Reply With Quote
After reading through the report. It is obvious that DELANEY is the crooked ref.
I'm just quoting the report, there's no credibility needed.
For all the conspiracy theories on that game, the Lakers only had a +1 favorable call advantage.
Anybody can read it and say the same thing, it doesn't have to be Lakerfan
After reading through the report. It is obvious that DELANEY is the crooked ref.
Roland Beech, who is not (to my knowledge) a Lakers fan or someone associated with the NBA, came up with strikingly similar numbers.
http://www.82games.com/lakerskingsgame6.htm
According to Beech's study, which characterized calls on a spectrum from "yes" to "very dubious" with intermediate categories of "probably," "maybe," and
"dubious," the tally was like this for "maybes" "dubious" and "very dubious" calls:
Bavetta -- 9 calls; 6 for LA, 3 for SAC
Delaney -- 10 calls; 5 for LA, 5 for SAC
Bernhardt -- 9 calls; 6 for LA, 3 for SAC
David Stern said Donaghy was a "rogue" official and other than him there is absolutely no funny business in basketball. Meanwhile, Donaghy is basically trying to claim his gambling had little to no impact on the game outcome and he's only a minescule part of a big crooked mess that fixes games.
Chances are, neither one of those extremes is right, it's probably somewhere in the middle. At the same time, a commishioner with a loving wife and tons of money who has a lot to lose is more credible than a broke convict who's wife said, "See you in the next life" with absolutely nothing to lose.
If David Stern gets caught in a lie, he gets booted as commish and could possibly face jail time while basically never being able to show his face in public again. If Donaghy gets caught lying, nothing changes. He's still broke, his wife still hates him, and he still has no future. It seems pretty obvious who to believe right now.
Good find:
he says that of the "dubious" calls, 7 favored LA and 1 favored SAC.
of the very dubious, only one, it favored SAC.
Then factor in both calls by DELANEY, the reverse-call on Bibby/Kobe, which is really two very dubious calls in one. I that was rated as "dubious", it should be re-classified as two "very dubious".
Also, the call on Divac by Delaney should also be "very deubious".
We now have 5 dubious calls for LA and 1 for SAC, and 3 very dubious for LA, and 1 of SAC.
And you're looking at all of this objectively, without any sort of agenda or preconceived notions about what the analysis should prove, right?
Yes, I am an expert at conspiracy theories, weeding out the bogus ones from the real ones.
And this is not a 'theory". Donaghy is an eyewitness. When you have an eyewitness to a conspiracy, it is not a theory.
DELANEY and STERN entered into a conspiracy. Bavetta is what I call a sloppy helper to the conspiracy. He was only involved implicitly by suggestion.
Take a look at Delaney's staements, compared to the other refs. DELANEY sounds like a professional liar. He knows exactly what to saying, using the most advnaced PR spin. His statements look rehearsed and targetted.
the NBA "admits" the reffing was bad that game. That is the cover story. Wow, really, the reffing was bad. You see, by making an admission, the NBA is trying to trick you in thinking they are honest. But don't be duped, they are only admitting the obvious, which means they are not really admitting anything.
Why do you even watch the games? The outcome has obviously already been decided.
Did you not read the thread?
I root for Tim Duncan and the Spurs because they are CONSPIRACY BREAKERS. They overcome obstacles to achieve greatness.
Did you not read the thread?
I root for Tim Duncan and the Spurs because they are CONSPIRACY BREAKERS. They overcome obstacles to achieve greatness.
Did you read the excerpts? There's a passage about how the refs nursed the Spurs past the Suns in 2007 just like there's a passage about how the refs nursed the Lakers past the Kings in 2002.
You don't get to cherry pick the parts you like and don't like from the excerpts. There's no possible, unbiased way to determine which part of Donaghy's book is true/untrue. If you think the NBA is so fixed, then don't watch.
There's also parts speaking about the Spurs gettin' the cheat to win.Did you not read the thread?
I root for Tim Duncan and the Spurs because they are CONSPIRACY BREAKERS. They overcome obstacles to achieve greatness.
It's too convenient to say the Spurs honestly won all 4 rings while the Lakers cheated their way to 4.
Like I said, I can accept it when Sunfan or Mavfan bring up conspiracy theories...they have a reason to gripe. But it's crazy when Spurfan or Lakerfan brings it up.
edit: What DoK said.
My personal review of my latest work performance is that I'm a bad ass perfect employee who deserves a 25% raise.
There's a reason people or organizations shouldn't review themselves.
Why hasn't anyone brought up the ref that has it out for Tim? It was discussed a lot on this website last year and most agreed that he called more fouls against Tim than proper. A foul for laughing on the bench?
So isn't that a form of cheating, even if the design is not to affect games? And can't it afftect games if a superstar gets tied up with fouls that most refs wouldn't call.
Who said that? In shading or manipulation the outcome isn't decided only the table is slanted to a degree towards the desired outcome. Doesn't mean it's a guarantee the outcome the league or refs want will happen they just influence to a degree in that direction. Evidence points directly to this being plausible I don't know why there are so many people in this thread that can't see the huge difference between shading/manipulation and a fix.
I saw Joey and Timmy chillin' at the mall, there ain't no conspiracy there.
If Jose fcuking Conseco can save baseball...
All you have to do is watch NBA games to know something is going on.
Yes it is a form of cheating or at least bias and it's called shading. The topic this thread should be about but some people just can't Comprehend that this isn't a fix situation but a manipulation one.
Which is why I posted an independent review, too, which reaches strikingly similar results to the NBA's study.
Actually I think it's Jack Nies that had the problem with TD for a long time after Timmy grabbed him to move him out of the way during a play and Nies was a little about it.
That's the problem is the ref ego and bias in NBA.
I didn't know about Jack Nies and Duncan, I must have missed that.
I just laugh every time I think back to Tim with that dumbfounded look (y'know his normal look) when he got a T for laughing on the bench. That was too funny.
NBA suspends Tim Duncan
Dec 01, 2003
Tim Duncan of the San Antonio Spurs was suspended for one game by the NBA on Monday for pushing an official to the floor.
The two-time league MVP and five-time all-star made contact with Jack Nies in the third quarter of the Spurs' loss Saturday night to the Golden State Warriors.
Duncan was setting a pick near the Spurs' 3-point line as Nies was trying to untangle himself from another player. Duncan cut to the high post, put both hands on the official to clear some room, and Nies tumbled to the floor. The official quickly got up and called a technical.
"Cir stances and facts have to be considered in each case, and I think that clearly, here, it's obvious that the contact was both inadvertent and accidental,'' Spurs coach Gregg Popovich said before San Antonio's game against the Los Angeles Clippers. ``To be suspended, the rule states that it's got to be intentional contact. So whether you want to speak intellectually, philosophically, factually, there's absolutely no support for such a decision. It's just a bad decision. It's absurd.''
Popovich said his star player was surprised by the league's decision.
"Tim was shocked,'' Popovich said. ``I mean, he almost let out a laugh, like `Are you kidding me?' It was just like a funny incident to the fans, and nothing was written about it. He was flabbergasted.''
Duncan, also the series MVP when the Spurs won the NBA le last spring, was out of the lineup against the Clippers.
Then those who buy into this should never complain about refereeing, League decisions or "questionable" outcomes of games.
Accept it as just another part of the game.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
