking about. It's a 3 letter word
Not a clue what you are talking about. That's why I asked. Seriously, your trolling is about as weak as your team.

[THE SIXTH MAN]

People make them tainted.
People don't crown champs so how can they taint them. Like I said your OPINION doesn't mean shit, and it also cant take away the Spurs championships.

[Fast Dunk]

How is 99 tainted because of a shortened regular season? Playoffs are all that matters...

Blah blah blah

1999 was an abomination!

Players were out of shape and simply they didin't give a damn about the season.

Don't get me wrong any team that have had won that title still was going to get labeled as tainted.

[Obstructed_View]

Blah blah blah

1999 was an abomination!

Players were out of shape and simply they didin't give a damn about the season.

Don't get me wrong any team that have had won that title still was going to get labeled as tainted.
What are you talking about?

[justanotherspursfan]

Players were out of shape and simply they didin't give a damn about the season.
Wouldn't that make every season Shaq has played an abomination?

[Fast Dunk]

People don't crown champs so how can they taint them. Like I said your OPINION doesn't mean shit, and it also cant take away the Spurs championships.

people is what makes teams successful, without people, there wouldn't be fans, fans who buy tickets, merchandise, memorabilia...

People have the right to say what is right or wrong...

[Obstructed_View]

people is what makes teams successful, without people, there wouldn't be fans, fans who buy tickets, merchandise, memorabilia...

People have the right to say what is right or wrong...
Seriously. What are you talking about? Do you even think about what you post?

[ShoogarBear]

It's actually

Spurs = 2
Suns + Mavs + Jazz = 0

I'll give you 2003 and 2005

1999 and 2007 are taintedNobody in the world with the possible exception of your mother gives a shit what you give.

[boutons_]

In the NBA, a Telling Calling Card

Stats Show How Referee May Have Shaped Outcomes

By Ivan Carter
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, July 25, 2007; E01

The idea that a lone NBA referee could alter the outcome of games and go undetected for a long period of time is not a shocking one for handicappers who make a living establishing betting lines for NBA games.

Several sports handicappers interviewed yesterday said that determining the betting lines on NBA regular season games is among the hardest tasks in the U.S. sports gambling industry, which takes in hundreds of billions of dollars in legal and illegal wagers annually. The difficulty arises because the teams play so many games and the effort of players tends to ebb and flow from night to night over the six-month regular season.

"I would be surprised if there haven't been refs fixing games for who knows how long," said Jimmy Boyd, who runs a sports gambling service based in Las Vegas, where sports gambling is legal. "With the NBA, selectivity is the thing. The league keeps close wraps on the officials. I mean, they are under as much scrutiny as anyone, but if a guy were to space out a bunch of games over two seasons it's not going to be easily detectable."

Boyd's assessment highlights the challenge faced by the NBA and the FBI as they investigate former NBA referee Tim Donaghy, who is the subject of a federal inquiry into the possibility that he gambled on games he worked over the past two seasons and passed insider information to others who placed bets themselves.

NBA Commissioner David Stern said yesterday that he believes Donaghy was a "rogue, isolated criminal" and that, to his knowledge, FBI investigators are not targeting any other NBA referees, players, coaches or league officials. Donaghy resigned on July 9, about 2 1/2 weeks after Stern said the FBI notified the league that Donaghy was part of a federal investigation into organized crime.

Donaghy, whose whereabouts are not known, is expected to turn himself in at U.S. District Court in Brooklyn, N.Y., over the next several days. A voice mail message seeking comment from Donaghy's attorney, John Lauro, was not answered yesterday evening.

Although Stern yesterday did not identify any specific games refereed by Donaghy that have come under suspicion, sports gambling expert R.J. Bell said he has spotted some trends that suggest the possibility of tampering. Bell examined statistics on hundreds of games called by Donaghy over the last four seasons and published an analysis on his Web site, Pregame.com, which tracks sports gambling trends.

"This is a pattern you have to dig deep to see," Bell said. "The fact of the matter is, in hindsight, it's easier to see patterns because you know what you are looking for."

Bell said that while he found no obvious instances of outright tampering by Donaghy, certain trends emerged that raised questions in his mind. "What's so condemning in this case historically is that he was a passive referee," meaning he did not call an inordinately large number of fouls, "and then he became an active referee, and that's the sort of change you don't see," he said.

The NBA tracks the performance of its referees but does not make the statistics public. However, numerous Web sites run by fans and gambling aficionados keep their own records and analyze them.

Bell said that teams playing in games worked by Donaghy the last two seasons scored more total points than Las Vegas bookmakers expected 57 percent of the time. The odds of that happening naturally are 19-1, according to Bell.

Bell said high-scoring games usually are games in which a large number of fouls are called. A separate analysis by Covers.com, a Web site that tracks trends among NBA referees, showed that games played over the last two seasons in which Donaghy worked had an average of 56.9 free throw attempts, tops among NBA officials.

Three referees work every NBA game, so it was impossible to say how many of those calls were made by Donaghy.

"The first thing I would look for is a guy calling a bunch of fouls on a key player early in a game or a bunch of ticky-tack calls at the end of a game," Las Vegas handicapper Tim Trushel said. "Fans are used to debating how a given game was called, so it's not like someone is automatically going to think it was fixed. If a guy is looking to hit the over" -- a bet that the total points scored by both teams would exceed the number established by bookmakers -- "one way to do that would be to call a bunch of fouls. Fouls lead to free throws and obviously, that leads to more points."

According to Bell, from Jan. 1, 2007, to the end of the regular season, the opening betting line -- the number that states which team is favored and by how many points -- of 12 games officiated by Donaghy changed 1 1/2 or more points, which is an indication that a lot of money had been bet. In those 12 games in which the money was predominately on one side, the money was right in 10 of them.

"Guys betting big money were right 10 out of 12 times," Bell said. "To me, that's a key number. Going 10-2, the odds of that are only 2 percent randomly."

Trushel said rumors that an NBA referee had been "bought off" began to circulate among gambling circles in April. "That's when you started hearing things, that a ref was shaving points or fixing games, but at the time, you weren't hearing any names and it would be very hard to pick up on it if the guy was careful," he said.

Trushel added that it is more difficult to detect a basketball referee who is seeking to influence the outcome of a game than it would be with officials in other sports.

"Basketball is different from the other sports," he said. "In baseball, the home plate umpire obviously has a huge impact on how balls and strikes are called based on their strike zone, but in basketball, you have three-man crews that rotate," meaning the same three referees do not always work together.

"So you'd have to look very closely to detect a pattern of a single guy altering the outcome of games," Trushel said. "The one question I have is: If he was doing this over a two-year period, how didn't any of the referees he worked with not detect something and say, 'What's going on?' "

Stern said yesterday that the investigation is looking into whether Donaghy fed privileged information to associates who bet on games. One piece of information that could help a gambler is knowing which referees are scheduled to call a given game. The NBA does not release such schedules and encourages referees to tell only their immediate family members. Coaches and players don't learn which crew is working a given game until shortly before tip-off.

"If a bookie could get that kind of information, it could help," said one source, who declined to be identified by name because he runs an illegal sports gambling operation in the Washington area. "Obviously the ref could make more of a difference by calling the game himself, but there is a reason why the NBA doesn't list which refs are working which games ahead of time. If you're setting a line, any piece of extra information can help."

Staff writer Michael Lee contributed to this report.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/24/AR2007072402259.html?hpid=topnews

[cornbread]

people is what makes teams successful, without people, there wouldn't be fans, fans who buy tickets, merchandise, memorabilia...

People have the right to say what is right or wrong...
So it the people who win the championships? If that's the case, you better hit gym little guy.

[THE SIXTH MAN]

people is what makes teams successful, without people, there wouldn't be fans, fans who buy tickets, merchandise, memorabilia...

People have the right to say what is right or wrong...
What do people/fans have to do with Championships? As far as I'm concerned they're earned and not awarded or voted on.

People have a right to their opinions, but that still doesn't change the fact that a fans opinion can take away a teams accomplishments.

[Fast Dunk]

What do people/fans have to do with Championships? As far as I'm concerned they're earned and not awarded or voted on.

People have a right to their opinions, but that still doesn't change the fact that a fans opinion can take away a teams accomplishments.

The laegue should stripped the Spurs from their rings..

[THE SIXTH MAN]

The laegue should stripped the Spurs from their rings..
And you should use fire fox for the spell check function. Again, you can have your opinion about the Spurs. You can even hang around here all day pouting like you have been. But your OPINION wont change or take away anything that the Spurs have accomplished.

[Supreme_Being]

The laegue should stripped the Spurs from their rings..


And you should get the fuck out of here, dumbass.

[UV Ray]

The laegue should stripped the Spurs from their rings..

YOU have been positively identified by my lab assistant as a paramecian.

[spursrule32]

quit responding to this idiot - the cavs are the arizona cardinals of the NBA except the cardinals have better chance of winning the super bowl than the cavs ever have of getting back to the finals. LeSweep is a great marketing tool, but his team doesn't have the tools to win a championship - just ask any sports writer in the country and they'll tell you the same - ubiased opinions. Most cavs fans would be embarassed at the crap this guy is saying - I know b/c I have a lot of cavs fan friends. All of them admit that the cavs were lucky to make the finals and they were way overmatched. I'll give them credit - they are much more realistic than suns or mavs fans.

[Reggie Miller]

Travelling is a non-issue. Palming is typically only called when it's used to gain an advantage, and I'm okay with that, unless you want to tell Allen Iverson and Dwayne Wade to learn how to dribble all over again. Everything else you mentioned is called when it's seen as far as I can tell. Complaints about those are by people that don't really know anything about basketball, and those complaints will continue until people find a better ill-informed opinion to blindly repeat...

...That leads to the biggest problem with the NBA IMO: They spend WAY too much time listening to the complaints of the peanut gallery. The competition committee keeps trying to change the rules to improve scoring and they don't allow the officials to catch up before changing the rules again. They set up points of emphasis based upon the most vocal complaints. They finally decided to clamp down on the complaining by the players, which was a big step. They'll have to stick to their guns for a couple of years until the fans follow suit.

If I only watched Spurs' games, I might agree. For example, all of the Spurs are very careful when crashing the offensive board and use the proper technique. Try watching the Pacers vs. the Hawks sometime. You will see offensive goaltending, and it isn't called.

I'm not sure what you mean by saying "travelling is a non-issue." I may not be an expert, but I am insulted by the notion that I don't know travelling when I see it. (Yes, I understand that the NBA and NCAA rules texts are not identical on this point, nor several others that people routinely gripe about.)

At any rate, you are missing my point a bit. If palming doesn't really matter, then get rid of the rule. Ignoring certain rules creates a bad impression and the appearance of impropriety.

The "pro call" is a problem that many experts and professionals have attempted to address. It's not just the ignorance or misperception of college basketball fans projected on the NBA game. I can name at least four books by former or current NBA players and coaches that specifically address travelling, palming, offensive goaltending, lane violations, etc. (These would be Charles Barkeley, Walt Frazier, Phil Jackson, and George Karl.) Their basic point is not that the officiating is unfair or influences the outcomes of games, but that it appears to do so when the rules are not consistently enforced as written.

I do agree that the most vocal critics of the NBA are by and large people that have no honest intention of ever watching a game, even if the league catered to their every whim. The strategy of appeasement is obviously not working, because many of the NBA's critics are not being intellectually honest.

[Obstructed_View]

I'm not sure what you mean by saying "travelling is a non-issue." I may not be an expert, but I am insulted by the notion that I don't know travelling when I see it. (Yes, I understand that the NBA and NCAA rules texts are not identical on this point, nor several others that people routinely gripe about.)
Sorry, but if you think there's a lot of travelling that goes uncalled, then you have to live with my opinion that you might not know travelling as well as you think. I could be wrong, but that'll be my opinion.

They are about as likely to call it on someone that didn't travel as they are to miss it when someone does, so it becomes a non-issue. Do they still miss them from time to time? Absolutely. It ain't the only thing they miss, it's just the easiest for someone who's never read the rulebook to see and complain about. If you have to go back and watch a replay of someone in the post to see if they took an extra step, then he did a good enough job of selling it that you aren't likely to ever be able to get him for it unless we'd like to issue challenges to the coaches and allow them to stop game play to have someone check the videotape. That should make games exciting.

If you want to talk about rules that aren't enforced as written, how about the five second back to the basket rule? I've never seen that called since they put it in. I think they called it the Mark Jackson rule at the time it was put into the rulebook. How many years has he been retired?

Rules are going to appear to be inconsistenly enforced due to people complaining. You and I could each make a highlight video of a single game, taking opposite teams, and make it look like our team got screwed by the officials. There are that many debatable calls in a single game. The average idiot that turns on the NBA game because it pre-empted The King of Queens may not realize that, but you and I should.

[word]

He tried, but the Spurs won anyway.

[Darkwaters]

Why do you give this Fast Dunk guy the time of day? Hes probably the lamest troll I've ever seen. His flaming posts are either moot or clearly simply the result of blatant ignorance. There isn't even any humor to his posts in the form of 3 mispelled words per sentence or a seemingly endless amount of random pictures (HoopsCzar). He inspires no fire or zeal in his "victims". All I feel is pity.

[Catharsis]

Let me just say that the nice thing about all of this is the reffing next year should be top notch. Mike Mathis (former NBA ref) was on ESPN and Jim Rome's show where he called out the league for not doing enough to ensure good officiating. He said that the 30 people used in the stands to oversee officials during games is a joke and that most of them aren't qualified enough to judge the quality of officiating. He also layed heavily into the "good old boy" network at the league office where people have been hired and "advanced" to the playoffs not because of their quality of officiating, but because of their friendships. That can be evidence enough if you look at the majority of refs for the Finals. Mainly Javie, Salvatore, Mauer, Crawford, Bavetta, and Rush (his being in the Finals is proof enough on how the best refs don't make it).

[knicksr1]

This is just terrible

[Fast Dunk]

Why do you give this Fast Dunk guy the time of day? Hes probably the lamest troll I've ever seen. His flaming posts are either moot or clearly simply the result of blatant ignorance. There isn't even any humor to his posts in the form of 3 mispelled words per sentence or a seemingly endless amount of random pictures (HoopsCzar). He inspires no fire or zeal in his "victims". All I feel is pity.

Whatever...!!

I'm your daddy!

[SpurForLife]

Whatever...!!

I'm your daddy!


No, Spurs are your daddy.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

I see this jack session is still going on.

[sandman]

Here is where I am failing to see all the logic in the Game 5 and now Game 3 protests: The "If Game" cascades into changing the entire sequence of events.

The series it tied 1-1 going into Game 3.

If they say that the Suns should have won Game 3 (because obviously Donaghy had the fix in as they could never lose a game because of their own inadequacies), then who is to say that the Spurs would not have played with more intensity in Game 4? Clearly the Suns did after losing Game 3, so why wouldn't the Spurs?

If the Spurs play with greater intensity in Game 4 to produce a win, there is no Horry hip check at the end of the game to "entice Amare off the bench for a suspension".

Essentially at this point, all we have done is flop Game 3 and Game 4 victories, with the only "what if" difference being that Amare/Diaw are available for Game 5. Series tied 2-2.

If the Suns are at full strength for Game 5, they have a greater chance of pulling out a victory on their home floor, even though the Spurs already beat them there in Game 1. If we give them the HCA, they win Game 5 and go back to SA for a potential elimination game.

If the Spurs are facing an elimination game, on their home floor, their intensity and level of play will be ratcheted up to a high level. See Game 7 against Detroit, and even Game 7 against the Mavs which was a great game even if they lost. I know that some may argue that this "what if" is not valid because the Suns lost the elimination Game 6, but they had already turned on the Excuse Machine at that point, and it was on the road. So Spurs still win Game 6 in this scenario, albeit on the different end of the elimination spectrum.

Series is now tied 3-3 going to a Game 7 in PHX.

If Sun Fan is going to create what if situations that favor his team, then to be intellectually honest he will have to assume some what if situations that go against his team as well. Thus, being logical about it, the most that could be assumed with different outcomes to Games 3 and 5 is that it would come down to a Game 7, because the outcome of Games 3 and 5 would naturally have an impact on the outcomes of Games 4 and 6 as noted above.

Nothing was "stolen" from the Suns that was rightfully or guaranteed theirs. Essentially, their logic is that their team would have done no wrong to lose a game and that the Spurs would have done nothing right to win a game, giving PHX a sweep of Games 2-5 and winning the series 4-1.

Unfortunately, both the regular season and playoff matchups between these two teams over the last 2 years does not logically support that what if scenario. The logic supports that the series could have easily gotten to a Game 7, and then all bets are off as either team could have won, but again, nothing indicates that this series was a guarantee for them.

Of course, they will want to throw out Game 1 as well because of the Nash Gash, meaning they will attempt to justify that they would have easily won this series based soley on the performance in Game 4, but then the logic digresses even further...

[thispego]

I see this jack session is still going on.
no shit. why/.?

[FromWayDowntown]

Let me just say that the nice thing about all of this is the reffing next year should be top notch. Mike Mathis (former NBA ref) was on ESPN and Jim Rome's show where he called out the league for not doing enough to ensure good officiating. He said that the 30 people used in the stands to oversee officials during games is a joke and that most of them aren't qualified enough to judge the quality of officiating. He also layed heavily into the "good old boy" network at the league office where people have been hired and "advanced" to the playoffs not because of their quality of officiating, but because of their friendships. That can be evidence enough if you look at the majority of refs for the Finals. Mainly Javie, Salvatore, Mauer, Crawford, Bavetta, and Rush (his being in the Finals is proof enough on how the best refs don't make it).

I think Mathis is making himself the poster boy for the anti-conspiracy camp.

If there ever was an official who stood to gain from outing a conspiracy, it's Mathis. He's obviously perfectly willing to comment about the league's officials in a negative way. He's a guy who was among the top officials in the game until he retired. He officiated 12 Finals games during his career, which means that he was among the best and most trusted officials -- certainly someone who would seem to be perfectly positioned to know about a conspiracy.

That he hasn't said anything about it, I think, speaks volumes to debunk any conspiracy theory.

As for the rest of the points made by Catharsis, I suppose that we'll always have differences in the way that we view officials. I once despised Javie, but it's clear to me that he's among the most accurate officials in the game on a night-to-night basis. He's definitely not afraid to make a big call against a home team in a big moment, which should be lauded and not scorned.

I'm not sure which "Crawford" Catharsis is speaking of, but both Joey and Danny Crawford are excellent play-calling officials and generally very consistent within their own styles. Danny Crawford definitely tends to be reluctant to call minor or incidental contact, but he's consistent with that approach.

I agree that it's probably time for Bavetta and Rush to be moved aside for the Finals.

Rush has never impressed me in any way. His most memorable call as an official was calling Michael Jordan and setting him up with some barfly that Rush was trying to impress.

I think the league's perception of Bavetta has slipped, if it's any consolation. He wasn't going to call Game 7 of the Finals this year.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

no shit. why/.?13 pages of :
pete and repeat walk in the store. pete comes out. who's left?
pete and repeat walk in the store. pete comes out. who's left?
pete and repeat walk in the store. pete comes out. who's left?
pete and repeat walk in the store. pete comes out. who's left?
pete and repeat walk in the store. pete comes out. who's left?
pete and repeat walk in the store. pete comes out. who's left?
pete and repeat walk in the store. pete comes out. who's left?


..................

[timvp]

I think the answer to the ref problem is to clone Danny Crawford 45 times and let Danny and the Clones ref every game.

To me, he's easily the best ref in the league. He lets teams actually play basketball and basically just stays out of the way. When he does blow his whistle, he's almost always right. He doesn't try to become part of the show or call technicals to get onto SportsCenter.

[boutons_]

July 25, 2007

Sports of The Times

N.B.A. Put Referees Above the Law

By SELENA ROBERTS

In a black suit and blue tie, wearing the colors of bruises, the typically grand David Stern arrived at a mic yesterday with the reduced look of an image viewed through binocular bottoms.

He was not haughty and pithy, but haunted and meek. He was not himself. Stern spoke softly — often with awkward pauses — as he explained what the N.B.A. knew of the F.B.I.’s investigation into whether the referee Tim Donaghy fixed games over the past two seasons.

Yes, the league’s internal security network of former “Dragnet” types and ex-spooks and retired spies missed detecting this scoundrel with a shady whistle.

No, he didn’t know Donaghy was at the center of an investigation into point shaving — the great taboo of sports — until the F.B.I. called the league June 20.

“My reaction was, ‘I can’t believe it’s happening to us,’ ” Stern said.

What’s not to fathom, though? Stern’s league has been rendered vulnerable by its longtime system of ref protectionism and false empowerment.

This goes beyond the unconditional defenses Stern has offered on behalf of referees who muss Pat Riley’s hair gel or rattle Phil Jackson’s Zen with a dubious call.

This is about ethical compromises the league has made over the years that have cultivated the God complexes of referees and provided a petri dish perfect to develop a rogue official.

Donaghy isn’t known to be among the nearly 20 N.B.A. referees in the late ’90s who caught the attention of I.R.S. investigators by exchanging first-class tickets for coach and pocketing a tax-free difference.

He was a witness to Stern’s response, though. In a sign of how deficient the N.B.A. officiating pool is, the league reinstated about a half-dozen of the tax cheats.

Why wouldn’t referees feel above the law if the league offered them loopholes in integrity?

The N.B.A. would go on to be hoodwinked by its blind faith in a flawed ref. In January 2005, Donaghy was questioned by the league for his part in a legal dispute with a neighbor near his home outside Philadelphia. A private eye from the league’s security department was directed to nose around Donaghy, to check out rumors of gambling and poke into the anger problems at issue.

The snooping came up dry. And Donaghy delivered a denial.

“He informed us that the allegations against him were untrue,” Stern said. “And that he was the person that was being harassed by his neighbor, not as alleged by the neighbor, that he was harassing the neighbor.”

The league believed Donaghy, its unimpeachable ref.

Stern has never conceded a human element in officiating. To him, the referees are always above reproach and suspicion. And yet the relationship between coaches, players and officials has become increasingly antagonistic in recent years.

Some players and coaches quietly point to a class differential that has grown exponentially over the last decade. As Stern noted, Donaghy pulled in a solid salary of $260,000 last year — or a week’s pay for star players and some coaches. Does anger or envy ever figure into a call?

The league’s officiating monitors are numbers freaks — how many calls are made, rate of technical fouls, etc. — but they do not measure each referee’s conscience.

For years, coaches have complained about referees who ask players for autographed shoes or request a star’s attendance at a charity golf event or pal around with a team after hours. In 2002, through court documents filed by Karla Knafel, a former mistress of Michael Jordan’s, the referee Eddie F. Rush was portrayed as the cupid for the secret lovers.

“I feel comfortable with his explanation,” Stu Jackson, the N.B.A.’s vice president, said at the time. “Do I feel there is a problem? Absolutely not.”

Or maybe there was an issue. In 2004, there was an official codification of fraternization rules. Yet a year later, the policy was waived when the referee Bob Delaney enlisted N.B.A. stars for scrimmages to attract paying customers to his basketball camp at IMG Academies in Bradenton, Fla.

This ref-player relationship may seem too cozy to be cool, but the league always offers its refs the benefit of the doubt. Many of them are good citizens and good people.

But here, in his worst hour as commissioner yesterday, with his face pale from stress, Stern was still extolling the virtues of his officials with few qualifiers.

“Sometimes they perhaps carry themselves in a way that is not as modest as we would prefer, but they do their darnedest to get the result right,” Stern said. “And frankly, I’m more concerned, rather than chastising them, with reassuring them that I am committed to protecting them while at the same time making sure that we keep our covenant with our fans.”

The promise of purity was clouded long ago, when the league put referees above the law, when Stern continued to deify them without regard to their human faults, when Donaghy was cutting his teeth.

Protectionism isn’t what referees need. Protectionism is how the league got into this fix.

E-mail: [email protected]

[ShoogarBear]

Oh, good lord. The NBA doesn't protect its officials any more than the NFL or MLB do. All of these "I knew this would happen" articles are pathetic.

[FromWayDowntown]

I think the answer to the ref problem is to clone Danny Crawford 45 times and let Danny and the Clones ref every game.

To me, he's easily the best ref in the league. He lets teams actually play basketball and basically just stays out of the way. When he does blow his whistle, he's almost always right. He doesn't try to become part of the show or call technicals to get onto SportsCenter.

I'd accept Danny Crawford for the reasons that you cite, but I'd also take Mike Callahan. I actually think he's better and more consistent than Crawford.

It tells me a lot that Callahan is truly an elite official who nobody knows about -- I'll never be able to actually prove it, but I have good reason to think that he was in line to officiate Game 7 of the Finals in 2006, had that game made (it was going to be some combination of Mauer, Nies, Bavetta, Callahan, and Fryer -- I figure it was Bavetta, Callahan, and Fryer {shudder}).

Anyway, nobody ever seems to bitch about anything that Callahan does. Fans of finesse teams don't hate him; fans of physical teams don't hate him. Coaches don't yell at him much. Aside from my own observations, that truth is pretty solid evidence to me that Callahan is really good at what he does.