NBA Ref Article

[Mark Dexter]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/s...age=bucherrefs

[FrankHtown]

I felt awfully depressed after reading that

[ShadowStripes]

Sometimes, the truth hurts, but I think it's good for this to come out. The desire by the NBA, and to a lesser extent college, to produce robotic officiating has made the product worse in many cases.

[Scrapper1]

Personally, I found this quote to be the most interesting part of the piece:

"NCI," says one ref. "It's short for 'no call incorrect.' That's what they hit you with the hardest. You're better off getting it wrong by blowing your whistle than by not blowing it."

This is exactly the difference in philosophy that we discussed with btaylor. In the NBA, you're better off making an incorrect call. In NCAA, they prefer for you to make an incorrect no-call. That's not earth-shaking, but I thought it was interesting to have that underscored by somebody within the league.

[Adam]

I was interested to read that the guys were going back reviewing tapes of when they reffed with Donaghy and still couldn't find anything even in hind sight.

[btaylor64]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

Personally, I found this quote to be the most interesting part of the piece:

This is exactly the difference in philosophy that we discussed with btaylor. In the NBA, you're better off making an incorrect call. In NCAA, they prefer for you to make an incorrect no-call. That's not earth-shaking, but I thought it was interesting to have that underscored by somebody within the league.

Yeah it's kinda funny that we talked about that. It's going to be interesting to see if that is changed at all in the upcoming season(s).

[Adam]

I'm going to be interested, as this thing progresses, to see if they are able to determine how he was able to manipulate the games. If he did it, it must be detectable, I would think.

And, if they aren't able to show how he did it after knowing he did, it doesn't inspire a lot of confidence that they'll be able to prevent or even detect it in the future.

An alternative is that all is not as it seems due to the federal investigation. Perhaps he didn't manipulate games.

The whole thing still smells funny to me.

[rainmaker]

This is what interested me the most:

"Officials say that over the previous two seasons, their decisions have been second-guessed by the league more than ever before and, all too often, erroneously. They are convinced that public or team perception of a call will ultimately dictate whether the league finds it correct. Several refs say they've been given a thumbs-up on a performance only to be harangued, even reprimanded, by the same people several days later after they've had a chance to view the slo-mo replay."

Looks like knowing whether your league has your back is one of the most important parts of reffing. When that changed, all of a sudden, everyone wants out. I can agree with that!

[Old School]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

Looks like knowing whether your league has your back is one of the most important parts of reffing. When that changed, all of a sudden, everyone wants out. I can agree with that!

As far as the NBA, that's a good thing. More people leave, more new people get to come in. I'm sorry, but sixty year olds working a pro-game. It's time for them to hang em up. Those guys make so much money, and pretend that they are so much better than everyone else. Well, they make mistakes just like me and you. They are paid quite handsomely to get it right, and when they don't, they should get called on the carpet. Just want to brush off some of that, I'm perfect and better than everyone else. The guys in their 50's and 60's stepping down, they had their run. Nothing to be mad about. Now the door swings open on the other end for new opportunities. That's a good thing. I'm excited for the guys that are very close to getting in.

[Texas Aggie]

Nothing new here. All this stuff has been going on for years.