PDA

View Full Version : Former Referee Donaghy: Raps are up against Nets, and referees!!!



MoneyBall20
04-22-2014, 01:43 PM
Disgraced former NBA referee Tim Donaghy is giving credence to Toronto Raptors fans who feel their team was victimized by biased officiating in game one of their NBA Eastern Conference playoff series against the Brooklyn Nets last Saturday.

Donaghy, who was an NBA official from 1994-2007 before being fired and later imprisoned for betting on games he officiated, appeared Tuesday on The Jeff Blair Show on Sportsnet 590 The Fan. He told Blair why he believes the Raptors are at a disadvantage in the series.


Here is the whole interview of former Referee Donaghy with Jeff Blair
Really interesting interview, I'm not surprised.
League has always p@#!@d on the raptors,proof is in the pudding.


http://pmd.fan590.com/audio_on_demand-3/Tim-Donaghy-with-Jeff-Blair-jb-20140422-Interview.mp3


Courtesy: Sportsnet



“They’re not only going against the Brooklyn Nets but going against the league office,” Donaghy said. “They have a very talented team and have to be that much better than the Brooklyn Nets. I have picked Brooklyn to win the series with (Paul) Pierce, (Kevin) Garnett, Joe Johnson and even Jason Kidd. When you look at the coaches – the referees are going to be more active to talk and respond to (Kidd) over (Raptors coach) Dwane Casey.”

“What they do is they actually send in a representative from the league office to sit down with the referees at an 11 o’clock meeting in the morning where they go over game film,” Donaghy said. “They will show the referees what they want called, what they want them to concentrate on, what they feel needs to be called or let go in a series to avoid any problems. With that, you would leave the room and say to yourself one team is put at an advantage or disadvantage.

“In this situation, Brooklyn would be put at an advantage. A Brooklyn-Miami matchup would bring great ratings and that’s what this is all about for the NBA and the league offices – bringing in as many dollars as they can.”

“Some of the things that the league does and continues to do puts these teams at a disadvantage — like the Toronto Raptors — because moving forward they won’t bring in the big dollars for the league. It’s terrible for the fans (of) Toronto. They go and support that team but really they’re going to have trouble moving on based on talent and what takes place on the floor when they’re really going against the refs and the league, along with the Nets.”

“As a referee, you get paid an enormous amount of money as (you) advance in rounds,” he said. “You’re bring graded in every way you’re officiated. And you’re going to be graded on what they want you to call. So if they say ‘Kyle Lowry is hand-checking Deron Williams and we need that called’, you’re certainly going to call it. If you let something go, you’re going to be dinged with a missed call.

“If you’re going to continue to progress up the ladder and make more money and gain status like Joey Crawford and Dick Bavetta, you’re going to do what they want.”

“It started with Michael Jordan,” he explained. “The referees used to tell the younger referees that if Jordan goes to the hole and if there’s a crowd in there then just blow the whistle. That’s what the refs are programmed (to do) – to give that star player the benefit of the doubt. Even when he commits a foul, if you can give a foul to another player in that area – that’s what you’re told to do.”

“When I look at refs for tonight’s game for example… if you’re putting Gary Zielinski and David Jones in an arena like Portland where the fans are very boisterous and come down on you at every call, then that home team will have an advantage. They’re what we consider to be in the referee world kind of like homer refs. They don’t like to go against the tough crowd.

“This isn’t a knock on Toronto or their fans, but they don’t have that type of crowd. If they did, I would say Toronto would be in good shape tonight.”

BALLER R
04-22-2014, 02:00 PM
So the end there is he saying the crowd needs to get at the refs more?

killersweet
04-22-2014, 02:01 PM
As much as I like to believe this, this guy has no credibility.

Freakazoid
04-22-2014, 02:08 PM
Donaghy is an opportunistic moron. For an "insider", his handicap record is atrocious.

FriedTofuz
04-22-2014, 02:12 PM
post it in the NBA forum for others to see this too

pebloemer
04-22-2014, 02:14 PM
I hate this sub-story of unfair refereeing being a disadvantage to Toronto in this series. It also seems very fan and media driven. I really didn't see anything egregious in the refereeing last game to indicate that there is going to be an unfair bias. I'm not saying it won't happen, but using it as an excuse and making a big deal about it when it hasn't actually happened (yet) is tiring. The guys playing the game control far more than the referees. Anyways, if the conversation bothers me so much I should probably just not click on threads like these and ignore the comments that frustrate me. Normally I would do that just fine, but the fact that I enjoy consuming Toronto sports media and the fact that it is currently saturated with this storyline is making it difficult.

mike_noodles
04-22-2014, 03:01 PM
Jeff Blair's a goofball too. Figures he would be the one doing the interview. I would take this with grain of salt. Disgruntled former employee being interviewed is never a good idea.

BHF
04-22-2014, 03:06 PM
NBA is a business first basketball second so anything is possible.

lajoie
04-22-2014, 03:09 PM
Lol at anyone who believes anything that comes out of Donaghy's mouth

LanceUpperCut
04-22-2014, 03:27 PM
Donaghy is a grease ball but like Canseco and the guy who accused Lance of doping they were right in many ways.

I just don't think the Raps lost at all in game 1 cause of reffing I just think it was a bad game especially by Amir, DD and Ross. Really Jonas was the only guy that had a real good game. I'm just scared moving forward if we see some favoritism especially in a tight game.

bucketss
04-22-2014, 04:08 PM
he lost credibility when he said we don't have that type of crowd, lmao, we were screaming "bull ****" at the first wrong call.

Sly Guy
04-22-2014, 04:18 PM
he lost credibility when he said we don't have that type of crowd, lmao, we were screaming "bull ****" at the first wrong call.

pretty much. I think we got the short end of the stick with the officiating in game 1, especially down the stretch, but the nets still deserved to win that game.

MoneyBall20
04-22-2014, 04:28 PM
Sorry I couldn't respond sooner,kinda at work.
Yes I agree with most of u about Donaghy,no way u would take his words since what he has done,however their is merit 2 his contradiction of the league it self,it is a money first business and raptors get slighted,bc well they aren't the money making machine for the league,which is bs..
Anyway I could go for hours with this topic,but don't have time.
I would love 2 c this interview shown on a big screen at air canada center,it would be interesting how the fans would take it at game..it would be nasty,maybe they should,stick it 2 espn and usa market.


P.S

F@!# Brooklyn!!!

GodsSon
04-22-2014, 07:07 PM
Lol at anyone who believes anything that comes out of Donaghy's mouth

People thought Galileo was crazy too when he insisted the Earth was round...

The NBA is a business, so I don't buy the fact that he was just a "rogue ref"; as a business, they're going to look out for their own best interests. What will be more profitable in the US? Miami Vs Toronto, or Miami vs BKN?

Freakazoid
04-22-2014, 08:40 PM
Sorry I couldn't respond sooner,kinda at work.
Yes I agree with most of u about Donaghy,no way u would take his words since what he has done,however their is merit 2 his contradiction of the league it self,it is a money first business and raptors get slighted,bc well they aren't the money making machine for the league,which is bs..
Anyway I could go for hours with this topic,but don't have time.
I would love 2 c this interview shown on a big screen at air canada center,it would be interesting how the fans would take it at game..it would be nasty,maybe they should,stick it 2 espn and usa market.


P.S

F@!# Brooklyn!!!




People thought Galileo was crazy too when he insisted the Earth was round...

The NBA is a business, so I don't buy the fact that he was just a "rogue ref"; as a business, they're going to look out for their own best interests. What will be more profitable in the US? Miami Vs Toronto, or Miami vs BKN?

K, people need to stop throwing out "it's a business" statements as if it's a meaningful argument.

First off, the NBA makes absolutely no money off of any rating differences. They already have a preset contract with ESPN/Turner Sports based off of projected values. They make ~680 million from the networks whether it's Miami vs Toronto, Miami vs Brooklyn or Milwaukee vs Atlanta. Only ESPN/TNT loses out when you have a Spurs vs Cavs final.

So in order for them to truly manipulate profit, they have to inflate their ratings by increasing market saturation and brand growth for future negotiations with networks, sponsors, local managers etc. They do this by forcing Milwaukee to upgrade their facilities, investing overseas (look at the number of international sponsors the NBA has) etc.

Even then, these contracts are hardly ever decided by ratings. If they were, MLSE wouldn't have invested in a new stadium.

ink
04-22-2014, 09:04 PM
Sorry I couldn't respond sooner,kinda at work.
Yes I agree with most of u about Donaghy,no way u would take his words since what he has done,however their is merit 2 his contradiction of the league it self,it is a money first business and raptors get slighted,bc well they aren't the money making machine for the league,which is bs..
Anyway I could go for hours with this topic,but don't have time.
I would love 2 c this interview shown on a big screen at air canada center,it would be interesting how the fans would take it at game..it would be nasty,maybe they should,stick it 2 espn and usa market.


P.S

F@!# Brooklyn!!!




People thought Galileo was crazy too when he insisted the Earth was round...

The NBA is a business, so I don't buy the fact that he was just a "rogue ref"; as a business, they're going to look out for their own best interests. What will be more profitable in the US? Miami Vs Toronto, or Miami vs BKN?

K, people need to stop throwing out "it's a business" statements as if it's a meaningful argument.

First off, the NBA makes absolutely no money off of any rating differences. They already have a preset contract with ESPN/Turner Sports based off of projected values. They make ~680 million from the networks whether it's Miami vs Toronto, Miami vs Brooklyn or Milwaukee vs Atlanta. Only ESPN/TNT loses out when you have a Spurs vs Cavs final.

So in order for them to truly manipulate profit, they have to inflate their ratings by increasing market saturation and brand growth for future negotiations with networks, sponsors, local managers etc. They do this by forcing Milwaukee to upgrade their facilities, investing overseas (look at the number of international sponsors the NBA has) etc.

Even then, these contracts are hardly ever decided by ratings. If they were, MLSE wouldn't have invested in a new stadium.

Thank you.

NBA_Starter
04-22-2014, 10:05 PM
That is a fact!

Raps08-09 Champ
04-22-2014, 10:23 PM
Donaghy has said a lot of things that turned out to be lies. Like over 90% of them. The only true things were about himself.

ink
04-22-2014, 10:26 PM
Two games done and no bias I could see.

Seems donaghy is the one with the bias and can't see the world any other way. No wonder he sucked as a ref.

Raps08-09 Champ
04-22-2014, 10:38 PM
Yea. People already have bias against the NBA (even though they are completely different entity from refs) and they can't see the world any other way but thinking the league is rigged.

MoneyBall20
04-23-2014, 12:22 AM
Yea. People already have bias against the NBA (even though they are completely different entity from refs) and they can't see the world any other way but thinking the league is rigged.


U might be right,but tonight's game..wow...there were some calls that would make ure head shake.
Love Jack Armstrong,he couldn't believe the crap that was going on.

Abdul Mutalib
04-23-2014, 12:54 AM
i dont think its the nba plotting against the raps in particular tbh... i think some vet teams like the nets kno how to work the refs and connive them to make certain calls and when and where to get away with calls. Im not sure where i've heard it before (maybe in another thread or somewhere else entirely), but some vet players change the style of play depending on the which refs call the game b/c they kno how each ref operates.

the net's exp is allowing for them to maintain composure in critical points of the game and not buckling under pressure which raps on the hand are letting overwhelm them leading to costly turn-overs. we're lucky that the turn-vers didnt lead to more points and net's are still missing many 3's.

playoffs are a game of adjustments and x-factors and every game its different.

JC_
04-23-2014, 02:50 AM
I think Donaghy likes the spotlight but we all know that some of the stuff he mentions is true. We see the politics involved in certain calls when we watch games whether we realize it or not.

B2B
04-23-2014, 07:55 AM
K, people need to stop throwing out "it's a business" statements as if it's a meaningful argument.

First off, the NBA makes absolutely no money off of any rating differences. They already have a preset contract with ESPN/Turner Sports based off of projected values. They make ~680 million from the networks whether it's Miami vs Toronto, Miami vs Brooklyn or Milwaukee vs Atlanta. Only ESPN/TNT loses out when you have a Spurs vs Cavs final.

So in order for them to truly manipulate profit, they have to inflate their ratings by increasing market saturation and brand growth for future negotiations with networks, sponsors, local managers etc. They do this by forcing Milwaukee to upgrade their facilities, investing overseas (look at the number of international sponsors the NBA has) etc.

Even then, these contracts are hardly ever decided by ratings. If they were, MLSE wouldn't have invested in a new stadium.

You talk about things that increase ratings like stadiums/investments etc.. mention the large 680mil Network deal & completely avoid the quality of product self.

How do you accomplish what you state if the product is not thriving with interest/ratings?.

Explain to people why Stern fined Pops for resting his players on a national spot light, when it's not against the rules & you say the NBA doesn't concern themselves with ratings to take measures to assure them, more less for one game?.

680mil invested by a Network, I'm sure the league has no interest in ratings because they already have a contract in place.

B2B
04-23-2014, 08:14 AM
I think Donaghy likes the spotlight but we all know that some of the stuff he mentions is true. We see the politics involved in certain calls when we watch games whether we realize it or not.

Donaghy is a liar, gambler & can't be trusted.

Even though his words are meshing with what you are seeing, you definitely can't take him for his word. You didn't see anyyythinnng, this multi billiondollar business is completely clean in their intentions. lol

Ignorance truly is bliss.

Bramaca
04-23-2014, 08:27 AM
U might be right,but tonight's game..wow...there were some calls that would make ure head shake.
Love Jack Armstrong,he couldn't believe the crap that was going on.

Where you watching a different game or just listening to Jack and keeping your eyes closed? Jack has been absolutely ridiculous with his homerism during the first two games. Sure there are bad calls every game but they went both ways pretty equally.

pebloemer
04-23-2014, 09:14 AM
Where you watching a different game or just listening to Jack and keeping your eyes closed? Jack has been absolutely ridiculous with his homerism during the first two games. Sure there are bad calls every game but they went both ways pretty equally.

I agree. I have long resigned myself to the fact that in order to appreciate NBA basketball, I have to accept the inherent fallibility of the officiating in the sport. It may be the most frustrating sport to follow based on its officiating. When those frustrations peak their head it is easy to put on the homer goggles and scream murder against the officials. Literally every team gets enraged with the officiating in the NBA.

With a veteran team like Brooklyn and an exciting potential matchup against Miami, it is easy to see where a bias could exist from the league, but I haven't seen anything in the first 2 games to indicate we've seen it.

Sly Guy
04-23-2014, 10:11 AM
Two games done and no bias I could see.

Seems donaghy is the one with the bias and can't see the world any other way. No wonder he sucked as a ref.

I kinda agree with you. I mean no fouls in the 4th of game one was kinda dodgy, but aside from that, I think it's been a reasonably officiated series so far. Yeah, there have been some really badly blown calls, but I'm not as impartial watching the games right now, and I can see how the nets might have had some argument on some non-calls on their side too.

If we lose the series, it's on the turnovers, not on the refs.

ScottFromCanada
04-23-2014, 11:11 AM
damn I just posted this on the main forum I thought it was a new story.

Freakazoid
04-23-2014, 12:36 PM
You talk about things that increase ratings like stadiums/investments etc.. mention the large 680mil Network deal & completely avoid the quality of product self.

How do you accomplish what you state if the product is not thriving with interest/ratings?.

Explain to people why Stern fined Pops for resting his players on a national spot light, when it's not against the rules & you say the NBA doesn't concern themselves with ratings to take measures to assure them, more less for one game?.

680mil invested by a Network, I'm sure the league has no interest in ratings because they already have a contract in place.

The quality of a product doesn't matter. NCIS is complete garbage and they have amazing ratings but that's besides the point. The NBA cares about ratings but they're not obsessed about them like NBC. They're more concerned about long term growth and what the long term projections say. Increasing interest in smaller markets increases brand worth more so than larger markets. Large market teams have existed for a longer time and are probably closer to reaching market saturation than the younger teams which are usually the small market teams. If they only cared about ratings, Stern wouldn't have vetoed the CP3 trade, he wouldn't have moved the Thunder to OK or the Grizzlies to Memphis or keeping the Kings in Sac. Vancouver and Seattle are some of the largest markets in NA. Memphis, Sacramento and OK? Not so much.

Stern didn't fine Pops for resting his players, he fined Pops for not being genuine about resting his players. Pops "rested" Green. If Pops didn't rest Green, Stern wouldn't have fined him. Pops was essentially fined for poor sportsmanship. Maybe ratings had something to do with it but Pops has rested his players for decades so I don't see how that is an example of Stern/NBA being influenced by ratings. But everybody knew or had a feeling that Pops was just playing mind games on the Heat.

If you're an established form of entertainment that has a cult like following, you're not going to care about interim short falls. You would be more concerned about where the league is headed in 10, 20, 30 years. Not playoff series to playoff series. Billion dollar corporations aren't mom and pop stores, they don't do weekly inventories.

nycericanguy
04-23-2014, 01:03 PM
BS: it would have been very easy for the NBA to get the Knicks into the playoffs with another win or two... if they cared that much about ratings.

I don't get all this "ref's against TOR" stuff even BEFORE the series started.

Where is this idea coming from that people want to see the nets? even in NY hardly anyone cares about the nets. Check out the nets forum on here, it's completely dead compared to the TOR forum.

and nationally... i don't think people are dying to see a 38 year old KG or Pierce anymore...

B2B
04-23-2014, 02:26 PM
The quality of a product doesn't matter. NCIS is complete garbage and they have amazing ratings but that's besides the point. The NBA cares about ratings but they're not obsessed about them like NBC. They're more concerned about long term growth and what the long term projections say. Increasing interest in smaller markets increases brand worth more so than larger markets. Large market teams have existed for a longer time and are probably closer to reaching market saturation than the younger teams which are usually the small market teams. If they only cared about ratings, Stern wouldn't have vetoed the CP3 trade, he wouldn't have moved the Thunder to OK or the Grizzlies to Memphis or keeping the Kings in Sac. Vancouver and Seattle are some of the largest markets in NA. Memphis, Sacramento and OK? Not so much.

Why am I not surprised with this response when in fact my whole point is about the quality of product/officiating. The degradation of product/(contest) to bolster ratings by catering to a demographic as you highlighted with your NCIS comment.

Do people like garbage or are you saying you don't like the show while others do?.

Sounds to me as a person who wants a better product out of the NBA in terms of no bias (fair contest), it's my NCIS.


Stern didn't fine Pops for resting his players, he fined Pops for not being genuine about resting his players. Pops "rested" Green. If Pops didn't rest Green, Stern wouldn't have fined him. Pops was essentially fined for poor sportsmanship. Maybe ratings had something to do with it but Pops has rested his players for decades so I don't see how that is an example of Stern/NBA being influenced by ratings. But everybody knew or had a feeling that Pops was just playing mind games on the Heat.

If you're an established form of entertainment that has a cult like following, you're not going to care about interim short falls. You would be more concerned about where the league is headed in 10, 20, 30 years. Not playoff series to playoff series. Billion dollar corporations aren't mom and pop stores, they don't do weekly inventories.

Why does Pop have to be genuine in who he chooses to rest?.

Spurs almost won that game, you know how silly it would look to fine a coach who won a game because he rested his "star players" on a national broadcast.

I'm not boiling this down to one particular series or team, you are. I'm referencing the series to an example of the reffing "code"/bias to promote a stars league/interest, which will affect this one particular series that has a team of stars, facing one without.

ink
04-23-2014, 02:38 PM
^ this seems to be veering off topic.

Byronicle
04-23-2014, 02:41 PM
BS: it would have been very easy for the NBA to get the Knicks into the playoffs with another win or two... if they cared that much about ratings.

I don't get all this "ref's against TOR" stuff even BEFORE the series started.

Where is this idea coming from that people want to see the nets? even in NY hardly anyone cares about the nets. Check out the nets forum on here, it's completely dead compared to the TOR forum.

and nationally... i don't think people are dying to see a 38 year old KG or Pierce anymore...

I don't believe the games are fixed but I do believe the refs give a lot of phantom calls to star players

A lot of the times refs don't blow a whistle until after they see if the player made the basket or not

If you do not believe that refs give superstar, phantom calls or another call to make up for a ball call previously whistled then you are naive

And the reason why the Raptor fans believe this is because we had 4 "official NBA apologies" issued last season on blown referee calls.

We are also watching from a Canadian broadcasting, where they replay these questionable calls and we see how bad they are. I've watched games from the states before and there was an obvious bias. Our game commentators have a reputation of being borderline neutral, some of our fans actually hate that about them.

B2B
04-23-2014, 02:45 PM
^ this seems to be veering off topic.

How am I off topic?.

ink
04-23-2014, 02:46 PM
^ this seems to be veering off topic.

How am I off topic?.

The thread is about the Raptors and Nets. Officiating in that context.

B2B
04-23-2014, 02:49 PM
I don't believe the games are fixed but I do believe the refs give a lot of phantom calls to star players

A lot of the times refs don't blow a whistle until after they see if the player made the basket or not

If you do not believe that refs give superstar, phantom calls or another call to make up for a ball call previously whistled then you are naive

And the reason why the Raptor fans believe this is because we had 4 "official NBA apologies" issued last season on blown referee calls.

We are also watching from a Canadian broadcasting, where they replay these questionable calls and we see how bad they are. I've watched games from the states before and there was an obvious bias. Our game commentators have a reputation of being borderline neutral, some of our fans actually hate that about them.

What is the difference?

It's not a level playing field when you get benefit because of the name on your jersey.

What I'm describing as stated off topic is the purpose behind the bias which is demographic. Casual fans over purist which leads to better ratings.

Don't people go tripping over their Nike Air Jordans over this.

JC_
04-23-2014, 03:03 PM
I don't get all this "ref's against TOR" stuff even BEFORE the series started.



I think it was mainly because the Raps have been known to get screwed over in the past. Complaining about it before the series starts at least brings more light to it ahead of time.

3RDASYSTEM
04-23-2014, 03:15 PM
As much as I like to believe this, this guy has no credibility.

no cred but he told the ref side of the story like CANSECO told the roid side and they all said he is a rat and has no cred until the Mitchell report leaked and then he just became a disliked person by many associated with the roid era

I guess STERN has plenty of cred since he hired him and then said it was a rogue ref

the former rogue commissioner knew how to work the media, like selig does in baseball, the roid culture that he nurtured in and then went and tried to act like he cared and did an investigation on the players he let bring in the roid culture, talk about having your cake+ice cream+gifts all in one

how does selig or stern have any credibility since they did hire those refs/players?

3RDASYSTEM
04-23-2014, 03:20 PM
BS: it would have been very easy for the NBA to get the Knicks into the playoffs with another win or two... if they cared that much about ratings.

I don't get all this "ref's against TOR" stuff even BEFORE the series started.

Where is this idea coming from that people want to see the nets? even in NY hardly anyone cares about the nets. Check out the nets forum on here, it's completely dead compared to the TOR forum.

and nationally... i don't think people are dying to see a 38 year old KG or Pierce anymore...

because his story always repeats itself over and over with slight adjustments

nobody wants to see raptors against HEAT, now if it was 01' air Canada CARTER then that's a diff. story, its no diff. other sports, legends are legends, raptors have none, and BKN has 2 on the court, plus one of the best PG's of his era and a legendary on the court now turned coach in KIDD, and they struggled early and swept HEAT 4-0 reg. season

That rogue ref sure do know what the hell he is talking about

he is the CANSECO of nba refs, legendary

killersweet
04-23-2014, 03:23 PM
no cred but he told the ref side of the story like CANSECO told the roid side and they all said he is a rat and has no cred until the Mitchell report leaked and then he just became a disliked person by many associated with the roid era

I guess STERN has plenty of cred since he hired him and then said it was a rogue ref

the former rogue commissioner knew how to work the media, like selig does in baseball, the roid culture that he nurtured in and then went and tried to act like he cared and did an investigation on the players he let bring in the roid culture, talk about having your cake+ice cream+gifts all in one

how does selig or stern have any credibility since they did hire those refs/players?

I don't think we were talking about Stern or Selig's credibility. To me lot of the stuff Donaghy spewed out was crap and stuff he has stated have been proven to be lies. He picks and chooses his spots to create controversy. Raptors always had a reputation of getting poor calls and of course Donaghy comes out guns blazing.

3RDASYSTEM
04-23-2014, 03:25 PM
I don't believe the games are fixed but I do believe the refs give a lot of phantom calls to star players

A lot of the times refs don't blow a whistle until after they see if the player made the basket or not

If you do not believe that refs give superstar, phantom calls or another call to make up for a ball call previously whistled then you are naive

And the reason why the Raptor fans believe this is because we had 4 "official NBA apologies" issued last season on blown referee calls.

We are also watching from a Canadian broadcasting, where they replay these questionable calls and we see how bad they are. I've watched games from the states before and there was an obvious bias. Our game commentators have a reputation of being borderline neutral, some of our fans actually hate that about them.

fixed=phantom

hand in hand

JORDAN had plenty of phantom=fixed calls+GAMES

along with others but he was the media nba cash cow so it somewhat started with him but even ALCINDOR got that phantom call treatment, go ask LAIMBEER

Freakazoid
04-23-2014, 03:45 PM
Why am I not surprised with this response when in fact my whole point is about the quality of product/officiating. The degradation of product/(contest) to bolster ratings by catering to a demographic as you highlighted with your NCIS comment.

Do people like garbage or are you saying you don't like the show while others do?.

Sounds to me as a person who wants a better product out of the NBA in terms of no bias (fair contest), it's my NCIS.

It was an offhanded comment that had nothing to do with my argument but I'm not surprised you chose to focus on and analyze theatrics rather than content. My point is/was that when you have a product that people already like, you don't continue to beat it to death in an already established culture. You look outwardly to try and establish a culture of interest. This is how they manipulate ratings.

I referenced NCIS because when a product has a HUGE cult-like following, you're not concerned about where you're at now, you're concerned about where you're headed. Refs manipulating games for ratings and rigging drafts is too short term and myopic for a billion dollar industry.


Why does Pop have to be genuine in who he chooses to rest?.

Spurs almost won that game, you know how silly it would look to fine a coach who won a game because he rested his "star players" on a national broadcast.

I'm not boiling this down to one particular series or team, you are. I'm referencing the series to an example of the reffing "code"/bias to promote a stars league/interest, which will affect this one particular series that has a team of stars, facing one without.

There's something called integrity and sportsmanship? A while back, you were pissed because you bought tickets and assumed the Raptors were going to start tanking. I don't see Stern's reaction being any different in that regard.

You continuously parrot the idea that certain series are favoured because they have better ratings. I'm addressing that corporations aren't myopic in their vision and limit themselves in such a manner.

3RDASYSTEM
04-23-2014, 04:31 PM
Its quite the comedy when rogue refs/players come out and speak on something not fair or of like being a slave still and people just brush it off as frustration

then go on to believe that multi billionaire owners are saving 10million dollars by releasing a player then going on and spending 80mill combined on 3 players, see BRONCOS for example after releasing CHAMP to save 10mill before going on crazy spend spree

i'll take the word of a player/ref over the commissioners any day of my lifetime, and just to think that rogue ref never called stern a rogue commish, or did he behind closed doors?

ink
04-23-2014, 04:34 PM
Its quite the comedy when rogue refs/players come out and speak on something not fair or of like being a slave still and people just brush it off as frustration

then go on to believe that multi billionaire owners are saving 10million dollars by releasing a player then going on and spending 80mill combined on 3 players, see BRONCOS for example after releasing CHAMP to save 10mill before going on crazy spend spree

i'll take the word of a player/ref over the commissioners any day of my lifetime, and just to think that rogue ref never called stern a rogue commish, or did he behind closed doors?

Since the thread is about Nets-Raptors officiating, I don't think anyone has found any examples from this series that support Donaghy's insinuations. The rest is still just speculation and suspicion.

3RDASYSTEM
04-23-2014, 04:37 PM
I don't think we were talking about Stern or Selig's credibility. To me lot of the stuff Donaghy spewed out was crap and stuff he has stated have been proven to be lies. He picks and chooses his spots to create controversy. Raptors always had a reputation of getting poor calls and of course Donaghy comes out guns blazing.

everybody who is scorned or felt slighted will pick and choose what to say since they obviously know so much

we were talking about the rogue ref and I mentioned the rogue commish so its hand in hand, just like the roid issue in nfl with goodell

why did stern and selig elect to pick and choose when saying its isolated rogue ref and the Mitchell report? trying to cover they *** or really trying to solve what they created? it doesn't matter because they are both at the top of the nba/mlb food chain, they cut the checks and monitor players, you think players just get wired for nba televised games?(don't fool yourself twice)

you think owners don't know who players hang out with and how they grew up before drafting/scouting? you have no clue how rogued up it really is then

put it like this, I know professional players who spark that green before actual games, and they were doing it also in nfl in the 70's in playoffs, cocaine lines that is

like CANSECO said after the mitch report was done he said what about AROD and the whole world went nuts on him and saying this and that and the third about how he has lost his mind

its basically the same thing you are trying to say about the rogue nba ref, he is the CANSECO of his trade so he has some clout, especially for stern to acknowledge it as isolated rogue incident

shame on stern for that lame of a move, selig as well with the weak *** mitch report

Kinglorious
04-23-2014, 04:40 PM
I haven't seen anything yet that substantiates his "claims." But I'll wait. lol

B2B
04-23-2014, 04:44 PM
It was an offhanded comment that had nothing to do with my argument but I'm not surprised you chose to focus on and analyze theatrics rather than content. My point is/was that when you have a product that people already like, you don't continue to beat it to death in an already established culture. You look outwardly to try and establish a culture of interest. This is how they manipulate ratings.

I referenced NCIS because when a product has a HUGE cult-like following, you're not concerned about where you're at now, you're concerned about where you're headed. Refs manipulating games for ratings and rigging drafts is too short term and myopic for a billion dollar industry.

There's something called integrity and sportsmanship? A while back, you were pissed because you bought tickets and assumed the Raptors were going to start tanking. I don't see Stern's reaction being any different in that regard.

You continuously parrot the idea that certain series are favoured because they have better ratings. I'm addressing that corporations aren't myopic in their vision and limit themselves in such a manner.

You referenced NCIS & called it a garbage product with a cult like following.

In this post your saying the NBA as a product is something people already like & doesn't need improvement/refinement when they self have moved away from the physical era into the hand check error & a time where officials have greater control of the game than ever before.

Casual fans is where the interest/manipulation/ratings/money is at.

Once again I don't care if anyone shares my view, I ain't short sighted or stupid & have a tone of experience/knowledge where corruption is concerned.

Telling me corporations aren't nearsighted, proves nothing to me, however your knowledge & defense of large corporations does.

B2B
04-23-2014, 04:47 PM
A key factor that is being ignored is the NBA didn't out Donaghy, the FBI did.

With all the quality control in place, why was it an external entity that exposed this?.

ink
04-23-2014, 04:48 PM
A key factor that is being ignored is the NBA didn't out Donaghy, the FBI did.

With all the quality control in place, why was it an external entity that exposed this?.

Because he was able to hide what he was doing from his bosses, like most good cons do.

Back to the thread topic, he's conning us enough that we waste our time talking about conspiracy theories. But there doesn't seem to be any substance to this as there's no real evidence of any "fix" from the calls we've seen so far. Officiating has hardly been the difference, and as many in the thread have said, both teams are complaining about bad calls.

killersweet
04-23-2014, 04:50 PM
everybody who is scorned or felt slighted will pick and choose what to say since they obviously know so much

we were talking about the rogue ref and I mentioned the rogue commish so its hand in hand, just like the roid issue in nfl with goodell

why did stern and selig elect to pick and choose when saying its isolated rogue ref and the Mitchell report? trying to cover they *** or really trying to solve what they created? it doesn't matter because they are both at the top of the nba/mlb food chain, they cut the checks and monitor players, you think players just get wired for nba televised games?(don't fool yourself twice)

you think owners don't know who players hang out with and how they grew up before drafting/scouting? you have no clue how rogued up it really is then

put it like this, I know professional players who spark that green before actual games, and they were doing it also in nfl in the 70's in playoffs, cocaine lines that is

I am not saying people in the higher position are clean or ethical. These are cut throat businessmen. People claim Stern fixed drafts so that knicks get Ewing and Cavs get LBJ. but has this been proven with solid evidence? I bet on sports. Some of the outcomes are mind blowing. but until I have some evidence, I can't say this game was fixed and that's why I lost. The point is, unless we are part of the organization, we just have to go with whatever information comes out from people in the organization.

ink
04-23-2014, 04:52 PM
I am not saying people in the higher position are clean or ethical. These are cut throat businessmen. People claim Stern fixed drafts so that knicks get Ewing and Cavs get LBJ. but has this been proven with solid evidence? I bet on sports. Some of the outcomes are mind blowing. but until I have some evidence, I can't say this game was fixed and that's why I lost. The point is, unless we are part of the organization, we just have to go with whatever information comes out from people in the organization.

In the case of the two teams in this series, the better team won both times. Officiating had little effect on the outcome and neither team was favoured.

MoneyBall20
04-23-2014, 04:56 PM
Looks like other affiliates are starting 2 pick up on this story..ie..espn,fox,cbs.
I'm really looking forward 2 seeing how the officiating will be presented at Brooklyn.
Referees do read the news,so the spotlight is on them,now. Microscope just got bigger.
It will be interesting.

B2B
04-23-2014, 05:18 PM
Because he was able to hide what he was doing from his bosses, like most good cons do.

Back to the thread topic, he's conning us enough that we waste our time talking about conspiracy theories. But there doesn't seem to be any substance to this as there's no real evidence of any "fix" from the calls we've seen so far. Officiating has hardly been the difference, and as many in the thread have said, both teams are complaining about bad calls.

Con job.., he's trying to get back at the NBA by attacking it's integrity.

Let me tell you something, if their was not a problem with officials people would see him for the slime/liar/gambler that he is & NBA claims him to be..

ink
04-23-2014, 05:24 PM
Con job.., he's trying to get back at the NBA by attacking it's integrity.

Let me tell you something, if their was not a problem with officials people would see him for the slime/liar/gambler that he is & NBA claims him to be..

Correlation is not causation.

B2B
04-23-2014, 05:29 PM
Correlation is not causation.

I wasn't talking about causation in your post, I was referring to the fact that you think people are being conned & can't think for themselves to make sense out of nonsense.

ink
04-23-2014, 05:38 PM
I wasn't talking about causation in your post, I was referring to the fact that you think people are being conned & can't think for themselves to make sense out of nonsense.

You can have slimeball refs, big money league officials, and bad officiating, and all three are bad in their own way (depending on a person's opinion). But none of the three are necessarily the cause of any of the other.

And again, there are no examples from this series to support any claim of bias or favouritism toward any team.

The vets know the body angles to use to draw fouls, they know what fouls they can get away with (KG pushes off every play, etc.), but they are extremely veteran and know exactly how to work the situation. Seems that the players are the ones cheating to get the edge, and it's happening on a play to play basis.

The fact that officials are inconsistent in catching the cheating on the floor speaks to human error. There is no pattern and both sides have had complaints about calls in the first game.

Raps Insider 12
04-23-2014, 05:49 PM
Looks like other affiliates are starting 2 pick up on this story..ie..espn,fox,cbs.
I'm really looking forward 2 seeing how the officiating will be presented at Brooklyn.
Referees do read the news,so the spotlight is on them,now. Microscope just got bigger.
It will be interesting.


Good point and I think it will benefit the Raps.

Honestly, this is the least that Donaghy can do for the underdog teams. I thank him for opening this stinky unhealed ulcer.

So what if he is saying the truth or not...as what you said, the spotlight is now focus on the refs officiating the Raps vs. BKN game. The pressure is on them.

Maybe now, the feel good story team is more of a draw than the sexier pick.

B2B
04-23-2014, 06:04 PM
You can have slimeball refs, big money league officials, and bad officiating, and all three are bad in their own way (depending on a person's opinion). But none of the three are necessarily the cause of any of the other.

And again, there are no examples from this series to support any claim of bias or favouritism toward any team.

The vets know the body angles to use to draw fouls, they know what fouls they can get away with (KG pushes off every play, etc.), but they are extremely veteran and know exactly how to work the situation. Seems that the players are the ones cheating to get the edge, and it's happening on a play to play basis.

The fact that officials are inconsistent in catching the cheating on the floor speaks to human error. There is no pattern and both sides have had complaints about calls in the first game.

KG is known for his illegal screening, you telling me they just miss these calls because of his veteran savvy?.

That they are not looking for it, though it's known he's a huge violator of the rule?.

How many illegal screens has he been called for this series?.

Raptors have not played well enough or had a comfortable/large enough lead for anything to be blatantly obvious, wait till Nets backs are against the wall & their hands are forced.

ScottFromCanada
04-23-2014, 07:05 PM
Why isn't the NBA reffed by robots yet? No more human bias I want robots!

MoneyBall20
04-23-2014, 07:20 PM
Why isn't the NBA reffed by robots yet? No more human bias I want robots!



http://t.fod4.com/t/71bfd7d447/c480x270_23.jpg ;)

Freakazoid
04-23-2014, 07:24 PM
You referenced NCIS & called it a garbage product with a cult like following.

In this post your saying the NBA as a product is something people already like & doesn't need improvement/refinement when they self have moved away from the physical era into the hand check error & a time where officials have greater control of the game than ever before.

Casual fans is where the interest/manipulation/ratings/money is at.

Once again I don't care if anyone shares my view, I ain't short sighted or stupid & have a tone of experience/knowledge where corruption is concerned.

Telling me corporations aren't nearsighted, proves nothing to me, however your knowledge & defense of large corporations does.

I never said any of that. Instead you filled the blanks with your own biases and political beliefs.

I said that the quality of a product doesn't really matter when you already have an established base of customers. The greater point being that you don't need to manipulate games to inflate ratings or pander to networks because the ratings are already there. I'm not concerned about how these views/ratings originated because this whole culture of referee conspiracy is a largely modern phenomenon. I referenced NCIS because it, like the NBA already has an established presence and proven record of interest. As a result, they're not concerned with interim shortfalls unlike many critically acclaimed television programs, who despite acclaim, do not have the same presence or interest. This is why I overlook quality when I talk about growth and branding.

I never said that the NBA hasn't changed nor did I say that the NBA purposely degraded the product for more views. These are views that you instilled.

My point continues to be:

i) People like and play basketball.
ii) People that like basketball watch the NBA.
iii) The NBA encourages more people to like and play basketball.
iv) More people watch the NBA.
v) The more people projected to like basketball in 10 years = more valuable contracts.

Honestly, if you want to call me a corporate shill, don't beat around the bush. You probably think I have a personal vendetta against you. I really don't. I dislike seeing and participating in a culture of misinformation, so I confront it. The subject matter is irrelevant. This is to me and from my knowledge of recent scientific literature to be the best way to deal with such culture. I would LOVE to be paid for posting facts on the internet.

I think it's worth pointing out to you (not that you care or need validation) that when you're consistently proven wrong and when your confirmation bias is pointed out to you, you just know. No facts, just experience and anecdotal evidence. It must be great to be omniscient.

Freakazoid
04-23-2014, 07:31 PM
Why isn't the NBA reffed by robots yet? No more human bias I want robots!

Money and technology are still barriers. It's has proven to be quite difficult to implement in tennis and they deal with a lot less variables. A simple solution would be to have a referee review calls on the sidelines. That wouldn't solve no calls or judgement calls but it's a start.

ink
04-23-2014, 07:55 PM
You can have slimeball refs, big money league officials, and bad officiating, and all three are bad in their own way (depending on a person's opinion). But none of the three are necessarily the cause of any of the other.

And again, there are no examples from this series to support any claim of bias or favouritism toward any team.

The vets know the body angles to use to draw fouls, they know what fouls they can get away with (KG pushes off every play, etc.), but they are extremely veteran and know exactly how to work the situation. Seems that the players are the ones cheating to get the edge, and it's happening on a play to play basis.

The fact that officials are inconsistent in catching the cheating on the floor speaks to human error. There is no pattern and both sides have had complaints about calls in the first game.

KG is known for his illegal screening, you telling me they just miss these calls because of his veteran savvy?.

That they are not looking for it, though it's known he's a huge violator of the rule?.

How many illegal screens has he been called for this series?.

Raptors have not played well enough or had a comfortable/large enough lead for anything to be blatantly obvious, wait till Nets backs are against the wall & their hands are forced.

Indeed. Because the best way to prove there's a conspiracy (when there's no evidence) is to say it's coming.

Players, and kg is only one example, have a knack for cheating without getting caught, just like Donaghy did. There is plenty of documented video evidence of that and zero evidence of a league-orchestrated conspiracy.

Freakazoid
04-23-2014, 08:39 PM
I guess the NBA is more forward thinking than I give them credit for. Obviously, it's far from ideal but IMO a decent step towards the right direction. Wonder what other ideas they have in the works in regards to ref bias.

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2014-02-14/sports/chi-nba-turns-to-centralized-replay-review-next-season-20140214_1_nba-president-the-nba-next-season

Raps Insider 12
04-23-2014, 08:43 PM
I don't know what is the spread in Vegas between Miami and Charlotte.

Mr. Scott Foster is officiating, gotta love this official...;).

He is the inside man. Mr. Donaghy move over. Lol

B2B
04-24-2014, 12:44 AM
I never said any of that. Instead you filled the blanks with your own biases and political beliefs.


The quality of a product doesn't matter. NCIS is complete garbage and they have amazing ratings but that's besides the point.


I said that the quality of a product doesn't really matter when you already have an established base of customers. The greater point being that you don't need to manipulate games to inflate ratings or pander to networks because the ratings are already there. I'm not concerned about how these views/ratings originated because this whole culture of referee conspiracy is a largely modern phenomenon. I referenced NCIS because it, like the NBA already has an established presence and proven record of interest. As a result, they're not concerned with interim shortfalls unlike many critically acclaimed television programs, who despite acclaim, do not have the same presence or interest. This is why I overlook quality when I talk about growth and branding.

You don't think there is any possibility of lost interest if a product slips in quality?, they will forever maintain that established base of interest no matter the type product they put out.


I never said that the NBA hasn't changed nor did I say that the NBA purposely degraded the product for more views. These are views that you instilled.

My point continues to be:

i) People like and play basketball.
ii) People that like basketball watch the NBA.
iii) The NBA encourages more people to like and play basketball.
iv) More people watch the NBA.
v) The more people projected to like basketball in 10 years = more valuable contracts.

I don't disagree with any of this. Except you keep omitting how the league grows & maintains that level of interest.

As in your first quote your saying people are too stupid to recognize quality of product once established.


Honestly, if you want to call me a corporate shill, don't beat around the bush. You probably think I have a personal vendetta against you. I really don't. I dislike seeing and participating in a culture of misinformation, so I confront it. The subject matter is irrelevant. This is to me and from my knowledge of recent scientific literature to be the best way to deal with such culture. I would LOVE to be paid for posting facts on the internet.

I think it's worth pointing out to you (not that you care or need validation) that when you're consistently proven wrong and when your confirmation bias is pointed out to you, you just know. No facts, just experience and anecdotal evidence. It must be great to be omniscient.

I don't play games. If I have something to tell you, you'll hear it.

I missed where you proved something.

ink
04-24-2014, 02:38 AM
I never said any of that. Instead you filled the blanks with your own biases and political beliefs.


The quality of a product doesn't matter. NCIS is complete garbage and they have amazing ratings but that's besides the point.


I said that the quality of a product doesn't really matter when you already have an established base of customers. The greater point being that you don't need to manipulate games to inflate ratings or pander to networks because the ratings are already there. I'm not concerned about how these views/ratings originated because this whole culture of referee conspiracy is a largely modern phenomenon. I referenced NCIS because it, like the NBA already has an established presence and proven record of interest. As a result, they're not concerned with interim shortfalls unlike many critically acclaimed television programs, who despite acclaim, do not have the same presence or interest. This is why I overlook quality when I talk about growth and branding.

You don't think there is any possibility of lost interest if a product slips in quality?, they will forever maintain that established base of interest no matter the type product they put out.


I never said that the NBA hasn't changed nor did I say that the NBA purposely degraded the product for more views. These are views that you instilled.

My point continues to be:

i) People like and play basketball.
ii) People that like basketball watch the NBA.
iii) The NBA encourages more people to like and play basketball.
iv) More people watch the NBA.
v) The more people projected to like basketball in 10 years = more valuable contracts.

I don't disagree with any of this. Except you keep omitting how the league grows & maintains that level of interest.

As in your first quote your saying people are too stupid to recognize quality of product once established.


Honestly, if you want to call me a corporate shill, don't beat around the bush. You probably think I have a personal vendetta against you. I really don't. I dislike seeing and participating in a culture of misinformation, so I confront it. The subject matter is irrelevant. This is to me and from my knowledge of recent scientific literature to be the best way to deal with such culture. I would LOVE to be paid for posting facts on the internet.

I think it's worth pointing out to you (not that you care or need validation) that when you're consistently proven wrong and when your confirmation bias is pointed out to you, you just know. No facts, just experience and anecdotal evidence. It must be great to be omniscient.

I don't play games. If I have something to tell you, you'll hear it.

I missed where you proved something.

Wait a second, considering he's not making the conspiracy claims, where's your proof?

B2B
04-24-2014, 07:34 AM
Wait a second, considering he's not making the conspiracy claims, where's your proof?

My opinion/claims doesn't matter, I haven't seen anyone in this thread disprove the former league official.

All people have done or are doing is dismissing his comments by characterizing him in a bad light.

I believe in some, if not all that he is saying, I don't have to prove that.

The people that are calling him a liar/cheat are the ones lacking proof.

lajoie
04-24-2014, 08:41 AM
My opinion/claims doesn't matter, I haven't seen anyone in this thread disprove the former league official.


Wait, so now someone has to disprove ideas and theories for them to be false not have the person who presented them provide evidence to prove their theories? Goddamn, wish I could have saved time doing my university thesis like that.

lajoie
04-24-2014, 09:10 AM
The people that are calling him a liar/cheat are the ones lacking proof.

What exactly is your definition of a cheat?

Because there is quite a bit of evidence that he influenced the outcome of games he officiated despite him saying the contrary.

Bramaca
04-24-2014, 09:59 AM
My opinion/claims doesn't matter, I haven't seen anyone in this thread disprove the former league official.

All people have done or are doing is dismissing his comments by characterizing him in a bad light.

I believe in some, if not all that he is saying, I don't have to prove that.

The people that are calling him a liar/cheat are the ones lacking proof.

I haven't seen anyone in here prove there is any validity to his statements either. If there is no proof from the initial accusing side there is absolutely no need for the other side to provide anything.

MoneyBall20
04-24-2014, 10:31 AM
NBA executive vice president, communications, Michael Bass issued the following statement Wednesday:

"Tim Donaghy is a convicted felon looking for any opportunity for people to listen to his baseless allegations. For Mr. Donaghy to continually try to challenge his former colleagues' ethics is distasteful and says more about his own integrity than it could ever say about our referees, who are the best and most scrutinized game officials in the world.”


That didn't take long..Social Media is exploding,this could really help the raptors.

nycericanguy
04-24-2014, 11:00 AM
KG is known for his illegal screening, you telling me they just miss these calls because of his veteran savvy?.

That they are not looking for it, though it's known he's a huge violator of the rule?.

How many illegal screens has he been called for this series?.

Raptors have not played well enough or had a comfortable/large enough lead for anything to be blatantly obvious, wait till Nets backs are against the wall & their hands are forced.

Do you remember game 1 of the BOS - NY series in 2011? Right after the Knicks got Melo and they had Amare healthy and Billups too? And the Knicks were on their way to stealing game 1 in BOS... then KG set that illegal screen on Douglas and BOS got a wide open look and that was pretty much it.

Point is, refs miss calls and stuff happens. The Raps had arguably their best season in franchise history and are tied now 1-1... and yet most of the talk is about how the refs are out to get TOR... as if BK is some great team that everyone can't get enough of. It just comes across as petty and looking for excuses.

I think most fans would rather see TOR against MIA... myself included.

I'll say this again, no one, not even in NY, cares about the Nets... check out their empty forum for further evidence.

Byronicle
04-24-2014, 11:21 AM
Do you remember game 1 of the BOS - NY series in 2011? Right after the Knicks got Melo and they had Amare healthy and Billups too? And the Knicks were on their way to stealing game 1 in BOS... then KG set that illegal screen on Douglas and BOS got a wide open look and that was pretty much it.

Point is, refs miss calls and stuff happens. The Raps had arguably their best season in franchise history and are tied now 1-1... and yet most of the talk is about how the refs are out to get TOR... as if BK is some great team that everyone can't get enough of. It just comes across as petty and looking for excuses.

I think most fans would rather see TOR against MIA... myself included.

I'll say this again, no one, not even in NY, cares about the Nets... check out their empty forum for further evidence.

Illegal screens like charges/block calls are ticky tacky fouls. A lot of times they can go either way and part of the reason is because this is where players flop the most. I can live with that

When a player drives to the net untouched and gets a call, there is more reason to be suspicious.

And like I said earlier, a lot of fans don't believe the NBA is fixed, just that refs can be bias and its true. People here who played at a collegiate level in ANY sports knows how reputation can affect calls, and more so in basketball because just like the players, the refs also have egos. If you don't believe in phantom calls, retribution calls, reputation calls which is RAMPANT in the NBA then you are lying to yourself.

Now Raptor fans have every reason to be upset with the refs, we have a long history to believe so and in recent history, last season the NBA has made 4 official apologies for blown calls. Most teams are lucky to even get 1. We had 4.

And if no one cared about BKN, then Jay Z in the past wouldn't have represented them, they wouldn't have undergone major changes either and players wouldn't agree to being traded there, but it all happened

ink
04-24-2014, 11:30 AM
I seriously don't think our "history" of bad calls is a big deal. At worst it's an indicator of sloppy officiating. It's amazing that anyone would tell themselves it's been a difference maker in the evolution of this struggling franchise. We have had much bigger, self-inflicted problems. It's a cop out to point at refereeing.

killersweet
04-24-2014, 12:02 PM
I seriously don't think our "history" of bad calls is a big deal. At worst it's an indicator of sloppy officiating. It's amazing that anyone would tell themselves it's been a difference maker in the evolution of this struggling franchise. We have had much bigger, self-inflicted problems. It's a cop out to point at refereeing.

I think winning plays a part in the NBA officials mind as well. If we produced a consistent winner/contender, I think we would get our share of calls.

B2B
04-24-2014, 03:06 PM
I haven't seen anyone in here prove there is any validity to his statements either. If there is no proof from the initial accusing side there is absolutely no need for the other side to provide anything..

The initial accusing side is the one saying that this former employee's claims are void because they simply dismiss him as a liar with zero proof that he is in fact lying.

I believe him, if none have proof that he is lying, I should not have to prove that he isn't, which is what Ink has asked of me.

B2B
04-24-2014, 03:15 PM
Wait, so now someone has to disprove ideas and theories for them to be false not have the person who presented them provide evidence to prove their theories? Goddamn, wish I could have saved time doing my university thesis like that.

You do realize I'm referring to Donaghy's claim.

I don't have to prove my beliefs because I don't give a **** if anyone else believes it.

B2B
04-24-2014, 03:22 PM
What exactly is your definition of a cheat?

Because there is quite a bit of evidence that he influenced the outcome of games he officiated despite him saying the contrary.

I'm sure you have at some point in your life lied, how about I judge everything you say from that point as a lie.

I don't care who he is or what he did, none has proved that what he has said, is in fact a lie.

B2B
04-24-2014, 03:42 PM
Do you remember game 1 of the BOS - NY series in 2011? Right after the Knicks got Melo and they had Amare healthy and Billups too? And the Knicks were on their way to stealing game 1 in BOS... then KG set that illegal screen on Douglas and BOS got a wide open look and that was pretty much it.

Point is, refs miss calls and stuff happens. The Raps had arguably their best season in franchise history and are tied now 1-1... and yet most of the talk is about how the refs are out to get TOR... as if BK is some great team that everyone can't get enough of. It just comes across as petty and looking for excuses.

I think most fans would rather see TOR against MIA... myself included.

I'll say this again, no one, not even in NY, cares about the Nets... check out their empty forum for further evidence.

Sure human error is a part of the problem, I don't for a second however believe it's the only contributing factor to the degradation of officiating.

I'm not saying what I am as a cop out, win/lose. I also don't think the problem is solely Raptor related.

Donaghy self, wasn't seen as crooked ref before being convicted of it. People watched the games he officiated thinking nothing was wrong.

killersweet
04-24-2014, 03:43 PM
I'm sure you have at some point in your life lied, how about I judge everything you say from that point as a lie.

I don't care who he is or what he did, none has proved that what he has said, is in fact a lie.

There were some studies that were done that showed he was in fact lying. Truehoop and some economists did some work on Donaghy's claims and there are some very good articles debunking Donaghy's claims backed up by stats.

B2B
04-24-2014, 03:50 PM
There were some studies that were done that showed he was in fact lying. Truehoop and some economists did some work on Donaghy's claims and there are some very good articles debunking Donaghy's claims backed up by stats.

It wasn't presented here, do you have a link?.

B2B
04-24-2014, 04:17 PM
Donaghy for 2ys made calls to affect the point spread & none picked up on it.

Donaghy's attorney filed a court document alleging, among other things, that Game 6 of the 2002 Western Conference Finals between the Los Angeles Lakers and Sacramento Kings was fixed by two referees. The letter states that Donaghy "learned from Referee A that Referees A and F wanted to extend the series to seven games. Tim knew Referees A and F to be 'company men', always acting in the interest of the NBA, and that night, it was in the NBA's interest to add another game to the series."[39] The Lakers won Game 6, attempting 18 more free throws than the Kings in the fourth quarter, and went on to win the 2002 NBA Finals.

Although no teams are specifically named, it is not hard to deduce the game in question. The Lakers-Kings series was the only one that postseason that went seven games, and the officiating in Game 6 was so questionable that consumer advocate and former presidential candidate Ralph Nader called for a formal investigation.

The Lakers attempted 40 free throws to the Kings' 25 in that game, and Los Angeles made 21 of 27 from the line while Sacramento converted 7 of 9 in the fourth quarter alone.

In addition, a foul was called against Mike Bibby of the Kings after he was shoved and elbowed by Kobe Bryant, denying the Kings an opportunity to try for a tying basket. Also in that game, Kings centers Vlade Divac and

Scot Pollard fouled out, and Kings coach Rick Adelman was highly critical of the officiating afterward.
"My first thought was: I knew it," Pollard said Tuesday night. "I'm not going to say there was a conspiracy. I just think something wasn't right. It was unfair. We didn't have a chance to win that game."

• "Tim gave information on how top executives of the NBA sought to manipulate games using referees to boost ticket sales and television ratings," the letter reads. "He also described how nepotism played a far greater role than qualifications in a number of referee hirings."

• In addition to game-altering allegations, Donaghy's letter claims that many officials carry on "relationships" with team executives, coaches and players that violate their NBA contracts. For example, it said, referees broke NBA rules by hitting up players for autographs, socializing with coaches, and accepting meals and merchandise from teams.

During the 2005 postseason, Mavs owner Mark Cuban did in fact complain after his team lost to the Houston Rockets in the first two games of their series, and Dallas went on to beat Houston in seven games. Jeff Van Gundy, then the coach of the Rockets, said that an NBA official had told him about the league's plan to closely monitor moving screens by Yao Ming, and Van Gundy was ultimately fined $100,000 for his comments regarding the situation. Van Gundy later backed off his comments.

Tuesday, Lakers coach Phil Jackson was asked about the allegations regarding Game 6 of the 2002 series against Sacramento.

"Was that after the fifth game, after we had the game stolen away from us after a bad call out of bounds and gave the ball back to Sacramento and they made a 3-point shot?" he said. "There's a lot of things going on in these games and they're suspicious, but I don't want to throw it back to there."

Jackson also was asked if he agreed with the notion that there were officials that were "NBA company men" who were doing this for the sake of ratings.

"Only us basketball coaches think that," Jackson said. "Nobody else can go to that extreme. They referee what they see in front of them. You know, a lot of things have happened in the course of the Tim Donaghy disposition. I think we have to weigh it as it comes out, [U]and we all think that probably referees should be under a separate entity than the NBA entirely. I mean, that's what we'd like to see probably in the NBA. It would just be separate and apart from it. But I don't think that's going to happen."

^ why not?.

I know why but would love to hear others responses.

The thing I love the most is all Stern could do is call Donaghy a criminal.

killersweet
04-24-2014, 04:59 PM
It wasn't presented here, do you have a link?.

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/11341/did-dick-bavetta-prop-up-weaker-teams

B2B
04-24-2014, 05:43 PM
http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/11341/did-dick-bavetta-prop-up-weaker-teams

Their experiment was to assess the individual behavior of Bavetta.

How conclusive is the evidence?

They noted - One of the challenges of assessing individual referee behavior in the NBA is that the publicly available data (such as the box-score or play-by-play data) does not indicate which referee made which call. The work that Justin Wolfers and I did on referee bias was based on the racial mix of the referee crew, so that wasn’t a problem. All the same, examining the behavior of one referee is challenging.

We're talking about 325 games officiated by Dick Bavetta. Despite the findings, is it possible that Donaghy could've identified specific trends within those games that would have allowed him to come out ahead?

It is possible, but unlikely. In order for us to test for effects on a subset of games, Donaghy would have to be more specific about which Bavetta games we should bet on.

Thanks for posting but there are a tone of holes in their experiment & their conclusion wasn't even conclusive despite the fact.

lajoie
04-24-2014, 06:01 PM
I'm sure you have at some point in your life lied, how about I judge everything you say from that point as a lie.

I don't care who he is or what he did, none has proved that what he has said, is in fact a lie.

1) Based on his book, all the theories Donaghy supposedly used were all losing theories against the spread. Henry Abbot debunked a couple of them.
http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/11340/tim-donaghys-claims-on-trial

2) Donaghy says he didn't influence or change calls and just had inside information. Which is great except the vast majority of the games he bet on were games he was one of the 3 refs.
It's the equivalent of saying someone has a huge edge on bets, but their only going to bet on games they actually attend. Makes absolutely no sense for an admitted degenerate gambler unless he's influencing games.

3) Yeah, I've told lies. I've never told lies that brought a whole corporation or entity under investigation and scrutiny or that involved the FBI.

B2B
04-24-2014, 06:02 PM
I haven't seen or read Donaghy's book. My opinions stated were established before I knew who Donaghy was or what he had done.

B2B
04-24-2014, 06:07 PM
1) Based on his book, all the theories Donaghy supposedly used were all losing theories against the spread. Henry Abbot debunked a couple of them.
http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/11340/tim-donaghys-claims-on-trial

2) Donaghy says he didn't influence or change calls and just had inside information. Which is great except the vast majority of the games he bet on were games he was one of the 3 refs.
It's the equivalent of saying someone has a huge edge on bets, but their only going to bet on games they actually attend. Makes absolutely no sense for an admitted degenerate gambler unless he's influencing games.

3) Yeah, I've told lies. I've never told lies that brought a whole corporation or entity under investigation and scrutiny or that involved the FBI.

Point I was making is stereo typing.

Someone in this thread brought up Conseco. Everyone said he was lying to drag everyone else down with him but eventually proven to be telling the truth.

Sure Donaghy maybe a con, liar etc.. doesn't mean what he said here was in fact a lie.

Tell me why the NBA is not suing him for defamation if he is lying?.

ink
04-24-2014, 08:49 PM
Classic shotgun argumentation

http://warp.povusers.org/grrr/conspiracytheories.html

smith&wesson
04-24-2014, 09:34 PM
K, people need to stop throwing out "it's a business" statements as if it's a meaningful argument.

First off, the NBA makes absolutely no money off of any rating differences. They already have a preset contract with ESPN/Turner Sports based off of projected values. They make ~680 million from the networks whether it's Miami vs Toronto, Miami vs Brooklyn or Milwaukee vs Atlanta. Only ESPN/TNT loses out when you have a Spurs vs Cavs final.

So in order for them to truly manipulate profit, they have to inflate their ratings by increasing market saturation and brand growth for future negotiations with networks, sponsors, local managers etc. They do this by forcing Milwaukee to upgrade their facilities, investing overseas (look at the number of international sponsors the NBA has) etc.

Even then, these contracts are hardly ever decided by ratings. If they were, MLSE wouldn't have invested in a new stadium.

It is a business, everything is performance based. If the NBA doesn't get great ratings while under the tenure of one contract, they are less likely to get leverage on their next deal.. Obviously the ratings are not the end all ball in these contract negotiations but don't tell me they mean nothing for the networks.. Why else do the best, or usually large market teams get the Xmass games etc. because they are projected to draw the most ratings.

The NBA could care less about ratings.. but their television networks care a lot and as a subcontractor you definitely need to appease the contractor that is giving you business. You cant assume you will continue to get these great deals if your ratings are **** every year. The NBA is established and probably has long deals with the networks, its not an issue imo... I just think that the ratings are most def a factor.

Bramaca
04-24-2014, 09:46 PM
.

The initial accusing side is the one saying that this former employee's claims are void because they simply dismiss him as a liar with zero proof that he is in fact lying.

He isn't lying, he also isn't telling the truth either. Everything he said is an opinion on what he thinks the leagues motives are. The only real fact he provided was;


What they do is they actually send in a representative from the league office to sit down with the referees at an 11 o’clock meeting in the morning where they go over game film,” Donaghy said. “They will show the referees what they want called, what they want them to concentrate on, what they feel needs to be called or let go in a series to avoid any problems.

Everthing else is conjecture and opinion on his part as to what he thinks the leagues intentions may be.


.I believe him, if none have proof that he is lying, I should not have to prove that he isn't, which is what Ink has asked of me.

Nobody really has to provide proof that he is lying or not since he is only expressing an opinion without any proof of his own. You sort of set the tone of how people would address you in this thread with your first posts where you mocked the idea that the league isn't dirty and used the phrase "ignorance is bliss" to describe people who aren't in line with your thinking.

smith&wesson
04-24-2014, 09:53 PM
I haven't seen or read Donaghy's book. My opinions stated were established before I knew who Donaghy was or what he had done.

I don't think its about this one ex ref any how. In general I think people understand that there are "superstar" calls and there are "reputation" type calls. Donaghy isn't really saying anything that any of us don't already know here.

him being a criminal and having no integrity is just a way for the NBA to get people to stop listening to him because after all how much integrity does a criminal have? people are very easily swayed in to "judging".. the irony to me is that again, he isnt saying anything that we don't already know so proving this criminal is telling the truth or not, I think is irrelevant.

smith&wesson
04-24-2014, 10:02 PM
Nobody really has to provide proof that he is lying or not since he is only expressing an opinion without any proof of his own. You sort of set the tone of how people would address you in this thread with your first posts where you mocked the idea that the league isn't dirty and used the phrase "ignorance is bliss" to describe people who aren't in line with your thinking.

would it be fair to say that there are in fact "super star" calls or "reputation" calls ?

that's what I gather from what Donaghy said.. he is basically saying that Brooklyn might get favourable calls due to having names like pierce, d.will, kg, jj etc... Toronto has a bunch of young guys who never been to the playofss... its fairly obvious.

"raptors vs the nets & refs" is an exaggeration.. but even before Donaghy stated this, we all knew that this match up was going to have that sort of faith. We didn't need this guy to spell it out for us.

Bramaca
04-24-2014, 10:40 PM
would it be fair to say that there are in fact "super star" calls or "reputation" calls ?

that's what I gather from what Donaghy said.. he is basically saying that Brooklyn might get favourable calls due to having names like pierce, d.will, kg, jj etc... Toronto has a bunch of young guys who never been to the playofss... its fairly obvious.

"raptors vs the nets & refs" is an exaggeration.. but even before Donaghy stated this, we all knew that this match up was going to have that sort of faith. We didn't need this guy to spell it out for us.

He actually went well beyond that saying that he thinks its rigged for ratings and that the league is influencing the refs to determine the outcome of the series. That is much more then just saying that the Nets will get "super star" or "reputation" calls. It's also an opinion of his and not a fact, and it certainly isn't an opinion that was made any stronger by the reffing in the first two games.

B2B
04-24-2014, 10:47 PM
He isn't lying, he also isn't telling the truth either. Everything he said is an opinion on what he thinks the leagues motives are. The only real fact he provided was;


What they do is they actually send in a representative from the league office to sit down with the referees at an 11 o’clock meeting in the morning where they go over game film,” Donaghy said. “They will show the referees what they want called, what they want them to concentrate on, what they feel needs to be called or let go in a series to avoid any problems.

"what they want called",

He then went on to say that once they showed how they wanted the game called he would leave the room thinking there was a clear advantage for one team.

Why are they specifying directives before hand?. (What to concentrate on, what to let go or not etc..)

Was/is that not the purpose of the rule book?.


Nobody really has to provide proof that he is lying or not since he is only expressing an opinion without any proof of his own. You sort of set the tone of how people would address you in this thread with your first posts where you mocked the idea that the league isn't dirty and used the phrase "ignorance is bliss" to describe people who aren't in line with your thinking.

To me any kind of profiling is ignorant & close minded. Saying he's a criminal so he must be lying is being ignorant to "potential" truth.

My opinion is that he's not lying, my statement was directed to the possibility of it.

B2B
04-24-2014, 11:00 PM
He actually went well beyond that saying that he thinks its rigged for ratings and that the league is influencing the refs to determine the outcome of the series. That is much more then just saying that the Nets will get "super star" or "reputation" calls. It's also an opinion of his and not a fact, and it certainly isn't an opinion that was made any stronger by the reffing in the first two games.

If people acknowledge superstar calls exist where stars receive benefit, how would the series not be in favor of a team that has several of them & 2 future HOF's over a team with 1 1st time allstar?.

In terms of ratings, I think it's the purpose of the superstar call. MJ as an individual grew the sport to a whole new level with his superstar status. IMO it helps maintain reputation/popularity of player.

ink
04-24-2014, 11:10 PM
^ but lying is not the issue, as Bramaca has pointed out. Donaghy is expressing an opinion with no evidence. There is not a shred of actual evidence from the first two games to support the conspiracy theory.

ink
04-24-2014, 11:13 PM
He actually went well beyond that saying that he thinks its rigged for ratings and that the league is influencing the refs to determine the outcome of the series. That is much more then just saying that the Nets will get "super star" or "reputation" calls. It's also an opinion of his and not a fact, and it certainly isn't an opinion that was made any stronger by the reffing in the first two games.

If people acknowledge superstar calls exist where stars receive benefit, how would the series not be in favor of a team that has several of them & 2 future HOF's over a team with 1 1st time allstar?.

In terms of ratings, I think it's the purpose of the superstar call. MJ as an individual grew the sport to a whole new level with his superstar status. IMO it helps maintain reputation/popularity of player.

This has already been explained to you several times in this thread. You choose to ignore whatever doesn't fit your theory.

B2B
04-24-2014, 11:14 PM
^ but lying is not the issue, as Bramaca has pointed out. Donaghy is expressing an opinion with no evidence. There is not a shred of actual evidence from the first two games to support the conspiracy theory.

When you say that you mean you personally didn't see anything out of sort to indicate bias?.

ink
04-24-2014, 11:21 PM
^ but lying is not the issue, as Bramaca has pointed out. Donaghy is expressing an opinion with no evidence. There is not a shred of actual evidence from the first two games to support the conspiracy theory.

When you say that you mean you personally didn't see anything out of sort to indicate bias?.

Why are we going in circles? You've already tried this and many other scattershot tactics to try to advance a theory you have no firm evidence of. All you can do is ALLEGE bias just as Donaghy can only allege conspiracy. There is no evidence of any orchestrated fix.

Bramaca
04-24-2014, 11:50 PM
"what they want called",

He then went on to say that once they showed how they wanted the game called he would leave the room thinking there was a clear advantage for one team.

Why are they specifying directives before hand?. (What to concentrate on, what to let go or not etc..)

Was/is that not the purpose of the rule book?.

We should start off with who "they" are. The "they" who are telling the refs "what they want called". It's Don Vaden and his staff. He is responsible for the day to day performance of NBA refs and has spent his entire career either reffing in the NBA, training NBA refs, or directing NBA and D-league refs. The guy in charge of recruiting, training, and team communications is Joe Borgia who has been involved in reffing, training refs, etc. since the 70's. So these league reps aren't just random suits telling the refs whats best for marketing, its their bosses who know what they are doing and what the job the refs do entails.

Why are they giving directives? Well its no different then any other sports league in the world. They all give the refs directives on what to look for and key on. There are many reasons why they can give certain directives. The league office likely takes calls daily from multiple teams about concerns with how games are reffed. So they have to address these concerns daily. These directives could come because of the team you are playing called about something, the team that played either of you the previous game, other teams in games you aren't involved in, or something that the league reps noticed by reviewing tapes.

There is a rulebook but if you want to go by that 100% then guess what there will be 2-3 infractions called every single possesion of the game. The directives can help to focus on certain things in an effort to keep the rules in general followed.

He says that sometimes he would leave the room and think there was an advantage for one team or the other but thats it. He thought there was, it may have been, it may not have been, it also may have been an advantage the other way in reality. But really it breaks down to it just being his opinion. And from that opinion he is guessing what the refs are going to be calling and guessing even further as to what the motives of the league are beyond that. Basically he took his opinion on something and then took a guess based on that opinion and then took another guess based on the first guess.


To me any kind of profiling is ignorant & close minded. Saying he's a criminal so he must be lying is being ignorant to "potential" truth.

My opinion is that he's not lying, my statement was directed to the possibility of it.

Sort of like profiling people as ignorant because they don't come to the same conclusions as you based off anothers opinion.

Bramaca
04-24-2014, 11:54 PM
If people acknowledge superstar calls exist where stars receive benefit, how would the series not be in favor of a team that has several of them & 2 future HOF's over a team with 1 1st time allstar?.

In terms of ratings, I think it's the purpose of the superstar call. MJ as an individual grew the sport to a whole new level with his superstar status. IMO it helps maintain reputation/popularity of player.

IMO DD has got more "star calls" in the first two games then any other player.

B2B
04-25-2014, 08:20 AM
We should start off with who "they" are. The "they" who are telling the refs "what they want called". It's Don Vaden and his staff. He is responsible for the day to day performance of NBA refs and has spent his entire career either reffing in the NBA, training NBA refs, or directing NBA and D-league refs. The guy in charge of recruiting, training, and team communications is Joe Borgia who has been involved in reffing, training refs, etc. since the 70's. So these league reps aren't just random suits telling the refs whats best for marketing, its their bosses who know what they are doing and what the job the refs do entails.

They, are still company men. They, are not a separate entity.


Why are they giving directives? Well its no different then any other sports league in the world. They all give the refs directives on what to look for and key on. There are many reasons why they can give certain directives. The league office likely takes calls daily from multiple teams about concerns with how games are reffed. So they have to address these concerns daily. These directives could come because of the team you are playing called about something, the team that played either of you the previous game, other teams in games you aren't involved in, or something that the league reps noticed by reviewing tapes.

There is a rulebook but if you want to go by that 100% then guess what there will be 2-3 infractions called every single possesion of the game. The directives can help to focus on certain things in an effort to keep the rules in general followed.

While all probably true, it also allows for manipulation as seen fit.


He says that sometimes he would leave the room and think there was an advantage for one team or the other but thats it. He thought there was, it may have been, it may not have been, it also may have been an advantage the other way in reality. But really it breaks down to it just being his opinion. And from that opinion he is guessing what the refs are going to be calling and guessing even further as to what the motives of the league are beyond that. Basically he took his opinion on something and then took a guess based on that opinion and then took another guess based on the first guess.

Sort of like profiling people as ignorant because they don't come to the same conclusions as you based off anothers opinion.

Read what I said again. I don't expect anyone to come to the same conclusion as myself. Only reason I'm beating the topic is because I think I'm helping the team get more fair treatment drawing the issue to light based off my belief of it's bias. I ain't doing it for any posters approval, that would be a waste of my time.

My statement was to the people who omitted Donaghy's words "because he's a criminal". They can draw the conclusion that he's lying if they want, I'm referencing the fact they came to that conclusion because they're profiling.

Any letter to come from the league is going to start with Donaghy is a criminal so anyone & everyone will simply dismiss him & his comments/opinion, true or not.

B2B
04-25-2014, 08:25 AM
IMO DD has got more "star calls" in the first two games then any other player.

DD never used to get calls.. The reason he's getting these calls now is because he made the allstar game.

Funniest part is outside the 4th of game 2, he hasn't exactly been one of the teams better performers in either game.

ink
04-25-2014, 09:29 AM
IMO DD has got more "star calls" in the first two games then any other player.

DD never used to get calls.. The reason he's getting these calls now is because he made the allstar game.

Funniest part is outside the 4th of game 2, he hasn't exactly been one of the teams better performers in either game.

Even if that were true, how does that demonstrate that the league has rigged this series in favour of the Nets?

B2B
04-25-2014, 09:48 AM
Even if that were true, how does that demonstrate that the league has rigged this series in favour of the Nets?

When I tell you, your response will be that we are going in circles.

If Derozan making the allstar game has given him benefit with the calls, despite his poor play in the first 2 games, what does that do for a team featuring several allstars & 2 HOF's in comparison to a team featuring one 1st time allstar?.

It's my belief superstar calls are implemented for ratings/money purposes.

If someone admits that type call exists, does it matter the purpose behind it, when a team of stars faces one without?. The playing field if admitted, is not level.

Bramaca
04-25-2014, 09:53 AM
They, are still company men. They, are not a separate entity.

So you have pretty much dismissed them as "company men". Isn't that the type of profiling that you consider ignorant and close minded?


While all probably true, it also allows for manipulation as seen fit.

Every facet of every business, government, or group allows for the potential of manipulation. If you agree that all of that is probably true then what is more likely? That the league (through the reps for the officials) have to deal with, satisfy, and try to create consistency for 30 different teams who all at times feel like they are short changed by multiple teams of refs who all call the game a little differently OR that the league's goal is to put the whole thing at risk by influencing the outcome of a 1st round matchup of 2 teams who aren't likely to go anywhere beyond winning this round for what is likely to be a minimal amount of ratings hike (if any) in the 2nd round?


Read what I said again. I don't expect anyone to come to the same conclusion as myself. Only reason I'm beating the topic is because I think I'm helping the team get more fair treatment drawing the issue to light based off my belief of it's bias. I ain't doing it for any posters approval, that would be a waste of my time.

My statement was to the people who omitted Donaghy's words "because he's a criminal". They can draw the conclusion that he's lying if they want, I'm referencing the fact they came to that conclusion because they're profiling.

Any letter to come from the league is going to start with Donaghy is a criminal so anyone & everyone will simply dismiss him & his comments/opinion, true or not.

Once again they are opinion and guesses made upon those opinions. If you share his opinions thats fine but maybe lay off calling people who dismiss Donaghy as ignorant when you are doing the same thing to league officials.

Bramaca
04-25-2014, 10:00 AM
When I tell you, your response will be that we are going in circles.

If Derozan making the allstar game has given him benefit with the calls, despite his poor play in the first 2 games, what does that do for a team featuring several allstars & 2 HOF's in comparison to a team featuring one 1st time allstar?.

It's my belief superstar calls are implemented for ratings/money purposes.

If someone admits that type call exists, does it matter the purpose behind it, when a team of stars faces one without?. The playing field if admitted, is not level.

Apparently not too much because they really haven't received mush of that. How much more marketable do you really think the Nets are right now. Deron isn't much of a must see player, neither is Johnson, and Pierce and Garnett are at the point in their careers where they are about as marketable as Carter on the Mavs or Grant Hill on the Suns. Do you really think the league is going to try and influence this series for for almost nothing gained?

Do you admit that there can be a level hometown calls in favor of a team? Donaghy did, and about the refs calling the Raps games at home. The playing field if admitted, is not level. You are basically taking a human flaw (the refs) and projecting all of it in a conspiracy theory about the league.

nycericanguy
04-25-2014, 10:21 AM
DD never used to get calls.. The reason he's getting these calls now is because he made the allstar game.

Funniest part is outside the 4th of game 2, he hasn't exactly been one of the teams better performers in either game.

wow now you're really reaching.

So the refs are against TOR, but at the same time they are thinking... "wait, Demar made the all star team this year, so let's get him a ton of FT's"

DD has shot 22 ft's in two games, far more than any player on any team and people are saying he doesn't get calls?

ink
04-25-2014, 10:22 AM
You've shifted the goalposts again. The thread WAS about fixing a series for the Nets. When you had no proof of that you shifted it to bias, the to superstar calls, then to the Spurs, etc. I still see nothing about the topic, which is how the league conspired to fix the series for the Nets.


Shotgun argumentation

"Shotgun argumentation" is a metaphor from real life: It's much easier to hunt a rabbit with a shotgun than with a rifle. This is because a rifle only fires one bullet and there's a high probability of a miss. A shotgun, however, fires tens or even hundreds of small pellets, and the probability of at least one of them hitting the rabbit is quite high.

Shotgun argumentation has the same basic idea: The more small arguments or "evidence" you present in favor of some claim, the higher the probability that someone will believe you regarldess of how ridiculous those arguments are. There are two reasons for this:

Firstly, just the sheer amount of arguments or "evidence" may be enough to convince someone that something strange is going on. The idea is basically: "There is this much evidence against the official story, there must be something wrong with it." One or two pieces of "evidence" may not be enough to convince anyone, but collect a set of a couple of hundreds of pieces of "evidence" and it immediately starts being more believable.

Of course the fallacy here is that the amount of "evidence" is in no way proof of anything. The vast majority, and usually all of this "evidence" is easily explainable and just patently false. There may be a few points which may be more difficult to explain, but they alone wouldn't be so convincing.

Secondly, and more closely related to the shotgun methapor: The more arguments or individual pieces of "evidence" you have, the higher the probability that at least some of them will convince someone. Someone might not get convinced by most of the arguments, but among them there may be one or a few which sounds so plausible to him that he is then convinced. Thus one or a few of the "pellets" hit the "rabbit" and killed it: Mission accomplished.

http://warp.povusers.org/grrr/conspiracytheories.html

B2B
04-25-2014, 10:39 AM
So you have pretty much dismissed them as "company men". Isn't that the type of profiling that you consider ignorant and close minded?

Are they not currently employed under the NBA?. What do you want me to call them. Homeless people that attend meetings.


Every facet of every business, government, or group allows for the potential of manipulation. If you agree that all of that is probably true then what is more likely? That the league (through the reps for the officials) have to deal with, satisfy, and try to create consistency for 30 different teams who all at times feel like they are short changed by multiple teams of refs who all call the game a little differently OR that the league's goal is to put the whole thing at risk by influencing the outcome of a 1st round matchup of 2 teams who aren't likely to go anywhere beyond winning this round for what is likely to be a minimal amount of ratings hike (if any) in the 2nd round?

You have no idea how much I know about corruption, at all levels. I need no explanation of attributing factors.

The league's approach to ratings is attributed to all. So it can affect just one game, one series no matter how trivial/shortsighted anyone views it.


Once again they are opinion and guesses made upon those opinions. If you share his opinions thats fine but maybe lay off calling people who dismiss Donaghy as ignorant when you are doing the same thing to league officials.

Calling a man that currently works for a company, a company man is different than saying someone who once lied is lying.

I'm not making assumption they work for the company.

B2B
04-25-2014, 10:48 AM
Apparently not too much because they really haven't received mush of that. How much more marketable do you really think the Nets are right now. Deron isn't much of a must see player, neither is Johnson, and Pierce and Garnett are at the point in their careers where they are about as marketable as Carter on the Mavs or Grant Hill on the Suns. Do you really think the league is going to try and influence this series for for almost nothing gained?

Do you admit that there can be a level hometown calls in favor of a team? Donaghy did, and about the refs calling the Raps games at home. The playing field if admitted, is not level. You are basically taking a human flaw (the refs) and projecting all of it in a conspiracy theory about the league.

If there's nothing to gain of course not.

I live outside the US/Canada & have yet to see a Raptors game televised, I've seen all the other series though.

Anywhere I can get the information on ratings for either team?.

B2B
04-25-2014, 11:03 AM
wow now you're really reaching.

So the refs are against TOR, but at the same time they are thinking... "wait, Demar made the all star team this year, so let's get him a ton of FT's"

DD has shot 22 ft's in two games, far more than any player on any team and people are saying he doesn't get calls?

You misunderstood both posts. None is saying that Derozan has "not" gotten the favorable call in this series.

Where Derozan is concerned people who have watched our team for years knows he rarely got calls over the years, even when he attacked the paint. He often complained from the lack of them. Now he's getting calls on every jump shot since making the allstar game & in this series despite playing poorly in both games.

Where did you see me say the refs are against Toronto specifically?.

Bramaca
04-25-2014, 11:12 AM
Are they not currently employed under the NBA?. What do you want me to call them. Homeless people that attend meetings.

You have no idea how much I know about corruption, at all levels. I need no explanation of attributing factors.

The league's approach to ratings is attributed to all. So it can affect just one game, one series no matter how trivial/shortsighted anyone views it.

Calling a man that currently works for a company, a company man is different than saying someone who once lied is lying.

I'm not making assumption they work for the company.

I like how you try to downplay it by simply saying that "company man" simply means they work for the company. It is a derogatory term used to descibe a "male or female, that is a royal suck-up or lackey, willing to perform any task on-demand to relish in self-gratification for the sake of promotion or monetary gain." So you are making an assumption. Its no different then calling Donaghy a lying cheat. Except that there is proof that he is a lying cheat and that he is a disgruntled former employee.

And you pretty much avoided my question about what you think is more likely with the league influencing everything through the refs or that its just a difficult job to juggle all the requests and demands of all the teams with the imperfect factor of human error involved.

What do you think would happen with the officiating without "the league" giving directives? It would be mayhem with 20 or so crews all calling the game different ways and without consequences. Sorry but direction has to be given and it doesn't mean there is a conspiracy. Every game there are bad calls and there is zero chance to get away from it, doesn't mean there is a conspiracy.

B2B
04-25-2014, 11:12 AM
You've shifted the goalposts again. The thread WAS about fixing a series for the Nets. When you had no proof of that you shifted it to bias, the to superstar calls, then to the Spurs, etc. I still see nothing about the topic, which is how the league conspired to fix the series for the Nets.



http://warp.povusers.org/grrr/conspiracytheories.html

I didn't shift my argument, they are one in the same.

B2B
04-25-2014, 11:22 AM
I like how you try to downplay it by simply saying that "company man" simply means they work for the company. It is a derogatory term used to descibe a "male or female, that is a royal suck-up or lackey, willing to perform any task on-demand to relish in self-gratification for the sake of promotion or monetary gain." So you are making an assumption. Its no different then calling Donaghy a lying cheat. Except that there is proof that he is a lying cheat and that he is a disgruntled former employee.

Did I not say in the original post that they are not a separate entity?. it was not meant as derogatory term.


And you pretty much avoided my question about what you think is more likely with the league influencing everything through the refs or that its just a difficult job to juggle all the requests and demands of all the teams with the imperfect factor of human error involved.

Both.


What do you think would happen with the officiating without "the league" giving directives? It would be mayhem with 20 or so crews all calling the game different ways and without consequences. Sorry but direction has to be given and it doesn't mean there is a conspiracy. Every game there are bad calls and there is zero chance to get away from it, doesn't mean there is a conspiracy.

I don't dispute direction for stability is given.

ink
04-25-2014, 11:30 AM
You've shifted the goalposts again. The thread WAS about fixing a series for the Nets. When you had no proof of that you shifted it to bias, the to superstar calls, then to the Spurs, etc. I still see nothing about the topic, which is how the league conspired to fix the series for the Nets.



http://warp.povusers.org/grrr/conspiracytheories.html

I didn't shift my argument, they are one in the same.

That's the MO of conspiracy theories. Keep shooting and one stray insinuating bullet is bound to hit the target.

ink
04-25-2014, 11:33 AM
DD never used to get calls.. The reason he's getting these calls now is because he made the allstar game.

Funniest part is outside the 4th of game 2, he hasn't exactly been one of the teams better performers in either game.

wow now you're really reaching.

So the refs are against TOR, but at the same time they are thinking... "wait, Demar made the all star team this year, so let's get him a ton of FT's"

DD has shot 22 ft's in two games, far more than any player on any team and people are saying he doesn't get calls?

It's actually bizarre. The referees have been a complete non-issue this post-season. Sure there are several missed calls per game but human error is not the same thing as conspiracy favouring one team.

B2B
04-25-2014, 11:37 AM
That's the MO of conspiracy theories. Keep shooting and one stray insinuating bullet is bound to hit the target.

If you say so, I'm arguing one thing popularity/ratings.

B2B
04-25-2014, 11:39 AM
It's actually bizarre. The referees have been a complete non-issue this post-season. Sure there are several missed calls per game but human error is not the same thing as conspiracy favouring one team.

What's bizare is you admit the superstar call exist but think there's no favor.

ink
04-25-2014, 11:56 AM
What's bizare is you admit the superstar call exist but think there's no favor.

It's not bizarre. Several of us have explained that the most aggressive players are usually the ones that draw fouls, and not coincidentally they are also the league's best players. Drawing fouls is a learned skill, just like shooting. A lot of the time they get the call because they're so consistently aggressive; when they don't and they argue, they get T'd up. Durant, for example, has had more T's this year than ever before. He's one of the biggest superstars in the league. You make the mistake of assuming that perceived superstar calls favour only one side. They don't. You also make the mistake of assuming that teams laden with veteran players are favoured. They aren't. They simply have more players who have honed the skill of drawing fouls. It's very selective logic to jump from veterans getting calls to league-orchestrated fixes, and most of all, you still offer no proof in this series, which is the topic of this thread. Remember, the burden of proof is on the accuser.

ink
04-25-2014, 12:00 PM
If you say so, I'm arguing one thing popularity/ratings.

But what you are trying to pass as evidence jumps all over the place, and each time you supply no real proof of anything. I know that you believe that you are making an argument, that's the nature of conspiracy theories.

A few people have also refuted the whole idea of seeking ratings through manipulating series and matchups. If the league was really in the business of fixing matchups I don't think the Spurs (in a tiny basketball market in Texas) would have dominated the way they have for the past 15+ years.

B2B
04-25-2014, 12:23 PM
It's not bizarre. Several of us have explained that the most aggressive players are usually the ones that draw fouls, and not coincidentally they are also the league's best players. Drawing fouls is a learned skill, just like shooting. A lot of the time they get the call because they're so consistently aggressive; when they don't and they argue, they get T'd up. Durant, for example, has had more T's this year than ever before. He's one of the biggest superstars in the league. You make the mistake of assuming that perceived superstar calls favour only one side. They don't. You also make the mistake of assuming that teams laden with veteran players are favoured. They aren't. They simply have more players who have honed the skill of drawing fouls. It's very selective logic to jump from veterans getting calls to league-orchestrated fixes, and most of all, you still offer no proof in this series, which is the topic of this thread. Remember, the burden of proof is on the accuser.

Here you state consistency, aggression & ability to mask. If the game was in fact called like that, I would have no issue.

How many times have people seen the game called one way on one end then different on the other regardless of consistency & aggression. One team allowed to play physical while the other gets ticky/tack fouls. Hibberst verticle rule for example where a player is entitled to his space going up. He's the only big allowed to lean forward, a fair amount of his blocks are fouls, without ever being called. This has helped him to be one o the best defensive bigs in the league. Is he a great defender on pure skill or is the leeway contributing to his impressive defensive numbers or both?.

Reputation calls don't have everything to do with the play at hand, which is not what you describe here. So I ask again do you think it's just human error or is there a reputation/popularity bias that affects a call?.

B2B
04-25-2014, 12:35 PM
But what you are trying to pass as evidence jumps all over the place, and each time you supply no real proof of anything. I know that you believe that you are making an argument, that's the nature of conspiracy theories.

A few people have also refuted the whole idea of seeking ratings through manipulating series and matchups. If the league was really in the business of fixing matchups I don't think the Spurs (in a tiny basketball market in Texas) would have dominated the way they have for the past 15+ years.

I saw the 680mil dollar network example, what do you think makes a network commit that type of money, I'm not the one narrowing it to a series or being specific behind the code that makes ball more exciting/watchable. This is why I referenced to the poster that they moved away from the physical NBA into one that allows hand checking/moving screens & more discretion calls that give the refs even more control. Would the solution not to be to lesson the control an official has on a game if your dealing from a human error point of view.

The series that Donaghy claimed was rigged, was in a network contract year.

The Spurs are an unbelievable team, I told Bob years ago it's easier to hide agenda, when not pushed. Raptors have yet to play well in this series to really challenge the officials.

ink
04-25-2014, 12:36 PM
Here you state consistency, aggression & ability to mask. If the game was in fact called like that, I would have no issue.

How many times have people seen the game called one way on one end then different on the other regardless of consistency & aggression. One team allowed to play physical while the other gets ticky/tack fouls. Hibberst verticle rule for example where a player is entitled to his space going up. He's the only big allowed to lean forward, a fair amount of his blocks are fouls, without ever being called. This has helped him to be one o the best defensive bigs in the league. Is he a great defender on pure skill or is the leeway contributing to his impressive defensive numbers or both?.

Reputation calls don't have everything to do with the play at hand, which is not what you describe here. So I ask again do you think it's just human error or is there a reputation/popularity bias that affects a call?.

Several people here have pointed out that it's about familiarity. You're still making a leap of logic from inconsistency and human error to league orchestration. That's where you have zero proof of anything systematic. You only have perceptions of unfairness, and even that "unfairness" changes from game to game and referee to referee.

I haven't seen anything systematic about the blown calls in this series. I have seen blown calls on both sides, and they do tend to involve the more aggressive players. A young player like Ross can only blame his own inexperience for the quick fouls he's been taking. He's trying to handle very difficult, aggressive players and he does not have his angles, his technique honed to the degree that the more seasoned players do. It will come, but in the meantime he will be on the receiving end of calls. It goes on and on, but I see no systematic work on the part of the league. The series is split and refereeing has played NO PART in the outcome of either game.

ink
04-25-2014, 12:41 PM
The other thing worth pointing out is that no other sport relies so heavily on calls from play to play as basketball. The game has actually evolved around getting calls as often as possible. There are dozens of calls per game and virtually all of them lead to scoring in one way or another. It's just the evolution of the game itself. Again, that shows no orchestration by the league. Quite the opposite in fact, as coaches and players from ALL SIDES see calls as their entitlement, and do everything in their power to draw calls on virtually every play. No other sport relies so heavily on constant decision making. It's not surprising that officials are unable to get every call right, or even see every play that merits a call.

B2B
04-25-2014, 12:47 PM
Several people here have pointed out that it's about familiarity. You're still making a leap of logic from inconsistency and human error to league orchestration. That's where you have zero proof of anything systematic. You only have perceptions of unfairness, and even that "unfairness" changes from game to game and referee to referee.

I haven't seen anything systematic about the blown calls in this series. I have seen blown calls on both sides, and they do tend to involve the more aggressive players. A young player like Ross can only blame his own inexperience for the quick fouls he's been taking. He's trying to handle very difficult, aggressive players and he does not have his angles, his technique honed to the degree that the more seasoned players do. It will come, but in the meantime he will be on the receiving end of calls. It goes on and on, but I see no systematic work on the part of the league. The series is split and refereeing has played NO PART in the outcome of either game.

Despite the series being split one/one. The Nets IMO have had control of the series. Whether some of that can be attributed to officiating I too have not seen anything overly blatant to complain about it to this point.

That said I also reference the fact Donaghy was shaving points for years & none noticed either till convicted by an external party.

Having said that the thinking point here is did the Nets have control solely on play or was there a reffing factor that was not noticeable to one watching the game. In short what I'm saying is it doesn't have to be obvious to be there.

When the Raptors play well to affect call where the officials have to be blatant & they don't, I will stop talking about the topic. I'm talking about it to support my team from my belief, not to prove myself to anyone here.

smith&wesson
04-25-2014, 12:48 PM
He actually went well beyond that saying that he thinks its rigged for ratings and that the league is influencing the refs to determine the outcome of the series. That is much more then just saying that the Nets will get "super star" or "reputation" calls. It's also an opinion of his and not a fact, and it certainly isn't an opinion that was made any stronger by the reffing in the first two games.

do super star calls or reputation calls not effect the outcome of a game? they do.

this is certainly not just about toronto and brooklyn. I think this series has been officiated pretty well thus far.. but it is a far gone conclusion that there are in fact these type of calls that do effect the out come of games through out the league. you would have to be blind to not see it.

im not nit picking on what donaghy said. I can care less about what he has to say. I just think that in regards to the superstar calls, its a well known thing and cant really be denied.

ink
04-25-2014, 12:57 PM
Several people here have pointed out that it's about familiarity. You're still making a leap of logic from inconsistency and human error to league orchestration. That's where you have zero proof of anything systematic. You only have perceptions of unfairness, and even that "unfairness" changes from game to game and referee to referee.

I haven't seen anything systematic about the blown calls in this series. I have seen blown calls on both sides, and they do tend to involve the more aggressive players. A young player like Ross can only blame his own inexperience for the quick fouls he's been taking. He's trying to handle very difficult, aggressive players and he does not have his angles, his technique honed to the degree that the more seasoned players do. It will come, but in the meantime he will be on the receiving end of calls. It goes on and on, but I see no systematic work on the part of the league. The series is split and refereeing has played NO PART in the outcome of either game.

Despite the series being split one/one. The Nets IMO have had control of the series. Whether some of that can be attributed to officiating I too have not seen anything overly blatant to complain about it to this point.

That said I also reference the fact Donaghy was shaving points for years & none noticed either till convicted by an external party.

Having said that the thinking point here is did the Nets have control solely on play or was there a reffing factor that was not noticeable to one watching the game. In short what I'm saying is it doesn't have to be obvious to be there.

When the Raptors play well to affect call where the officials have to be blatant & they don't, I will stop talking about the topic. I'm talking about it to support my team from my belief, not to prove myself to anyone here.

I don't see how conspiracy theorizing is supportive of anything.

And again, the only argument you make is to encourage paranoia. If you are distrustful, everything will look like some sort of plot, but what a waste of time and opportunity.

B2B
04-25-2014, 12:59 PM
The other thing worth pointing out is that no other sport relies so heavily on calls from play to play as basketball. The game has actually evolved around getting calls as often as possible. There are dozens of calls per game and virtually all of them lead to scoring in one way or another. It's just the evolution of the game itself. Again, that shows no orchestration by the league. Quite the opposite in fact, as coaches and players from ALL SIDES see calls as their entitlement, and do everything in their power to draw calls on virtually every play. No other sport relies so heavily on constant decision making. It's not surprising that officials are unable to get every call right, or even see every play that merits a call.

Exactly, why did the game evolve, not to increase ratings because the old physical NBA was more boring.

This evolution of hand checking & moving screens has increased the amount of control an official has on a game which leave even more room for error & corruption.

Why is the NBA increasing not decreasing the control an official has over a game?.

My answer is to increase product ratings over the purity of competition.

B2B
04-25-2014, 01:07 PM
I don't see how conspiracy theorizing is supportive of anything.

And again, the only argument you make is to encourage paranoia. If you are distrustful, everything will look like some sort of plot, but what a waste of time and opportunity.

I would not expect anyone to understand it. The sad part is if there was nothing to it, the league would not have had to release a statement on Donaghy's appearance on a TO sports show.

If Donaghy is causing damage to their image, why issue a statement of his Character to dismiss him?, why not threaten to sue him for defamation & be rid of him for good?.

ink
04-25-2014, 01:11 PM
I don't see how conspiracy theorizing is supportive of anything.

And again, the only argument you make is to encourage paranoia. If you are distrustful, everything will look like some sort of plot, but what a waste of time and opportunity.

I would not expect anyone to understand it. The sad part is if there was nothing to it, the league would not have had to release a statement on Donaghy's appearance on a TO sports show.

If Donaghy is causing damage to their image, why issue a statement of his Character to dismiss him?, why not threaten to sue him for defamation & be rid of him for good?.

Because they don't take him seriously.

ink
04-25-2014, 01:12 PM
The other thing worth pointing out is that no other sport relies so heavily on calls from play to play as basketball. The game has actually evolved around getting calls as often as possible. There are dozens of calls per game and virtually all of them lead to scoring in one way or another. It's just the evolution of the game itself. Again, that shows no orchestration by the league. Quite the opposite in fact, as coaches and players from ALL SIDES see calls as their entitlement, and do everything in their power to draw calls on virtually every play. No other sport relies so heavily on constant decision making. It's not surprising that officials are unable to get every call right, or even see every play that merits a call.

Exactly, why did the game evolve, not to increase ratings because the old physical NBA was more boring.

This evolution of hand checking & moving screens has increased the amount of control an official has on a game which leave even more room for error & corruption.

Why is the NBA increasing not decreasing the control an official has over a game?.

My answer is to increase product ratings over the purity of competition.

I realize that's your answer. Your foregone conclusion is conspiracy. You only look for things that support your suspicious approach.

B2B
04-25-2014, 01:25 PM
I realize that's your answer. Your foregone conclusion is conspiracy. You only look for things that support your suspicious approach.

Forget my opinion. I want to hear your opinion

Why is it the NBA is giving the refs more control if human error is a problem in the quality of the game?.

B2B
04-25-2014, 01:31 PM
Because they don't take him seriously.

Oh but they do, otherwise they would not have released a statement citing that he's a criminal for a 5 min spot on a talk radio show.

ink
04-25-2014, 01:34 PM
Forget my opinion. I want to hear your opinion

Why is it the NBA is giving the refs more control if human error is a problem in the quality of the game?.

I accept that there is going to be human error and I just watch the game. I assume the best about the players and officials and understand that they're all trying to get the edge on each other.

smith&wesson
04-25-2014, 01:36 PM
I accept that there is going to be human error and I just watch the game. I assume the best about the players and officials and understand that they're all trying to get the edge on each other.

that doesnt really explain the reputation calls or the super star calls though. accepting it doesnt mean that it doesnt occur.

ink
04-25-2014, 01:36 PM
Oh but they do, otherwise they would not have released a statement citing that he's a criminal for a 5 min spot on a talk radio show.

I didn't say they shouldn't have responded. Of course they should respond. They just don't really need to dignify his allegations with anything more than the statement they released. The burden of proof is on the accuser and he had nothing but allegations.

btw they didn't just call him a "criminal". By saying he's a "convicted felon" they raised the standard of discussion to include trial, proof, evidence, instead of mere speculation and suspicion.

ink
04-25-2014, 01:37 PM
that doesnt really explain the reputation calls or the super star calls though. accepting it doesnt mean that it doesnt occur.

Those have been explained 5 or 6 times already in this thread. I was just saying that I accept it as part of the game.

B2B
04-25-2014, 01:41 PM
I accept that there is going to be human error and I just watch the game. I assume the best about the players and officials and understand that they're all trying to get the edge on each other.

Happy for you, I know better.

smith&wesson
04-25-2014, 01:41 PM
Those have been explained 5 or 6 times already in this thread. I was just saying that I accept it as part of the game.

we have no choice really, if there was a choice we could all do with out those type of calls. how about just calling it down the middle regardless of the name on the back of the jersey ??

B2B
04-25-2014, 01:49 PM
I didn't say they shouldn't have responded. Of course they should respond. They just don't really need to dignify his allegations with anything more than the statement they released. The burden of proof is on the accuser and he had nothing but allegations.

btw they didn't just call him a "criminal". By saying he's a "convicted felon" they raised the standard of discussion to include trial, proof, evidence, instead of mere speculation and suspicion.

They said that to kill his credibility as a former official with inside info

The letter may challenge his opinion/statement, it doesn't prevent him from making it.

He's obviously trying to get back at the association & is slandering their product, why are they not suing him in order to put this to bed?.

Bramaca
04-25-2014, 02:16 PM
Did I not say in the original post that they are not a separate entity?. it was not meant as derogatory term.

Basically any mention of the league and their reps by you are laced with the underlying sentiment that its all a conspiracy. So when you backtrack and say that you didn't mean "company men" in its generally accepted way (derogatory) I don't really find that believable.


I don't dispute direction for stability is given.

So you don't dispute that leadership and direction is necesary but then the fact that they are doing their job is to you an indication that they are doing crooked things.

ink
04-25-2014, 02:16 PM
Happy for you, I know better.

hahaha, that is absurd. There's nothing to "know" and I don't get the sense from your posts that you have any insight that anyone else here is missing. Anyone can see that there are blown calls. Letting it bother you just ruins your experience.

ink
04-25-2014, 02:19 PM
They said that to kill his credibility as a former official with inside info

The letter may challenge his opinion/statement, it doesn't prevent him from making it.

He's obviously trying to get back at the association & is slandering their product, why are they not suing him in order to put this to bed?.

You already asked that question and I answered. Only a few diehard conspiracy theorists continue to milk this.

gwrighter
04-25-2014, 02:21 PM
Raps got the calls in game 2. It's going to be tough for them to get the whistle in BK tonight.

ink
04-25-2014, 02:21 PM
So you don't dispute that leadership and direction is necesary but then the fact that they are doing their job is to you an indication that they are doing crooked things.

The irony is that the strongest, most unshakeable bias is in the folks who suspect crookedness in the league at every turn.

ink
04-25-2014, 02:22 PM
Raps got the calls in game 2. It's going to be tough for them to get the whistle in BK tonight.

I think the crowds do have an influence. Again that's not systemic, just a reality about human beings being screamed at right through the game. BK is going to be a zoo tonight.

smith&wesson
04-25-2014, 02:25 PM
Raps got the calls in game 2. It's going to be tough for them to get the whistle in BK tonight.

you said it man, Brooklyn has a crazy crowd as it is. . not that its the playoffs and kg and pp called out their fans to be extra passionate tonight.. watch out lol... I actually cant wait to see it.

I wonder if were going to see a "f Toronto" statement from the nets lol

Bramaca
04-25-2014, 02:26 PM
do super star calls or reputation calls not effect the outcome of a game? they do.

this is certainly not just about toronto and brooklyn. I think this series has been officiated pretty well thus far.. but it is a far gone conclusion that there are in fact these type of calls that do effect the out come of games through out the league. you would have to be blind to not see it.

im not nit picking on what donaghy said. I can care less about what he has to say. I just think that in regards to the superstar calls, its a well known thing and cant really be denied.

Where did I deny that superstars will get calls that others may not? I didn't, so I have no idea what your point is. Donaghy has gone well beyond that with these opinions and guesses. Can they affect the outcome of a game? Yes, but so can bad calls and missed calls and calls made to appease a home crowd. What of that is league directed? I personally don't think much at all. Those are things that any ref in any league in any sport in the world tend to do without direction from above.

Bramaca
04-25-2014, 02:33 PM
Forget my opinion. I want to hear your opinion

Why is it the NBA is giving the refs more control if human error is a problem in the quality of the game?.

Are they really giving the more control of the game? Sure there have been rule changes but the ones you will bring up have been made to open the game up more and not to control it more. Thats backed up by the fact that the proportion of fg's to ft's and fouls called is greater then it has been in 40 years. Refs are letting players play more and spend less time at the line then they have in a long time.

B2B
04-25-2014, 02:33 PM
Basically any mention of the league and their reps by you are laced with the underlying sentiment that its all a conspiracy. So when you backtrack and say that you didn't mean "company men" in its generally accepted way (derogatory) I don't really find that believable.



So you don't dispute that leadership and direction is necesary but then the fact that they are doing their job is to you an indication that they are doing crooked things.

I' not backtracking from my stance,

Bramaca
04-25-2014, 02:37 PM
I' not backtracking from my stance,

Didn't say anything about your stance. You are backtracking from doing the same thing that you called people ignorant for.

B2B
04-25-2014, 02:43 PM
hahaha, that is absurd. There's nothing to "know" and I don't get the sense from your posts that you have any insight that anyone else here is missing. Anyone can see that there are blown calls. Letting it bother you just ruins your experience.

I know better than to take things at face value whether I'm right or not. I grew up in an environment that required it & I'm built that way. Laugh all you want, you were the same person making fun when I said the Heat were going to sign all 3 free agents claiming the league wanted parity & that they would not allow it.

smith&wesson
04-25-2014, 02:44 PM
Where did I deny that superstars will get calls that others may not? I didn't, so I have no idea what your point is. Donaghy has gone well beyond that with these opinions and guesses. Can they affect the outcome of a game? Yes, but so can bad calls and missed calls and calls made to appease a home crowd. What of that is league directed? I personally don't think much at all. Those are things that any ref in any league in any sport in the world tend to do without direction from above.

I was responding to your post where you stated " donaghy is saying the league is influencing the refs to determine the outcome of the series. That is much more then just saying that the Nets will get "super star" or "reputation" calls."

Im just pointing out that super star and reputation calls do infact impact the game.. and they are completly different than blown or missed calls. blown or missed calls are human error. superstar or reputation calls are favourable calls to certain players over others. they are intentional and not made in any sort of error.

by you saying "can they impact the game, but so do missed calls and blown calls" you are in a sense saying its ok to have superstar calls or reputation calls because they impact the game as much as blown or missed calls. blown or missed calls and superstar, reputation calls are 2 very different things that you are tying together.

B2B
04-25-2014, 02:45 PM
Didn't say anything about your stance. You are backtracking from doing the same thing that you called people ignorant for.

I told you that it wasn't meant as derogatory, it's up to you whether you believe that or not.

pulzar
04-25-2014, 02:51 PM
Im just pointing out that super star and reputation calls do infact impact the game.. and they are completly different than blown or missed calls. blown or missed calls are human error. superstar or reputation calls are favourable calls to certain players over others. they are intentional and not made in any sort of error.

But that's what it boils down to -- some of you have an opinion that they are intentional, and others believe that they are blown calls. "Pointing out" your opinion isn't going to convince anybody.

Instead, if you can point out some facts that back up your opinion, then we might get somewhere, otherwise this thread will continue to go nowhere.

ink
04-25-2014, 02:52 PM
I know better than to take things at face value whether I'm right or not. I grew up in an environment that required it & I'm built that way. Laugh all you want, you were the same person making fun when I said the Heat were going to sign all 3 free agents claiming the league wanted parity & that they would not allow it.

I consider the conspiracy angle to be the easy angle to take. It's easy to distrust and think people are ripping you off. It's harder to insist on firm evidence.

ink
04-25-2014, 02:54 PM
But that's what it boils down to -- some of you have an opinion that they are intentional, and others believe that they are blown calls. "Pointing out" your opinion isn't going to convince anybody.

Instead, if you can point out some facts that back up your opinion, then we might get somewhere, otherwise this thread will continue to go nowhere.

Would anyone object to this thread being closed?

pulzar
04-25-2014, 02:59 PM
Would anyone object to this thread being closed?

I wouldn't. I'd rather we talk about game 3 than this.

Bramaca
04-25-2014, 03:02 PM
I was responding to your post where you stated " donaghy is saying the league is influencing the refs to determine the outcome of the series. That is much more then just saying that the Nets will get "super star" or "reputation" calls."

Im just pointing out that super star and reputation calls do infact impact the game.. and they are completly different than blown or missed calls. blown or missed calls are human error. superstar or reputation calls are favourable calls to certain players over others. they are intentional and not made in any sort of error.

by you saying "can they impact the game, but so do missed calls and blown calls" you are in a sense saying its ok to have superstar calls or reputation calls because they impact the game as much as blown or missed calls. blown or missed calls and superstar, reputation calls are 2 very different things that you are tying together.

A blown call or a missed call is human error. "Star" or "rep" calls as well as hometown calls are also a form of human error because the majority of the time in is not intentional. It's natural that people who deal with each other more will gain a certain amount of favortism, intentional or not. So no, I am not saying its ok but those "2 very different things" aren't actually that different. And it is a leap to go from saying that there are these calls to saying its the league initiating it and intentionally influencing the outcome of individual games and or series.

Bramaca
04-25-2014, 03:04 PM
I told you that it wasn't meant as derogatory, it's up to you whether you believe that or not.

Already said I didn't believe it.

ink
04-25-2014, 03:04 PM
Would anyone object to this thread being closed?

I wouldn't. I'd rather we talk about game 3 than this.

I would too but I'd like sign off from others.

killersweet
04-25-2014, 03:04 PM
Would anyone object to this thread being closed?

unless we get some ground breaking stuff, I don't think we are going to come to any conclusions. Some good points discussed. But at this point, things are going to go in circles.

B2B
04-25-2014, 03:05 PM
I consider the conspiracy angle to be the easy angle to take. It's easy to distrust and think people are ripping you off. It's harder to insist on firm evidence.

if you say so.

ink
04-25-2014, 03:08 PM
I consider the conspiracy angle to be the easy angle to take. It's easy to distrust and think people are ripping you off. It's harder to insist on firm evidence.

I've experienced life in Canada,

Easiest way to put a knife in a man back, is to befriend him. Give him the benefit of doubt, then tell me it's easier.

I know men that have killed near 40 people who have not yet turned 20, who will never see the inside of a prison cell.

You asked me for my coaching credentials, I guarantee you I have experience on this topic.

Do you mind if we closed this thread? We are really not establishing anything to do with the topic.

I have no idea how personal experience completely unrelated to the NBA is relevant here except in establishing strong bias.

B2B
04-25-2014, 03:10 PM
Do you mind if we closed this thread? We are really not establishing anything to do with the topic.

I have no idea how personal experience completely unrelated to the NBA is relevant here except in establishing strong bias.

Go ahead.