Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee
Yabut......foul calls are subjective as hell in the NBA, given the amount of constant contact. Anyone evaluating those calls, or non-calls, has to be completely subjective also when deciding whether a good call was made or not. Geeze, I can't figure out what criteria is currently being used to call fouls consistently anyway in the NBA. I can see how an official could sneak in enough calls or non-calls to keep a game either inside or outside the line. Iow, they don't have to make a game-deciding call which would probably be scrutinized heavier, just enough calls to keep the game where they want it in relation to the line.
I agree that something doesn't sound right, but that something might just be the NBA evaluation system.
Thoughts?
|
I completely agree that calls are subjective. But in order to shave points, I would think you would be calling things that did not happen. Also the NBA after every game scrutinizes calls. They even know at halftime what they did wrong. If you work D-1 they might not hear anything about a missed call for days. The NBA they get all over the officials for what they call NCI (Non Call Incorrect). If he was screwing up that much, I would think there would be some real evidence. I guess time will tell and it does not help if you have contact with mob members. I am just saying I do not see how this can be done for a 2 year period. Now if you told me he did this just during one season and did not work the playoffs, I think that would be easier to swallow.
Peace