NBA Officials

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Right.

And, again my point - no where is there any mention of "fixing" games, whether it is changing the point spread, or actually determining who wins or loses.

Huh?

That's exactly what's being reported, that he fixed games. If you make calls to affect the number of points scored in a game, then from a gambling aspect, you have FIXED the game.

How can you say there's no mention?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by btaylor64

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.

People who bet all the time would bet on just about every game they can get their hands on. Usually many betters are chasing money. So they might have a sure thing in one game, but they want to make sure they can cover on other games. This is why I do not like betting at all.

Peace

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Huh?

That's exactly what's being reported, that he fixed games. If you make calls to affect the number of points scored in a game, then from a gambling aspect, you have FIXED the game.

How can you say there's no mention?

According to the reports on Stern's news conference, "Stern said the NBA is aware Donaghy is being accused of betting on games and providing information to others for the purpose of profiting off bets. Stern also said that he was unaware of any discussions of Donaghy potentially fixing games."

I was also under the impression it was for fixing games, point spreads, whatever. That was what most of the stories focused on initially. But that isn't what is being reported now. Maybe the gambling is all Stern knows for sure now, and that is all he needs to get Donaghy to resign. Maybe there is more behind the scenes, but it is only speculation.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Splute

JRut... did I hear him correctly when he said NO GAMBLING at all is allowed in the NBA (except horse racing) ?

Yes I did. The horse racing part was also negotiated in the collective bargaining agreement. It was also made clear by Stern that the NBA had the strictest policy on gambling as it relates to other sports for their officials.

Peace

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

Protect the league from what? If he's convinced the allegations are true, then jettisoning Donaghy is a good move. But if he's not, wouldn't it be better for the league to stand by your man and assert that there has been no impropriety?

No. It would be better to get rid of him - whether he "resigns" or is fired - immediately...you can always reinstate him and offer an "apology" later if it all turns out to be bogus after all...then Stern can point to his actions and simply say he was trying to protect the integrity of the league...get as much distance from the accused as you can, the whole concept of "plausible deniability", etc...

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

According to the reports on Stern's news conference, "Stern said the NBA is aware Donaghy is being accused of betting on games and providing information to others for the purpose of profiting off bets. Stern also said that he was unaware of any discussions of Donaghy potentially fixing games."

I was also under the impression it was for fixing games, point spreads, whatever. That was what most of the stories focused on initially. But that isn't what is being reported now. Maybe the gambling is all Stern knows for sure now, and that is all he needs to get Donaghy to resign. Maybe there is more behind the scenes, but it is only speculation.

While Stern may have been careful is selecting his words, I think we've all read what's been written and he's the only one saying that. If you're the type of person who is betting on games that you're officiating, then you're going to make calls that affect the point spread. That's were the integrity issue comes in.

Take a look at the article where sports gambler R.J. Bell put together some numbers on his games and the outcomes. In the two years prior to the alleged activity, TD's games beat the over 44% of the time. In the two years during the activity, his games surpassed the over 57%. The odds of that happening are 1000 to 1. There were 12 straight TD games where their was so much big money bet just before the game that the points pushed 1.5 points prior to the tip. In 10 of those 12 games, if you had bet with the money, you would had won. That's an 80% winning percentage, which is next to impossible.

Sorry but I don't buy that the fix wasn't in.

[Mark Dexter]

Q: To the best of your understanding, do you really feel that it's possible to determine if a referee is actually cheating, making calls that aren't real?
Stern: That's a really good question. It's very hard, but we're going to give it our best shot. There are things that you have been speculating about in the media in the last few days about the number of calls, the disparity of calls and the like. But it's hard, but we're going to do it and we'll be able to make the judgment at that time.

It would not surprise me if it proves to be difficult, but I just want to say one thing here. If you bet on a game, you lose the benefit of the doubt. So I'm not going to stand here and say to you, it didn't happen, because that would impair the credibility that I think the NBA deserves for its efforts, and that's why we don't allow betting on games because as our brochure that we give to the referees says, that if you bet, then people will assume that the game is being subjected to the possibility that it would be decided by other than on its merits, and I think that's a fair point. And I will make no defense, neat criminal distinction between betting on games here and something worse. You lose the benefit of the doubt when you do it.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Mark Dexter

Q: To the best of your understanding, do you really feel that it's possible to determine if a referee is actually cheating, making calls that aren't real?
Stern: That's a really good question. It's very hard, but we're going to give it our best shot. There are things that you have been speculating about in the media in the last few days about the number of calls, the disparity of calls and the like. But it's hard, but we're going to do it and we'll be able to make the judgment at that time.

Isn't that what they were supposed to be doing already with their vaunted evaluation program? If the calls are that subjective(which a lot of them are imo), and it's so hard to decide whether the right call was made or not, don't you think that something new in the way of evaluation has to come about?

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Isn't that what they were supposed to be doing already with their vaunted evaluation program? If the calls are that subjective(which a lot of them are imo), and it's so hard to decide whether the right call was made or not, don't you think that something new in the way of evaluation has to come about?

I'm not sure if the original comment was made in regards to future attempts to detect cheating as part of the eval or not, I suspect it was. There has been a lot of criticism leveled because the NBA's current evaluation system didn't detect this. I just don't see how it could have.

Evaluating an official's performance for a single game is a very different activity than mining evaluation and other related data for evidence of fraud or cheating. If you're not focused on the latter, I don't see where there is any reasonable expectation that you would discover it, not if it's subtle.

To do so would indeed require something new. Probably an army of statistics nerds locked in a storage closet somewhere doing round-the-clock analyses on mountains of data about call selection, long term trends, what the odds were, what the outcome was, etc. In theory it should be possible to determine some kind of baseline profile for each official then spot deviations from it. Who knows, they may even be able to create the statistical equivalent of QuesTec.

And I'm sure Stern would love nothing more than to have irrefutable statistical evidence that the conspiracy theorists are all wrong. Well, except maybe to have it all printed in a hefty spread sheet he can roll up and beat the hell out of Mark Cuban with the next time he goes off

[Odd Duck]

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

And I'm sure Stern would love nothing more than to have irrefutable statistical evidence that the conspiracy theorists are all wrong. Well, except maybe to have it all printed in a hefty spread sheet he can roll up and beat the hell out of Mark Cuban with the next time he goes off

He better be careful about beating up Cuban with anything right now. Sterns needs to be concerned with the league's perception with the fans...you know, those insignificant minions that BUY TICKETS...my bet is 95% of them are thinking Cuban was right and Sterns' glorious system is a big stinking pile of bull dung.

Honestly, if I were in Sterns position...as soon as the whirlwind settles a bit and more details come out, I would establish a committee made up of owners and former officials to review and overhaul the officials evaluation program, to include something to detect suspect activity/trends, and make Cuban the chairman.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Odd Duck

Honestly, if I were in Sterns position...as soon as the whirlwind settles a bit and more details come out, I would establish a committee made up of owners and former officials to review and overhaul the officials evaluation program, to include something to detect suspect activity/trends, and make Cuban the chairman.

Are you serious? Owners?

Whatinthehell do owners know about officiating?

And make Cuban the chairman? Helluva idea. I'm sure that his Mavs would just love the officiating after he got done with it. The other teams in the league? Not so much methinks. All Cuban cares about is whether his team is gonna get their fair share of the calls that he thinks that they deserve, which is about 85% of 'em.

[Odd Duck]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Are you serious? Owners?

Whatinthehell do owners know about officiating?

And make Cuban the chairman? Helluva idea. I'm sure that his Mavs would just love the officiating after he got done with it. The other teams in the league? Not so much methinks. All Cuban cares about is whether his team is gonna get their fair share of the calls that he thinks that they deserve, which is about 85% of 'em.

Give me a break Jurassic...what do the owners in the NFL know about rules? Yet they have a competition committee that handles, amoung other things, rules.

First, like it or not, the OWNERS are, or should be, the ones that dictate how things are handled in a professional league. If by no other way, than by employing a commissioner. Sterns may be powerful, but you can bet your last dollar that if he started doing things the owners didn't like they would get things changed.

Second, do you really think any official in the NBA is going to do anything that may even be remotely perceived as bias? My bet is next year you will see a marked difference in how things are called. They are not going to want to be viewed as "on the take". I am not saying any others are, but it is human nature to act differently when a peer is caught up in something like this...and even though a lot here don't think they are, NBA officials are human.

Lastly, If ANY owner of any team in any league is only concerned with his team then that owner is a short sighted business idiot. A team benefits when the league as a whole does well. Cuban may be a lot of things...but short sighted business idiot is not one of them.

[lrpalmer3]

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.

That's because 25 years ago they didn't have 30 cameras to zoom in on an official's mistake, and they didn't play in on Sportscenter 35 times each hour.

NBA officials make 7-10 mistakes a game. They don't alert the fans to these mistakes, but teams are told that a mistake was made. If you watch a game and observe a no-call that you think should have been called, don't assume that's the way the NBA wants it called. It's possible that the ref didn't see it, or saw it and had a brain fart. These guys are the best, but they are not perfect.

[Adam]

Screw the NBA. My faith in the integrity of the gambling industry has been shaken to the core. I don't even know if I can bet on boxing now.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Screw the NBA. My faith in the integrity of the gambling industry has been shaken to the core. I don't even know if I can bet on boxing now.

Too funny. There's always UFC. Boxing is on the way out.