NBA Officials

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

Very true, but Stern's comments certainly make sound like he's convinced. "We would like to assure our fans that no amount of effort, time or personnel is being spared to assist in this investigation, to bring to justice an individual who has betrayed the most sacred trust in professional sports, and to take the necessary steps to protect against this ever happening again," Stern said.

We may be guessing, but I'm sure Stern isn't. He's already seen what the FBI has. I think ESPN is carrying Stern's news conference at 11 am Eastern today.

Scrappy, wouldn't you agree that Stern is getting a bit ahead of himself in terms of a presumption of innocence?

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

Scrappy, wouldn't you agree that Stern is getting a bit ahead of himself in terms of a presumption of innocence?

Not necessarily. He's probably seen/heard the evidence that the FBI has collected; at the very least, he's been briefed on it by the FBI. If he didn't have the evidence in front of him, I can't believe that he would come out so strongly on the issue. The guy is a league employee, after all. If there was still some doubt in his mind, he would likely say the usual "wait to hear all the evidence" things.

I'm not ready to convict the guy, because I don't have any evidence at all. But I'm sure that Stern does. We'll probably find out in about 20 minutes.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

Not necessarily. He's probably seen/heard the evidence that the FBI has collected; at the very least, he's been briefed on it by the FBI. If he didn't have the evidence in front of him, I can't believe that he would come out so strongly on the issue. The guy is a league employee, after all. If there was still some doubt in his mind, he would likely say the usual "wait to hear all the evidence" things.

I'm not ready to convict the guy, because I don't have any evidence at all. But I'm sure that Stern does. We'll probably find out in about 20 minutes.

Can we listen in online somewhere?

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

Not necessarily. He's probably seen/heard the evidence that the FBI has collected; at the very least, he's been briefed on it by the FBI. If he didn't have the evidence in front of him, I can't believe that he would come out so strongly on the issue. The guy is a league employee, after all. If there was still some doubt in his mind, he would likely say the usual "wait to hear all the evidence" things.

I'm not ready to convict the guy, because I don't have any evidence at all. But I'm sure that Stern does. We'll probably find out in about 20 minutes.

I'm not a lawyer of course but I believe the FBI can't disclose evidence that's going to a grand jury. Regardless of what Stern's role is here the government is bound by law. In any event if I was a lawyer and I got hired to represent the official in question I would certainly make a big deal out of Stern having tainted any potential jury pool with his remarks. There's a reason why in the real world we often hear people say things like "I can't talk about it because it's under investigation...or going to trial...or in trial". Apparently these considerations don't apply in Stern's world.

Of course neither of us know what we're talking about so I'll go ahead and give you *my* take. Stern is facing a huge sh1tstorm with this story and he's more than willing to identify and publicly hang any scapegoats that will help his case. Regardless of what evidence he may or may not have seen.

[sj]

Stern is giving a press conference right now.

[JugglingReferee]

Got it on www.sportsline.com

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

Scrappy, wouldn't you agree that Stern is getting a bit ahead of himself in terms of a presumption of innocence?

I know it's not the same thing, but didn't we just see some athletes get convicted before trial and turn out to be completely innocent. And, the guilty party there was someone who had more reason to know better than David Stern.

[Jimgolf]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I know it's not the same thing, but didn't we just see some athletes get convicted before trial and turn out to be completely innocent.

True,but supposedly he's going to plead guilty, and sing like a canary. Pretty safe to assume he's guilty if he plans on pleading guilty.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by Jimgolf

True,but supposedly he's going to plead guilty, and sing like a canary. Pretty safe to assume he's guilty if he plans on pleading guilty.

True. But until he pleads quilty he's assumed to be what...?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Jimgolf

True,but supposedly he's going to plead guilty, and sing like a canary. Pretty safe to assume he's guilty if he plans on pleading guilty.

Maybe, but it's "supposed" at this point. My only point is that just because someone who's supposed to have seen and evaluated the evidence is going on television and proclaiming the accused to be guilty doesn't mean he is in fact guilty; even if the person on TV has credibility.
Granted, Stern isn't Nifong, and doesn't face disbarment if this all goes south for the feds; but it doesn't make Stern's statement any more credible. Like I said, if this all goes south for the feds, Stern is going to owe an apology to this official.

Edited to mark #4000. Me and Pete Rose, baby. Now, what are the odds that this thread gets to 50 posts?

[rockyroad]

I think we can all agree that Stern's #1 priority right now is to protect the League - and if he can do that by throwing this official under the bus, then he will do it in a heartbeat and worry about any apologies he has to make later when and if that time comes...

On a side note, I have led discussions at camps and training sessions for both officials and teachers (my real job) in which I have pointed out that as a ref (or teacher) we are held to a higher standard than the general public (coaches, players, parents, whatever)...but that does NOT mean that everyone who becomes an official (or teacher) is above reproach, and it is our job to make sure that we "police" ourselves so to speak...if this guy was doing these things, someone should have known and figured it out and blown the whistle on him...I find it very hard to believe that no one had a clue and everyone was taken by surprise as Stern keeps saying. They had to know there was something strange going on...

[Adam]

I wonder if the NBA wasn't approached in the midst of the investigation to attempt to gather evidence using the NBA's evaluation system. That might explain Stern's confidence in Tim's guilt.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

...if this guy was doing these things, someone should have known and figured it out and blown the whistle on him...I find it very hard to believe that no one had a clue and everyone was taken by surprise as Stern keeps saying. They had to know there was something strange going on...

DJ, I've been in this whistle-blowing game for close to 50 years now. I can watch an NBA game now and not have a clue as to what a foul is. Or when traveling should be called. Or when 3-seconds should be called. Or.....

I couldn't say that 20-25 years ago.

That's one of the reasons that I don't watch the NBA anymore.

Apparently Donaghy's evaluations were good and his ratings were high. That has to reflect more on the NBA's current system imo. Garbage in...garbage out.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

DJ, I've been in this whistle-blowing game for close to 50 years now. I can watch an NBA game now and not have a clue as to what a foul is. Or when traveling should be called. Or when 3-seconds should be called. Or.....

I couldn't say that 20-25 years ago.

That's one of the reasons that I don't watch the NBA anymore.

Apparently Donaghy's evaluations were good and his ratings were high. That has to reflect more on the NBA's current system imo. Garbage in...garbage out.

I agree...it's very hard to watch. But the people in the league who do know and understand - most importantly other officials - should have been able to figure out that something weird was going on...they do understand the way the league wants things called, etc...it just strikes me as very odd that everyone involved with the league is acting so surprised and shocked. How could no one have known anything???

[btaylor64]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

DJ, I've been in this whistle-blowing game for close to 50 years now. I can watch an NBA game now and not have a clue as to what a foul is. Or when traveling should be called. Or when 3-seconds should be called. Or.....

I couldn't say that 20-25 years ago.

That's one of the reasons that I don't watch the NBA anymore.

Apparently Donaghy's evaluations were good and his ratings were high. That has to reflect more on the NBA's current system imo. Garbage in...garbage out.

he wasn't making a ton of bad calls Jurassic. heck, he didn't even have to make the wrong call sometimes. Sometimes a foul could have came at the perfect time for him. Maybe sometimes in the 4th qtr., while the PG was dribbling, a defender put a hand on the PG on the perimeter and he calls a quick foul, which by the NBA guidelines is a foul. Well a couple of those along with a couple of fouls from your partners and you have the team shooting the penalty early in the 4th. All the time Donaghy gets his fouls charted as correct calls. Easy enough, all the while uping his play calling percentage.

all in all if he was a great play recognition guy and got damn near all his plays right until one or two plays in the 4th, I can see easily how he gets to the playoffs. Plus he didn't have to fix every game. I'm sure there isn't as much betting going on when the Atlanta Hawks play the Charlotte Bobcats vs. the Spurs and the Heat.