The reffing situation just got uglier

WHOOPDEEDO42

Newbie
Joined
Aug 15, 2007
Posts
7
Reaction score
0
New Blood.

I vote Mark Cuban for new commish. Just for the F.U to the man factor. JC would clean house for sure but he ain't as spry as he used to be.
 

BC867

Long time Phoenician!
Joined
Sep 16, 2002
Posts
17,827
Reaction score
1,709
Location
NE Phoenix
Gambo and Ashe were asking theoretically on KTAR what the NBA would do if it had to replace 20 refs.

How about promoting or recruiting them? (There must be hundreds around the country qualified to referee basketball games.)

Hey, games would then be called fairly for a change.

Regarding David Stern, this happened on his watch. His proclamations now mean nothing. Make him gone. :titanic:

Edit: Per the Republic, 20 refs represent about a third of the NBA staff of referees.
 
Last edited:

azirish

ASFN Lifer
Joined
Jan 26, 2007
Posts
3,876
Reaction score
0
Location
Sun City
http://www.nypost.com

FORMER NBA REF BLASTS OFFICIATING




By FRED KERBER

You must be registered for see images


August 17, 2007 -- The former head of the NBA referees union and a league official for 26 years yesterday said rogue referee Tim Donaghy was able to slip through the cracks because refereeing has gotten worse and cited the final shot of Michael Jordan's Chicago Bulls career as an example where a player's reputation prevented a proper call.

Mike Mathis, who retired in 2001, said Donaghy's guilty plea in federal court to betting on games he officiated and supplying inside information to mob affiliates, came as "a stick of dynamite" to the league. But Mathis said, "another stick of dynamite should be utilized (to) clean the entire officiating office and start from scratch."

Mathis, who had been snared in the NBA officials' airline ticket scandal in the late 1990's, has been loudly critical of NBA officiating. Mathis charged too many supervisors are unqualified and that referees are hired based on who, not what, they know.

Though angrily denouncing Donaghy's actions, Mathis referenced the pivotal shot in Game 6 of the 1998 Finals by Jordan against the Utah Jazz that gave the Bulls their sixth and final championship in the Jordan era. Many observers maintain Jordan committed an offensive foul, but it was not called because of Jordan's stature and reputation.

"Refereeing has gone downhill," said Mathis, who runs the Mathis Foundation that works with and supplies scholarships for foster kids in Cincinnati. "Remember when Jordan hit that winning shot? I'm going to give you exactly what the commentators said: 'What a great move by Michael.' Was that a great move or was that an offensive foul? There was no question it was a push-off. No buts about it. The only buts you can have is, 'Well, it was Michael Jordan.' That was a defining moment.
"The video tape would never lie," Mathis said. "Here's what could have happened. The referee makes the call and it's, 'No, no. How could he do that? It was Michael Jordan.' "

If what Mathis called "funny stuff" went on in games Donaghy worked, it likely went unnoticed because of the level officiating has hit.

"(We) accept unbelievable, mediocre and bad officiating," Mathis said. "The commentator says, 'He must have seen something we didn't.' No, he didn't. It's either he's guessing, he's incompetent or there's some funny stuff going on."

Donaghy admitted to federal officials that he often supplied inside information to gamblers, alerting them to what referees were working particular games. He said he was aware how some referees interacted with certain players.

"The first thing I went through was shock," Mathis said when he learned of Donaghy's transgressions. "Then I got angry. Then I said, 'What caused this?' I'm not talking about the gambling, I'm talking about the deterioration of the refereeing that has allowed this to go undetected. . . . If he was doing the funny stuff, I'm not saying he would have been caught but we might have had a chance, because all of a sudden he's standing out by calling all these calls." [email protected]
 

SASpursfan

Veteran
Joined
May 26, 2005
Posts
125
Reaction score
0
Its beautiful in that it proved how big of a mess that the officiating in the league, which most of us as NBA fans knew for the most part anyways.

I doubt if even the casual fan knows about the referee (single) even knows about the scandal.
 

azirish

ASFN Lifer
Joined
Jan 26, 2007
Posts
3,876
Reaction score
0
Location
Sun City
Its beautiful in that it proved how big of a mess that the officiating in the league, which most of us as NBA fans knew for the most part anyways.

I doubt if even the casual fan knows about the referee (single) even knows about the scandal.

I'm not sure who this "silent majority" of average fans is, but I think this contempt for them is unwarrented. They've known there something messed up with officiating for a long time. It is part of the reason the NBA remains a distant third in professional team sports support.
 

SASpursfan

Veteran
Joined
May 26, 2005
Posts
125
Reaction score
0
In my past 10 years of reading various NBA forums (including Spurs)Ive noticed a pattern of the losing team tending to claim that playoff games were "fixed".
 

Cheesebeef

ASFN IDOL
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Posts
88,928
Reaction score
62,023
I'm not sure who this "silent majority" of average fans is, but I think this contempt for them is unwarrented. They've known there something messed up with officiating for a long time. It is part of the reason the NBA remains a distant third in professional team sports support.

a distant third? Anyone know the ratings/tv deals comparison between the two? i might be wrong here - not sure, but if anything, I think overall baseball and basketball are probably distant only in comparison to the king NFL, but somewhat close to each other.
 
Last edited:

azirish

ASFN Lifer
Joined
Jan 26, 2007
Posts
3,876
Reaction score
0
Location
Sun City
a distant third? Is the NBA really behind baseball as far as anything is concerned? Anyone know the ratings/tv deals comparison between the two?

I don't. Still, considering the dismal ratings of the NBA finals, I think I'm on firm ground.

In terms of attendance, it is clearly unequal in that baseball plays in much larger facilities and plays twice as many games. But in other measures such as newpaper inches, time devoted by radio talk shows, etc.; I'm pretty sure the ratings follow. The NBA has struggled to regain even their status following the strike year of a decade ago.
 

CaptainInsano

Registered User
Joined
Jul 30, 2005
Posts
1,516
Reaction score
0
In my past 10 years of reading various NBA forums (including Spurs)Ive noticed a pattern of the losing team tending to claim that playoff games were "fixed".

Pfft, that doesn't make every single claim of possible fixing the exact same though. Suns fans kind of have a huge podium to speak from now after ridiculous suspensions + this very exact ref showing he screwed the suns over every time (ridiculous loss to the knicks in 05-06 season with I believe 4 of our players fouling out, only loss to lakers in the playoffs, loss to the spurs in what was called one of the worst officiated playoff games) so I hope you can just get the point and lose the homerism.

But I am sure as a spurs fan you consider it all exactly the same.

*edit: And the worst part is it seems donagy was quite the wily trickster, in many of the games he rigged he himself didn't do most of the bad calls but seemed to have a fellow official in on the scheme so it didn't seem obvious that he as a sole ref was fixing. In the knicks game he made a lot of bad calls but most of them were made by another ref in the game. Same thing with the heat/knicks, same thing with the spurs game where we see Eddie F. Rush just having a blast screwing everything over. Just like the article says about him having his crews in on it.
 
Last edited:

Cheesebeef

ASFN IDOL
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Posts
88,928
Reaction score
62,023
Pfft, that doesn't make every single claim of possible fixing the exact same though. Suns fans kind of have a huge podium to speak from now after ridiculous suspensions + this very exact ref showing he screwed the suns over every time (ridiculous loss to the knicks in 05-06 season with I believe 4 of our players fouling out, only loss to lakers in the playoffs, loss to the spurs in what was called one of the worst officiated playoff games) so I hope you can just get the point and lose the homerism.

But I am sure as a spurs fan you consider it all exactly the same.

he reffed the Suns win at LA.
 

Cheesebeef

ASFN IDOL
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Posts
88,928
Reaction score
62,023
Are you sure about that? I remember that game being the one we lost, not that the officiating was really any bad though but I remember it making me suspicious.

i'm pretty sure. i think someone referenced it earlier in the thread.
 

CaptainInsano

Registered User
Joined
Jul 30, 2005
Posts
1,516
Reaction score
0
i'm pretty sure. i think someone referenced it earlier in the thread.

Yeah you are right, you have to wonder though, if he did indeed stop before that and the spurs series then why exactly was Eddie Rush so absolutely abysmal in game 3?

I guess nothing is ever really easy to figure out, but it seemed obvious that rush was up to something.
 

SASpursfan

Veteran
Joined
May 26, 2005
Posts
125
Reaction score
0
Are you sure about that? I remember that game being the one we lost, not that the officiating was really any bad though but I remember it making me suspicious.
I believe he did, according to what laker fans have to say. My advice is to look at your team and how the compare to the opponent and if u realy believe that there is a conspiracy then continue your argument... Cause I know many fans claimed conspiracy theories when SA was losing to LA.. yet the fact was... LA was a better team than SA.
 

Cheesebeef

ASFN IDOL
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Posts
88,928
Reaction score
62,023
I believe he did, according to what laker fans have to say. My advice is to look at your team and how the compare to the opponent and if u realy believe that there is a conspiracy then continue your argument... Cause I know many fans claimed conspiracy theories when SA was losing to LA.. yet the fact was... LA was a better team than SA.

i'd say the difference between the two examples that you're giving are pretty simple though - when the Lakers beat you guys two years in a row en route to titles numbero dos and tres, they just kicked the every living crap out the Spurs, just crushing the Spurs in a 4-0 sweep and putting them away quite handily with a 4-1 stomping, as opposed to a very hotly contested series between the Spurs and Suns this year (I don't think anyone's talking about 2005 when the Suns were clearly outclassed) where a KNOWN crooked ref was part of a game that was universally labeled as horrific from a referee standpoint in favor of the Spurs. None of that was going on in the Spurs-Lakers series when the Spurs kept getting beat. I think that's where the fuel for the fire comes for Suns fans -the fact that it was a close series and there was a shady ref involved with a very weird game.

that being said, I think the Suns screwed themselves in the Spurs series this year more than anything else with the suspensions (which WERE justified as much as it pains me to say it). I just think bottom line is we don't know who the better team on the floor is, but mentally the Spurs still have that edge, being able to push us until we burst. Championship teams can't let their emotions get the best ofthem like that no matter how hard you're being pushed. When you're able to rise above, only then will you be champs.
 

CaptainInsano

Registered User
Joined
Jul 30, 2005
Posts
1,516
Reaction score
0
I believe he did, according to what laker fans have to say. My advice is to look at your team and how the compare to the opponent and if u realy believe that there is a conspiracy then continue your argument... Cause I know many fans claimed conspiracy theories when SA was losing to LA.. yet the fact was... LA was a better team than SA.

Is that really the truth? Derek nailing that 3, while a great moment, doesn't mean that LA was bonafide better then SA, it seemed pretty close and clutch shots either happen or they don't. That to me means that both teams are almost equal or very close, and a few key moments of luck/clutchiness (dereks 3) or stupid mistakes (when I think sheed left horry open for that 3) decides it.

Problem is though, those are what usually decides those close series between two equal or almost equal teams which is great and all but guess what?

Suns never even got the chance, because of an absolute garbage rule.
 

CaptainInsano

Registered User
Joined
Jul 30, 2005
Posts
1,516
Reaction score
0
i'd say the difference between the two examples that you're giving are pretty simple though - when the Lakers beat you guys two years in a row en route to titles numbero dos and tres, they just kicked the every living crap out the Spurs, just crushing the Spurs in a 4-0 sweep and putting them away quite handily with a 4-1 stomping, as opposed to a very hotly contested series between the Spurs and Suns this year

In the 2004 series it was 4-2, but that doesn't tell the whole story.

Spurs had homecourt, won first 2, lakers stormed back and won 2 on their own HC. So everything seems even.

Game 5 though, fisher nails that 3, and it was so cold and momentous that it just completely took the sails out of SA. If fisher wouldn't have hit that 3 it would have been the complete opposite, with Spurs winning it 4-2 instead of the lakers.
 

Cheesebeef

ASFN IDOL
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Posts
88,928
Reaction score
62,023
In the 2004 series it was 4-2, but that doesn't tell the whole story.

Spurs had homecourt, won first 2, lakers stormed back and won 2 on their own HC. So everything seems even.

Game 5 though, fisher nails that 3, and it was so cold and momentous that it just completely took the sails out of SA. If fisher wouldn't have hit that 3 it would have been the complete opposite, with Spurs winning it 4-2 instead of the lakers.

but i don't think he's talking about 2004 - I think he's talking about 2001/2, because in 2004 that was a series where both teams were pretty evenly matched and I actually think physically the Spurs WERE superior, but they were a tad bit mentally weaker than that Laker team and that's why they lost. They had they're foot on the Lakers throats going into Game 3 and just got the snot beat out of them twice in LA.

I mean, you can't complain conspiracy about Fisher's shot where your playing at home with your hometown time-keeper's hand on the trigger.
 

JCSunsfan

ASFN Icon
Joined
Oct 24, 2002
Posts
21,758
Reaction score
6,150
In my past 10 years of reading various NBA forums (including Spurs)Ive noticed a pattern of the losing team tending to claim that playoff games were "fixed".

Listen. I don't remember anyone on this board, or any other one that claimed any playoff games were fixed this year. They claimed they were extremely poorly reffed and the league office clearly lacked any imagination at all in dealing with the suspensions. There was a claim that San Antonio played dirty--and they did--but that does not intimate that the game is fixed.

In fact, a fix didn't make sense because of how detrimental a SA/Cleveland finals series was to the league as a whole.

The only time that the idea of a fix came up was when an NBA referree admitted it!

That's not sour grapes. That is fact. Its bad for everybody. We'll never know what could have happened, and San Antonio's championship this year--unfairly for them--will be clouded.
 
Last edited:

BC867

Long time Phoenician!
Joined
Sep 16, 2002
Posts
17,827
Reaction score
1,709
Location
NE Phoenix
...San Antonio's championship this year--unfairly for them--will be clouded.
It's not unfair at all if the refs let the Spurs get away with fouling, body slams, kicks to the groin, intentionally tripping, etc. -- which they did.
 

Mainstreet

Cruisin' Mainstreet
Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2003
Posts
113,290
Reaction score
52,921
It's not unfair at all if the refs let the Spurs get away with fouling, body slams, kicks to the groin, intentionally tripping, etc. -- which they did.

Your telling the truth BC867.
 

JCSunsfan

ASFN Icon
Joined
Oct 24, 2002
Posts
21,758
Reaction score
6,150
It's not unfair at all if the refs let the Spurs get away with fouling, body slams, kicks to the groin, intentionally tripping, etc. -- which they did.

They did all that and got away with it.

What is unfair to San Antonio is that crooked refs denied them the joy of having won the championship on an even playing field. This year's championship will always be look upon with suspicion (and it should be).

There is the possibility that they could have won it without the crooked referreeing, but we will never know.
 

YouJustGotSUNSD

Custom User Title!
Joined
Jun 6, 2007
Posts
5,168
Reaction score
0
They did all that and got away with it.

What is unfair to San Antonio is that crooked refs denied them the joy of having won the championship on an even playing field. This year's championship will always be look upon with suspicion (and it should be).

There is the possibility that they could have won it without the crooked referreeing, but we will never know.

Just because the refs dont have you on a tight leash doesnt mean you have to take advantage of it by kicking kneeing and bodyslamming

wouldnt that be like having pity for convicted bank robbers who wiped out a bank that had unlocked doors?
 
Top