Reply With Quote
"it's not even debatable
the refs have obviously been instructed to take this series to 7 games" --Corso
corso says "it is obvious that the refs have been instructed to take this series to seven," and you guys still hope to claim you are the one's in the mainstream? This is typical of you guys' willingness to believe anything about your team as long as it doesn't involve giving credit to your opponent. You won't find much of anyone outside of San Antonio who is going to say that the refs did not do their best to officiate the game as best they could, but instead threw away all ethical concerns to fix a game.
Not that any of this deserves serious consideration, but how does your conspiracy theory jive with Josh Howard being called for a foul on his textbook block of Manu Boohoo?
"it's not even debatable
the refs have obviously been instructed to take this series to 7 games" --Corso
Now, this is what is funny. Spurs fans blaming a 22 pt loss on the refs. Ridiculous.
There must be a global conspiracy. How else could an organization as great as the Mavs be held to 0 championships.
The only consensus here is that Dallas fans are the worst on the internets.
You people whine about as much as Tim Duncan after every single offensive and defensive possession.
It wasn't soley the refs' fault. It would be ridiculous to say that, but one cannot ignore their involvement with the Mavs' runaway win.
There's nothing like a little Ross Perot moment.
Anyways, there's also nothing like seeing Dallas fans count a series win before it happens. I seem to recall the same thing going on in '03. Oh well.
The Spurs are a great team but unfortunately for the Spurs the Mavs are playing better. The last thing the Spurs fans need to do is sink to an all time low and start believing in conspiracy theories.
A lot of BS calls were made in the 2nd quarter of Game 2, which allowed the Mavs to outscore the Spurs by a lot. That which in the end lead to a 22 pt victory, it would of been a different game if it was close toward the end.
I usually say bout the refs but these last 2 games have been horrendous, especially last night's game. It was ridicious and sad to see the Spurs getting screwed, yet we still had a chance to win in the end but ed up
So now all Spurs fans believe in conspiracy theories? I don't.
What I do believe is that Mav fans are the worst basketball fans in the NBA, and that's an accomplishment, considering the purple and gold clad crowd to the west is included.
Seriously, do any of you 'necks have anything better to do than troll the internets looking for attention? I mean, I guess if I'd suffered season after season of postseason disappointment I'd shoot off a load at the prospect of a 2nd round series win.
Now that was a bad call. Doesn't make up for all the others though.
Spurs put themselves in a position to win the game, its just very scary when you think that if Barry does not get lucky in game 1, we're on the verge of getting swept...
Maybe one of you Spurs fans could explain to me how a whopping 6 FTA differencial equalizes a 22 point loss. The Spurs had their chances in the 3rd quarter to get back into the game, every time the Spurs made an offensive push they simply got lazy on defense and the Mavs answered.
Game 3 had some tight officiating in the end but it was going BOTH ways in the 4th, I don't understand why the Spurs didn't just go to the hole every possession like Dallas did. That's what made the difference in the game. However, what if Dallas had lost by one? What about the 2 calls for Parker late in the 4th when no one even touched him? What about the 2 calls Ginobli got when he flopped like a little ? Morale of the story is both teams got questionable calls, Dallas simply was more aggressive. You should thank the refs because if they hadn't started calling ticky tack fouls against the Mavs at the end of the 1st and 2nd quarter it would have been another blowout.
Thje FTA differential thing is lame anyway....that's not what it's about, and some nights no one is doing the Spurs any favors by putting them on the FT line...
But Ducan fouling out hurts, Spurs players getting called for fouls for hustling hurts, and Spurs getting elbowed in the mouth or shoved under the rim, and getting fouls called on them for it, is a huge load of BS.
I love doing a bit and getting the Spurs fan fired up...this place is hilarious...
The Spurs is all sports fans in SA have, so it's like the end of the world if the Spurs don't win a ring. Stars just finished up, Rangers are playing, and the Cowboys just drafted and are getting close to training camp...
The lack of a big FTA differencial proves fouls and the refs were not the reason the Spurs lost. Again, how does 6 more FTA by Dallas account for a 22 point loss? That's 3-4 calls. Hardly relevant in a blowout.
If Duncan doesn't want to foul out he shouldn't commit fouls. All big men are getting officiated stricter this year, I bet you didn't mind in game 2 when Dallas was over the foul limit like 4 minutes into the game and both centers got in foul trouble real quick. As for the hussle plays, hussle plays are fine. Devin Harris made a great hussle play last night, and he didn't foul. Spurs should watch that game tape. Also, elbows with no call? Ron Artest's face says hi, and left me a message to ask where the call was there. Not to mention, maybe refs would take Ginobli a bit more serious if he didn't flop like a every chance he gets. It's like watcing Vlade Divac Jr out there.
Yeah, obviously your life is full.I love doing a bit and getting the Spurs fan fired up...this place is hilarious...
The Spurs is all sports fans in SA have, so it's like the end of the world if the Spurs don't win a ring. Stars just finished up, Rangers are playing, and the Cowboys just drafted and are getting close to training camp...
2003 WCF (Spurs/Mavs)
# of FTs taken, not made, but taken:
Game 1 - Spurs 48 Mavs 50 (Bennett Salvatore, Ron Garretson, Greg Willard)
Game 2 - Spurs 45 Mavs 22 ( Bavetta, Joey Crawford, Monty McCutchen)
Game 3 - Spurs 26 Mavs 6 (Danny Crawford, Bob Delaney, Bill Spooner)
Game 4 - Spurs 31 Mavs 13 (Joe DeRosa, Bernie Fryer, Derrick Stafford)
Game 5 - Spurs 38 Mavs 23 (Mike Callahan, Jack Nies, Eddie F. Rush)
Game 6 - Spurs 21 Mavs 11 (Ron Garretson, Steve Javie, Tom Washington)
Quit yer in'. It's all consistent, no one's out to *get* the Spurs and gang up on them.
Okay, if any of those bull calls against the Spurs were "make-up calls", then I'd like to see some Mavs fans give some detailed examples of bull calls made against the Mavs in Games 1 and 2. And trust me, the Game 2 officiating was a LOT worse than Game 3's officiating. When a ref lets a defensive player get away with goaltending and credit him for a rebound in the process, you know the officiating has gone to . Said goaltending violation that was a non-call wasn't one of those that required the ref's best judgement. It wasn't a blocked shot that looked on it's way down. It wasn't a hand going up the net. It wasn't grabbing the rim while the ball was near that restricted zone. It wasn't slapping a ball against the backboard in a shot-block attempt. It was a ball being grabbed while it was inside that cylinder, and it was blatantly obvious. I actually had to ask a fan who was at the game to be able to verify it. And that's only a small example of how ed up Game 2's officiating was.
That said, I doubt we would've won Game 2 even if the officiating was fair and correct, but I'm pretty sure we wouldn't have been blown out in Game 2 had it not been for the bull calls.
Well, also take into account the fact that the rosters on both teams were different in 2003 than they are now. And also take note that two players who were on the Mavs roster 3 years ago are on the Spurs roster now. Which means, one could easily jump to the conclusion that some refs are targetting the team that has a certain player on their roster. Take Nick Van Exel, for example. He was on the Mavs roster 3 years ago. Now, on the Spurs roster. Apparently, he has a bad history with Steve Javie dating back to a regular season game a few years back, so I think Javie would want to keep a closer eye on NVE (as seen in Game 2). Also, Michael Finley, the second guy on the Mavs roster 3 years ago that's now on the Spurs roster. You might remember a Spurs/Mavs game the very next year where Finley and Bowen got into a scuffle. I don't remember who the officials were on that game, but I do remember Finley and then-Mavs head coach Don Nelson getting ejected. And I guess we all know the irony of that incident; Finley later becomes a teammate to Bowen (I think Brent Barry also got into a fight with Bowen in the 2002 playoffs while Brent was still playing for the Sonics). Anyway, if one of those refs whose names are in bold worked that game in March of 2004 that had the Finley/Bowen scuffle, then chances are, that ref may be keeping a close eye on Finley. I also forget who the refs were that worked that Sonics/Spurs game this season where Bruce kicked Ray Allen in the back. If it was one of the refs that worked Game 2, again...that ref would have reason to keep a close eye on Bowen.
The point I'm trying to make here is, I'm not saying refs target the team that has players that particular ref has had problems with before, or worked a game where that particular player got involved in something. I'm saying there's a possibility that is the case.
Last edited by Bloodline666; 05-14-2006 at 04:35 PM.
Below is an interesting article that Ric Bucher/ESPN wrote back in February, but then updated a couple of weeks ago. There are a few interesting items in it, especially that this is the youngest team of refs they've had in years.
As for conspiracy theorists, if Stern were that interested in compromising the game for high dollars, the Lakers and the Heat would be headed towards the Finals. Also, it would be impossible to involved 60+ people, the number of refs in the league, albeit fewer in the playoffs, along with directors, supervisors, etc., in any kind of conspiracy without getting busted.
Has game officiating seemingly gotten worse in the past couple of years... yes. But some of that may be due to lack of experience. Granted, Javee, Bavetta, Crawford... these guys have plenty of experience, but one guy can't call an entire game and these veteran officials are working within teams that may have less experience than everyone would like.
One thing is for sure – nobody wants to believe that a championship is decided by anyone other than the two teams involved.
With that, I bring you Ric Bucher.
**********************************************
The truth about refereeing in the NBA
By Ric Bucher
Joey Crawford, Nolan Fine and Violet Palmer have commandeered a corner of the bar for a late-night meal in a Sea-Tac hotel lobby lounge. They've got one eye on their plates of food, one eye on the TV screen above their heads, one ear on their conversation and one ear saved for their cell phones. When you're a referee, you're used to having your senses working in different directions.
Highlights of their game that night, Miami at Seattle, appear on the TV screen. Conversation stops. All eyes are on the screen now. The game gets a passing mention. The crew appears to collectively exhale. A cell phone rings and they momentarily tense up again, until they realize it's not one of theirs.
Violet Palmer and her crew review more game tape than coaches.
It was a meaningless game, for the most part, one of the many that come and go with relatively little notice. Neither Ralph Nader, Pat Riley, Mark Cuban, Tommy Heinsohn nor the bearded, over-caffeinated dude wearing a flannel shirt in Section 109 made a fuss about the Sonics' 100-71 win. Neither, apparently, did Ed Rush, supervisor of officials, or Matt Winick, the vice president of game operations. No matter. This is one of the thousand aspects about officials the general public -- including the part that plays and coaches in the NBA -- doesn't know: The officials are scrutinized by their administrators and themselves, far more harshly than anyone else.
In the normal midday meeting at the hotel, Crawford cautioned the crew that Riley might turn the game into an ugly scrum, knowing that his young road-weary team had no chance of winning and had been pummeled the night before in Portland.
These elements, incidentally, are mandatory for every ref to know -- the disruptive personalities on every team, how long a team has been on the road, how their previous games have gone, what changes they've had to make to their personnel, their favorite plays, what other controversies that might affect a team's or player's demeanor. This, for every game they work. Aside from the 59-page rule book, the 76-page case book and 71-page official's manual, of course, which is tested with weekly quizzes and regular videotape you-make-the-call tests online.
None of which, however, can stop a coach bent on wreaking havoc. Riley did uglify the game, yanking rookie Caron Butler after 30 seconds because Rashard Lewis scored on the tip-off. Riley's not-too-subtle message to his young team: I don't care if you're tired or overmatched, I want you to take a piece out of them. Former Sonic Vladimir Stepania had his own grudge, chapped that Seattle dealt him two years earlier to the Knicks, who then cut him. A second-quarter loose ball in Miami's backcourt results in Stepania diving on top of Desmond Mason and elbowing him in the scramble for the ball. Crawford and Fine are already up court, but Palmer is trailing the play when Mason and Stepania square off. She jumps between them and Ts both.
In the locker room at halftime, Crawford isn't happy that Palmer couldn't tell him where the ball was when she fired off the Ts, which determines how the game should be re-started. "Joey, I looked for it but I was trying to keep them apart," she says. He also asks Fine if, in hindsight, he should've called a flagrant foul on "Seattle's foreign kid" (Vladimir Radmanovic) for a hard foul to stop a Stepania layup shortly before halftime. "I'm saying it's just something to think about," Crawford says.
Then they review tape of Palmer's blocking call on Travis Best. Crawford, hoping to keep Miami from turning the game into a wrestling match, would've called a charge on principle, because it was a 50-50 play and that kind of call tones down a game's physicality, whereas the other encourages it. But the replay shows Palmer's call is technically correct. "Way to go, Violet," Crawford says. This is a case, however, when the technically correct call may not always be the ideal call. If calling Best for a charge might've stopped the second-half shenanigans, the league and every official would've happily taken that trade.
The Heat are down by 16 and have no chance, but Crawford's fears are fully realized. Gary Payton and Butler square off and draw Ts from Fine, then the Sonics' Reggie Evans and Stepania tangle battling for a loose ball. That's two more Ts and Stepania is gone. Midway through the fourth quarter, Lewis and Best go nose-to-nose and a mini-melee breaks out. Two more Ts. As the refs walk under the stands to their locker room, Heat security director David Holcombe informs Crawford that Lewis threw a punch at Best.
Fine rushes for the videotape in the locker room. It takes three different camera-angle replays and a freeze frame to detect Lewis putting a fist to Best's chin as teammates prevent him from actually throwing it. Referees are required to call either Rush or Winick immediately if the game is "atypical." Eight Ts qualifies. The post-game report includes a section for "Personality Problems."
"Everybody," mutters Crawford as he pecks at the keys.
In doing my magazine piece on Palmer, I spent time with four different crews, observing their game-day meeting, their pre-game conference, their locker room chat at halftime and their post-game wrap-up. I saw them review more tape than some teams do. I heard them quiz each other on arcane rules or test each other with what-ifs, situations that the average fan, player or coach has no idea what the correct call would be. They actually get a twisted sort of pleasure trying to stump each other, like the guys in "Diner" testing each other on the B-side songs of obscure 45s.
I saw the officials scrutinize plays the public might've been aware were questionable and more than a few that only they caught as possibly errant. I saw them study tape to get down what league authorities believe needed special emphasis -- defensive three seconds, lane violations, defenders walking up under shooters after they've released the ball. Teams are constantly pushing the boundaries, seeing what they can get away with and it's a never-ending, ever-changing battle.
Which brings us to the harsh truth: you, Joe or Josephine Fan, complain loudest about the aspect of the game you least know. The announcers and analysts you listen to for help know no more than you and that's difficult to admit because I know most of them. I admire Jeff Van Gundy, in that he talks about officials from a coach's perspective, which is what he knows and he's invariably on the money. Other than Mike Breen, the rest are poking around in the dark, yet bellowing as if they should be taken as authorities. Danny Ainge? One of my favorite people. Great insight to playing and coaching. Clueless when it comes to what referees do and how they do it.
Harsher truth: Most players and coaches aren't any better. Why? Mainly because they're interested in tricking the refs, not seeing the game from their perspective. Which is OK until they start talking about what refs do and why they do it.
Yes, I saw the referees make mistakes. Palmer missed a double-dribble violation by Ricky Davis right in front of her. To avoid a possible late whistle, Davis immediately hoisted a 3-point shot. The ball caromed off the rim and hit the shot clock, making it Boston's ball. Antoine Walker still screamed and got T'ed for it. Reviewing the play at halftime, Palmer said, "Thank God it hit the top. Thank you, Jesus." Then Leroy Richardson told Walker they had indeed missed the play but that still didn't warrant going berserk.
As it so happens, one of Davis' tricks is to dribble with one hand and bring the second hand over as if he's about to stop his dribble, thereby freezing the defender. Rest assured every official working his games from now on will know to watch that move closely.
Which is really maybe the point of all this. The referees are indeed far from perfect. They know that. They will tell you that. Some have paid the fines and served the suspensions to prove that. The league, as of now, doesn't believe you need to know who those officials are, anymore than teams are required to announce player fines for team infractions.
The current crew of officials are also younger than they've been in a long time, thanks to a slew of venerable officials retiring, with more leaving in the next few years. They are forever playing a game of catch-up, despite vast improvements in training and technology and technique. Media scrutiny is higher than ever. But they have no choice but to continue the pursuit. They don't expect that you'll ever understand. The best they can hope for is that someday, you might know enough to give them the benefit of the doubt.
If - and that's a big IF - but if the Mavs are getting the benefit of the referee calls then it is justice for us (Mavs) because of the above stats from the 2003 playoffs. The Mavs got hosed in that playoff series by the refs, and though I don't think the Spurs are getting hosed in this series, IF the Spurs are then it is only right after what happened in 2003.
Someone earlier alluded to the idea that the reason the Spurs got more FT's in that 2003 series is because they were more aggressive than the Mavs. Well, if that was true then I say the reason the Mavs have gotten more FT's in last night's game is because it could be the Mavs have been more aggressive than the Spurs. Did you ever stop to think about that? Or is your idea of a team being aggressive only reserved for the Spurs?
Pssst...about the FT differential...
Equal number of FTA does not mean the game was fairly officiated...if one teams commits 75 fouls and the other commits 10 and they both shoot an equal number of FT's...that doesn't mean the game was fairly officiated.
RE 2003:
Mavs were last in the league in FTA per game for the year that year, beccause they had no inside presence and were a jump shooting team...
The Spurs were #1 defensive team in the NBA that year(like this year) and the team was built around two Hall of Fame caliber defensive bigmen and an All NBA perimeter defender, offensively they were built around a 2 time MVP post player and two penetrating guards..
The Mavs didn't play D and shot J's....why should the FT's have been equal?
This year...Well the Spurs still have a 9 time all NBA defensive big, a 6 time ALL NBA perimeter defender, a 2 time MVP post scorer, 2 All Star guards among the best in the NBA at penetration...and a PG that lead the NBA in points in the paint...Again, the Spurs were the #1 defensive team in the NBA.
The Mavs have....a 7 foot All Star jump shooter who is just now developing elementary post moves(as he admits in interviews), no ALL NBA defenders,...
So how is it that Dirk Nowtizki is all of a sudden the second coming of Bill Russell on Defense, Tim Duncan all of a sudden plays D like a rookie....and Parker can't buy a basket?
Talk about FTA all you want...but Bull is Bull and FTA indicate nothing.
The mavs only shot 5 3 pointers the whole night and were attacking the rim. The spurs were forced to foul a lot. The way the spurs guard the perimeter the mavs are forced to play this way and the spurs have yet been able to stop the penetration as well.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
