Another NBA official implicated

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by tomegun

Why do you keep going off on a tangent? See the smiley face. Accept the smiley face. Let the smiley face cleanse you.

Stick the smiley face up your azz.

[Bad Zebra]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Stick the smiley face up your azz.

Classic response... Thanks, I just spit Pepsi all over my monitor.

Originally Posted by Bad Zebra

Classic response... Thanks, I just spit Pepsi all over my monitor.

The Pepsi incident could've been avoided if you only took heed to the following statement

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Stick the smiley face up your azz.

[Adam]

Maybe that's where it came from.

[Camron Rust]

Implication doesn't mean fact, it mean possibility or suggestion. The pattern of phone calls, all by themselves, implicate him...no matter what any person reads into the calls or what the calls were about. The pattern of calls suggest possible involvement in Donaghy's crimes....that's all.

Does it prove it? Of course not.

Was he involved? Probably not, but such phone calls do call him into question (implicate him).

Have they disproven his involvement? I doubt that too. It's pretty hard to prove something didn't happen.

I'm all for assuming innocence but, if more & more suggestive evidence appears to connect him with crimes, it will still lead the NBA to terminate him...employement actions as well as civil actons require far less concrete evidence than criminal convictions.

[BillyMac]

Implicate
Definition im·pli·cate (im′pli kāt′)
transitive verb -·cat′ed, -·cat′·ing
- to show to have a connection with a crime, fault, etc.; involve
- to show to be involved or concerned

Implicate
Synonyms implicate
v. involve, connect, cite, impute, associate, tie up with, charge, incriminate, inculpate, stigmatize, link, catch up in, draw in, relate, compromise, ensnare, embroil, mire, entangle, entail;

[regular guy]

Isn't is automatically an "implication" if NO OTHER REF IN THE NBA would want to be the guy one either end of the 134 calls, right?

Also, up further review (not mine) there appears to be a "strange" pattern at least to the calls:

Calls between Foster, 41, and Donaghy, also 41, took place immediately before and after 54 of the 57 games Donaghy officiated from the beginning of the 2006-2007 season until mid-March, when his role in the gambling operation apparently ended. Records also show a vast majority of the calls came in the hours before or after games officiated by Donaghy or Foster.

Donaghy’s phone records for one of those days, Dec. 30, obtained by Fox News, reveal the following:

— 10:34 a.m. – Donaghy calls Foster.

— 10:35 a.m. – Donaghy calls another referee.

— 10:36 a.m. – Donaghy calls Martino, the “middleman” between him and his bookie.

— 10:39 a.m. – Donaghy calls Foster.

— 5:15 p.m. – Donaghy calls Martino.

— 5:23 p.m. – Donaghy calls Martino.

— 7 p.m. – Donaghy referees game between the Miami Heat and the Orlando Magic. The Magic win in a rout, 97-68.

— 8 p.m. – Foster referees a game between the Toronto Raptors and the Memphis Grizzlies in Memphis. The Grizzlies win 110-104. Foster and Donaghy speak 12 minutes after the game.

— 11:27 p.m. – Foster and Donaghy speak for at least the fourth time of the day.

— 11:38 p.m. – Foster and Donaghy speak for at least the fifth time of the day.

The following day, Donaghy spoke with Foster at 1:37 p.m., for two minutes. One minute later, at 1:40 p.m., Donaghy spoke to Martino, also for two minutes.

On a number of other days:

— Donaghy placed three calls to Foster before Donaghy refereed the Jan. 19, 2007, game between the New Orleans Hornets and the San Antonio Spurs. The next day, he called Foster three more times.

— On Jan. 27, Donaghy had the day off, but he called Foster five times, each time for no more than two minutes, before Foster refereed a game that night between the Sacramento Kings and Dallas Mavericks.

— On Jan. 18, the next day, Donaghy and Foster spoke three more times.

— On Feb. 2, before Donaghy refereed a game in Boston between the Celtics and Los Angeles Clippers, he made three more calls to Foster. He called Foster again after the game, then immediately called Martino.

Only three game days do not show calls to Foster:

— Nov. 29, when the L.A. Clippers hosted Memphis;

— Jan. 22, when Donaghy was in Toronto and, according to court records, used calling cards to place all of his calls;

— Jan. 24, when Cleveland hosted Philadelphia and Donaghy used the same calling card. On Jan. 23, however, Donaghy’s cell phone records show two calls to Foster.

Donaghy might logically communicate with other referees he was officiating with, and there are many such calls in Donaghy’s records. But Donaghy and Foster did not referee a single game together during the 2006-2007 season.

Donaghy also had three other cell phone numbers registered in his name, all of which he used. But he called Foster using the phone the feds say he designated for mostly gambling-related use.

The short calls with Foster stopped abruptly in mid March 2007, when Donaghy is believed to have stopped his gambling.

AND THEN IT GETS REALLY "STRANGE":

Big Money UNDEFEATED in Accused Ref's Games
by RJ_Bell on 07/16/2008 8:00 AM
Statistics indicate that NBA Referee Scott Foster Affected Games

Las Vegas, Nevada (7/15/08) News reports have revealed that NBA referee Scott Foster was involved in over 130 suspicious phone calls with disgraced ref Tim Donaghy. An examination by RJ Bell of Pregame.com of betting patterns in Scott Fosters games raises even more questions.

During the 2006-07 period under investigation, seven games refereed by Scott Foster had lopsided enough betting on one team to move the point spread by at least 2 points; those seven teams were undefeated against Vegas meaning that the big-money gamblers won a 7 of 7 times on Fosters games; the odds of that happening randomly are less than 1%.Statistics alone cannot convict, but its certainly noteworthy that seven times in Fosters games one team was bet extremely heavily, and all seven times that team won, said RJ Bell of Pregame.com.

Two of those seven games stand out: On January 19, 2007 the Kings opened as a 1.5 favorites at Boston; betting on Sacramento moved the line to -4.5. Kings won by 5, shooting 25 free throws, versus only 14 free throws for the home team Celtics. On March 20, 2007 the Nuggets opened as 2.5 point underdogs at New Jersey. Denver was bet so heavily, they closed as 1 point favorites. Denver won by 4, shooting 32 free throws versus only 22 for the home team Nets.

In prior reporting widely carried by the national media, RJ Bell of Pregame.com uncovered that big-money bettors won 15 straight lopsidedly bet games refereed by Tim Donaghy during the 2006-2007 season.

Inside the numbers of this study: Teams bet in a disproportionate fashion typically win only around 50% against the Las Vegas line. Wins and losses determined against the opening number. The time frame considered: Opening Day 2006 through March 31, 2007.

MEDIA NOTE: Print, radio, TV, and Internet media should feel free to quote any information above. Please attribute: RJ Bell of Pregame.com.

For complete game-by-game details, follow-up questions, or media appearances email: [email protected]

About RJ Bell of Pregame.com
RJ Bell, president of http://Pregame.com, has been featured on CBS News with Katie Couric, ABC News with Charles Gibson, Nightline, Sportscenter, Outside the Lines (ESPN), First Take (ESPN2), ESPN.com, ESPN National Radio, Yahoo, AOL.com, CNN.com and in Wall Street Journal, USA Today, Associated Press, LA Times, Newsweek.com, Maxim, and Forbes.

[JugglingReferee]

If that info is true, then I think it looks bad for Foster.

[Adam]

If it's true, I'd bet the feds already looked into it. Good grief.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

If it's true, I'd bet the feds already looked into it. Good grief.

True. Public perception about this guy wll be harmed, though.

[Adam]

Only if the real media get irresponsible and pick up Bell's story. Unless there's more to it than Bell, I'll be surprised if it has real legs.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

If it's true, I'd bet the feds already looked into it. Good grief.

And if they did, the fact that there are no charges doesn't mean much. It may mean that just don't have enough to get a conviction....doesn't mean he's innocent. And, on the flip side, he may be completely innocent.

Now, what's that word that is so important to officials????

Ah, yes....perception!!

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

And if they did, the fact that there are no charges doesn't mean much. It may mean that just don't have enough to get a conviction....doesn't mean he's innocent. And, on the flip side, he may be completely innocent.

Now, what's that word that is so important to officials????

Ah, yes....perception!!

You are right that it is about perception, but is it a fair case of perception? And as officials do we really need to feed into that "perception."

Remember the general public thinks we are all corrupt or play favorites and all this situation did was "confirm" that for many people. I just think we need to be careful to make insinuations based on very innocent activity.

I know officials that work HS games that cannot get off the phone before, during halftime or after games to call just about everyone they know.

Peace

[jkjenning]

Originally Posted by regular guy

Isn't is automatically an "implication" if NO OTHER REF IN THE NBA would want to be the guy one either end of the 134 calls, right?

No, not when Donaghy is the one calling Foster. I can call anybody I want 100 times a day and if they are nice enough to answer the phone, then I guess I can implicate them when I get caught doing something ugly - maybe these are CYA calls. Those who are investigating this will have all the facts possible and until Foster gets charged with something, then there is no real implication. We are presumed innocent in this country.

Statistical spreads will be beat - that's the nature of statistics. I don't see any quoted statistics about the likelihood of game outcomes where Foster/Donaghy did not talk [and am not really interested in them anyway].

[referee99]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Who's Domino?