Ralph Nader and game 6

[Mark Padgett]

Originally posted by djh3
I have read a couple of the replys, and comments at this site. I was hoping to find some honest, object review of the officiating in the kings-lakers series, and game 6 in particular.

Unfortunately it seems "officials" are much like what police used to be, in that they seem to be protecting their own. A common theme seems to be when a fan questions something, the response is "you should put a whistle on, you should deal with the pressure, etc....."

Well, I guess that means that none of you ever complain about a rude doctor, a poorly served meal, being ripped off at the car dealer, etc.... unless of course you have all done those jobs before. Must be nice going through life knowing that everyone is doing their job right, unless of course you previously did the job, then you have the right to complain or question. Paying $50 for a ticket, and financially supporting the sport that pays the salaries of the officials does not give us that right. I understand.

A fan can appreciate that calling a game of this magnitude can be difficult, however game 6 was not just poorly called, it was called poorly in a biased fashion. The number of mistakes favored one side significantly more than the other.

I am not a tree hugger, but I am glad to see that Nader is keeping the focus on this issue.

You still don't get it. We're not defending officials that make "bad" calls by taking the position that the calls were not bad after all and only another official is qualified to comment on the quality of calls, we're taking the position that anyone who thinks that NBA officials intentionally make calls that favor certain teams over others because of some conspiricy by the league to have certain teams win to boost television ratings (or some other such nonsense)is a moron.

Not only that, but your analogies are not congruent. I wouldn't think that only a doctor would be able to judge another doctor because he was rude (certainly a patient can be justified in doing that), but I would think that only a doctor could have a meaningful opinion of whether another doctor was negligent or not. And - it seems like our courts agree with me.

I hope Ralph was only kidding. I don't dismiss his opinions offhand, after all - if it wasn't for Ralph, people would still be driving in, and dying in, Corvairs. But for him to represent that there was something amiss on purpose in the officiating of a basketball game - well, that's just plain silly.