Article pointing finger at Racist Referees

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by Berkut

If the officer should lose his job, it should be because he is incompetent.

Whether he was incompetent because he is a racist, or incompetent while not being racist is both immaterial and almost impossible to ascertain.

But that race card is just too enticing to leave it unplayed.

Yup.

[Kelvin green]

[QUOTE=Da Official;591614]"The NBA data, released in early May by Justin Wolfers, a public policy professor at the University of Pennsylvania, and Joseph Price, a Cornell University economics graduate student and doctoral candidate, concluded that black players received between 0.12 and 0.21 more fouls per 48 minutes when the number of white referees officiating a game increased from zero to three. The study reported that white players were also discriminated against in games officiated by allblack referee crews (“The News” 7/07)."

QUOTE]

What utter nonsense... ..2 fouls more per player per ball game. that is so statistically insignificant ... 1 foul difference in a game? Give me a break

" Mr. Wolfers and Mr. Price also report a statistically significant correlation with decreases in points, rebounds and assists, and a rise in turnovers, when players performed before primarily opposite-race officials.

“Player-performance appears to deteriorate at every margin when officiated by a larger fraction of opposite-race referees,” they write. The paper later notes no change in free-throw percentage. “We emphasize this result because this is the one on-court behavior that we expect to be unaffected by referee behavior.”


They blamed a decrease in scoring, rebounds and assists and increased number of turnovers on the officiating crew...

They never did look at whether the call was right or not.

Even this study's raw data says.

compared to white players, black players play more minutes per game (weighted means—30.7 minutes vs 27.2 minutes; while the unweighted means among those with positive playing time are 25.0 vs 20.5).

Black players receive about the same number of fouls per game (2.55 vs 2.53) as white players, but receive fewer fouls per 48 minutes played (4.33 vs. 4.97).
The differences in foul rates largely reflect the fact that white players tend to be taller, heavier, and more likely to play center than black players. (wasnt their a movie with a name that told us that?)

They create some foul rate and break it down by crews...

Their conclusion in their study

We find that players earn up to 4% fewer fouls and score up to 2½% more points on nights in which their race matches that of the refereeing crew. Player statistics that one might think are unaffected by referee behavior are uncorrelated with referee race. The bias in foul-calling is large enough that the probability of a team winning is noticeably affected by the racial composition of the refereeing crew assigned to the game.

Non sense because it is team effort... A team's probablitity of winning is effected by their numbers....Just dont think so.

Break this down (even assuming this is true)..They do a whole bunch of math and economic wizardry Kobe Bryant scores (assuming scores 40 points per game) scores 1 point more in a game when he has an all black crew as opposed to an all white crew.. The authors claim that since so may games are decided in OT or by one point that this is statistically significant...

They try to equate dynamics in games but how do you deal with the home court versus away. LA playing in Boston as opposed to Oklahoma. Teams with better players, players with higher salaries? Teams with better benches, points scored per minues, who is in the gameat the end.... (ad nauseum)

they also state In addition, it is generally believed that coaches have some influence over the decision of referees. If the own-race bias of the referees extends to the race of the coach then we would expect a coach of a particular race to have more influence when a larger fraction of their referees are of his race, especially when facing a coach of the opposite race. ... shows some weakly suggestive evidence of bias against opposite-race coaches; the magnitude of the coach effect is equal roughly equivalent to the effect of the race of a single player, but quite imprecisely estimated

I could do some sort of regression model that shows that when the full moon is out there are more points, or defense are better on thursdays than Fridays, There may be some bias out there but I think most of it is more percieved than not...

They still never do tell us out of the 600,000 foul calls how many were wrong or right. Nor do they analyze the no call and how many were made (go figure no data from a box score they used)... I wonder how they would do that study, or how about the one that superstars get less calls than the rookie? or that subs get more fouls than starters. I know how about fouls ber dollar earned? (Bill Lambier would have been the lowest paid player in the league)

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Berkut

He didn't ask if it happens, he asked if it was acceptable.

You have a person that is questioning the current system, and people here are defending that system. So it must not be a big deal to those that think everything is peachy.

Peace

[WreckRef]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

You have a person that is questioning the current system, and people here are defending that system. So it must not be a big deal to those that think everything is peachy.

Peace

From what I've read, it sounds like you are an advocate for having refs officiate their own race more often than not. So what happens to me since I'm Asian, do I not get to officiate at all since probably less than 1% of players are Asian? Should I only ref 1% of the total number of games?

[Berkut]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

You have a person that is questioning the current system, and people here are defending that system. So it must not be a big deal to those that think everything is peachy.

Peace

You are avoiding the question.

Not accepting the claim that we should practice racism in officiating selection in one particular direction is not "defending the current system" or claiming everything is "peachy". Those are you straws.

So - is it ok or not if assigners decide that they should preferentially select white officials over black officials based on some criteria having nothing to do with the competency of the officials in question?

That deserves an answer regardless of whether you think it happens, or regardless of whether someone or anyone thinks that it is peachy if in fact it does happen.

[Berkut]

I am curious if those who think that "affirmative action"-like activities in regards to officials should be engaged in in order to maintain "diversity" would also agree that the same practice should be engaged in with respect to the "racial" (understanding that the term "race" is largely fake) make up of the players as well.

Note that I am not asking whether this happens - I am asking whether they would advocate for it to happen. You know, in an effort to promote the appearance of diversity that is so important.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Berkut

He didn't ask if it happens, he asked if it was acceptable.

If it already happens and has been happening for years I guess it's acceptable already.

Being as I'm 1/2 Black (father, Republican) and 1/2 White (mother, Democrat; plus White step-mother, Democrat) I'm very comfortable any time this type of discussion comes up.

But I will make this comment based solely on my life's observations. When Blacks encounter discrimination and/or bigotry they get upset but they realize it's a part of life and are lot quicker to move on and realize "it is what it is". When Whites encounter discrimination and/or bigotry they react as if it's the worst thing that could ever happen to them and that someone should step in and make sure it nevers happens again. In other words, again based solely of what I have personally observed in my 45 years on earth, Whites have a lot more extreme reaction to being the victim of racism than Blacks do.

Originally Posted by Berkut

If the officer should lose his job, it should be because he is incompetent.

Whether he was incompetent because he is a racist, or incompetent while not being racist is both immaterial and almost impossible to ascertain.

But that race card is just too enticing to leave it unplayed.

It's very possible to ascertain. The officer has friends and co-workers. They know whether or not he is racist. The reason the so-called "race card" is brought out in these situations is because though African-American make up around 11-13% of the US population it seems as though African-Americans are involved in an over-whelming majority of these publicized incidents.

[IUgrad92]

Having known, and being good friends with the losing coach in the OP, I can guarantee that his focus was on his own teams' turnovers, missed free throws, and the number of defensive breakdowns that caused his team to lose that game. Much different than what would come from any parent, as Mr. Ray appears to be. And unfortunately, due to a public position he holds in the community, has a bigger platform to be able to spew from.

Likewise, I know one of the officials on that crew that Mr. Ray chose to target. He is from the Indianapolis area, works just as many 'diverse' high school basketball games as any other official in the state, and is regarded very highly amongst coaches and ADs in the Indianapolis area and where ever he works.

Unfortunately, Mr. Ray chose to take the stance that this team (his team) was a victim, instead of taking the stance that his team just didn't quite do enough to win. A stance that is seen all too much in today's society.

BTW, how does Mr. Ray know that the official said "he didn't want to impact the game"?? I seriously doubt Mr. Ray was allowed in the locker room after the game and I doubt any of the officials held a media conference after the game. How incredulous to make such a statement.

Mr. Ray, you deserve no less than to be given the status of 'fanboy'.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by WreckRef

From what I've read, it sounds like you are an advocate for having refs officiate their own race more often than not. So what happens to me since I'm Asian, do I not get to officiate at all since probably less than 1% of players are Asian? Should I only ref 1% of the total number of games?

Did you actually read what I said?

Peace

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

What I am actually considering is you consider everything. Where people live, experience, conferences the officials are from, physical fitness, big game history or any number of things we talk about here as "qualifications." I do not see the harm in looking for diverse crews to work certain games if the result is to give an appearance of fairness.
...

A few years ago the diversity of the officials was a big deal in a post season game where a coach put it front and center. You do not hear that constant complaining anymore. Out of the 12 officials that worked the State Finals in my state for the Boy's Class 3A and 4A Tournament (big schools), 3 were Black. Out of the 8 teams, 5 were entirely Black teams from the Head coaches, all the players and the water boy. And the top players on the other teams were mostly Black except one school. And that school beat on of the teams out of that five by a last second shot by a player that was Black. Are you telling me that if our state wanted to have more than 3 African-American officials would have been unacceptable considering what the tournament looked like?

Peace

Yes, that is unacceptable. Answer this....Since Illinois is ~75% white, do you, in the name of consistency, suggest that several of those teams should have been disallowed from the tourney since they didn't match the population of the state?? ... I didn't think so.

In fact, the officials exactly matched the population of the sate. I'd say that, from looking purely at the numbers, the mix of officials was not suspect no matter how much noise someone made about it.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

At the high school level I feel strongly that this is about education. This is not even the college level. I feel like the participants should have the right to see people in leadership roles that look like them. To me it sends a bad message if you say to the players, you can play the game, but when it comes to running the game you cannot participate. And that is why for younger people what happen in this past election was so emotional for some many.

Peace

If 50% a team is black but only 20% of the school is black, should they kick 3 black kids off the team to make room for 3 white kids...all to make sure the team looks like those around them? (and no, I don't).

Again, the officials in your example above seem to represent the general society almost perfectly. The fact that the all-black team(s) beat the all/mostly-white team(s) from some other area doesn't imply anything about the ability of the officials and should have no influence one way or the other about who is selected to work the tourney. It should be the best 12...and in a large pool, that 12 will resemble the general population.

I can tell you that from the Portland area, the representation of minorities in the state tournament is at a level that is both greater than their proportion of the population and also greater than their proportion of basketball officials. And they're not selected by color either....they are simply getting the recognition of their peers (all officials)..who put them there based on their abilities. In other words, they earned it...it was not handed to them to make some numbers look good.

[Berkut]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

If it already happens and has been happening for years I guess it's acceptable already.

Lots of thing have happened before and happen right now that various people do not find acceptable. Again, avoiding the question.

Do YOU find it acceptable? Does Rut?

Quit avoiding the question by telling us how it is already happening. Is it or is not acceptable *with you* for assignors to preferentially choose "white" officials over "black" officials under some circumstances?

Being as I'm 1/2 Black (father, Republican) and 1/2 White (mother, Democrat; plus White step-mother, Democrat) I'm very comfortable any time this type of discussion comes up.

Congratulations. The only thing I am certain of about my race is that I am 100% human.

But I will make this comment based solely on my life's observations. When Blacks encounter discrimination and/or bigotry they get upset but they realize it's a part of life and are lot quicker to move on and realize "it is what it is". When Whites encounter discrimination and/or bigotry they react as if it's the worst thing that could ever happen to them and that someone should step in and make sure it nevers happens again. In other words, again based solely of what I have personally observed in my 45 years on earth, Whites have a lot more extreme reaction to being the victim of racism than Blacks do.

A nice generalization based on...what? How "white" does someone have to be to be certain that they will "have an extreme reaction"? Does the one drop white rule apply here?

I guess you are white, since you said you were 1/2 white - certainly you are just as white as you are black - do you find yourself having a "lot more extreme reactions"?

It's very possible to ascertain. The officer has friends and co-workers. They know whether or not he is racist.

They do? How could they tell? Is it possible to be a racist and not be obvious?

What difference would it make anyway - if we found out he was NOT obviously racist, would that make his actions acceptable? Is it ok to be incompetent, just as long as you are not "racist"?

What questions would we ask to find out if he was racist? Perhaps we could see if he makes overly broad and generalized comments about other based on this perceived "race" thing?

Would comments along the lines of "black people tend to react in a certain way, while white people react in some other 'extreme' way" suffice to ascertain if he is a racist? As an example, of course.

The reason the so-called "race card" is brought out in these situations is because though African-American make up around 11-13% of the US population it seems as African-Americans are involved in an over-whelming majority of these publicized situations.

And what does that tell us?

Is there *anything* that tells us beyond how terribly racist everyone is - anything at all? Is it *possible* that there are reason that have nothing to do with race or racism that explain why there are more "white" officials than "black" officials (and I defy anyone to come up with a coherent and objective definition of those terms to begin with)?

Does it bother you that while "black" people make up 11-13% of the population, they make up 100% of the starting corner backs in the NFL? Should we look into this to see if there is racism at work?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Berkut

Lots of thing have happened before and happen right now that various people do not find acceptable. Again, avoiding the question.

Do YOU find it acceptable? Does Rut?

Quit avoiding the question by telling us how it is already happening. Is it or is not acceptable *with you* for assignors to preferentially choose "white" officials over "black" officials under some circumstances?



Congratulations. The only thing I am certain of about my race is that I am 100% human.



A nice generalization based on...what? How "white" does someone have to be to be certain that they will "have an extreme reaction"? Does the one drop white rule apply here?

I guess you are white, since you said you were 1/2 white - certainly you are just as white as you are black - do you find yourself having a "lot more extreme reactions"?



They do? How could they tell? Is it possible to be a racist and not be obvious?

What difference would it make anyway - if we found out he was NOT obviously racist, would that make his actions acceptable? Is it ok to be incompetent, just as long as you are not "racist"?

What questions would we ask to find out if he was racist? Perhaps we could see if he makes overly broad and generalized comments about other based on this perceived "race" thing?

Would comments along the lines of "black people tend to react in a certain way, while white people react in some other 'extreme' way" suffice to ascertain if he is a racist? As an example, of course.



And what does that tell us?

Is there *anything* that tells us beyond how terribly racist everyone is - anything at all? Is it *possible* that there are reason that have nothing to do with race or racism that explain why there are more "white" officials than "black" officials (and I defy anyone to come up with a coherent and objective definition of those terms to begin with)?

Does it bother you that while "black" people make up 11-13% of the population, they make up 100% of the starting corner backs in the NFL? Should we look into this to see if there is racism at work?

Your reaction tells me alot about you. Very emotional as if someone has done something to you.

I don't go around worrying about what is or isn't acceptable. Why don't you answer your own questions? My answers aren't going to affect how you perceive this or any other situation. My opinions are based on my lifetime of experiences. And whether you like it or not my physical appearance allows me for hear things said by people who wouldn't say them in front of me if they knew what my parents looked like.

I, personally, have never really encountered any discrimination that has adversely affected me. But I'll let you guess which one of my 3 parents has relayed stories of racial discrimination that directly affected them. But I guess you would say those experiences are balanced out by racial make-up of cornerbacks in the NFL.

[Berkut]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

You're reaction tells me alot about you. Very emotional as if someone has done something to you.

I don't go around worrying about what is or isn't acceptable. Why don't you answer your own questions? My answers aren't going to affect how you perceive this or any other situation. My opinions are based on my lifetime of experiences.

LOL, no nothing has "happened to me", and my response was no more "emotional" than your own - certainly considerably less than this attempt to make this about me, rather than my argument.

Your reaction tells me a lot about you - and your reaction is that you refuse to address my points, and decide to play the man instead of the ball.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Did you actually read what I said?

Peace

I think many wonder if you even read what you say.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Berkut

You are avoiding the question.

Let me make something very clear. I love these discussions. These discussions are conversations I have often and like having. I am not afraid of saying what I feel on them. I do not need to avoid any question. The reality is that people live in a different life perspective and these things shock them because they never have to face these situations head on.

Originally Posted by Berkut

Not accepting the claim that we should practice racism in officiating selection in one particular direction is not "defending the current system" or claiming everything is "peachy". Those are you straws.

I do not know how it is racism to have people that look like the people participating. Racism is a belief in superiority, not a practice to hire people that look like everyone that is involved. And if the players of one team are all Black, I do not see why it has to be racism to suggest one of the officials can look like them. You are telling me there was not one guy available to make that happen? And was it racism to exclude all Black officials from a game where one team in a game is Black? Or are you saying that without a shadow of a doubt those were the best of the best and no one but those 3 could have worked the game?

Originally Posted by Berkut

So - is it ok or not if assigners decide that they should preferentially select white officials over black officials based on some criteria having nothing to do with the competency of the officials in question?

It baffles me when people do not actually read what people say. Did I not include places you work, where you live, experience, conference staffs you are a member or any number of factors?

Why do people say over and over here that officials should not work in towns or schools they are associated with, but you cannot even mention that if one of the officials looked like one of the teams, the complaining would go away? I know of an official that worked a Christmas Tournament game where he shared the same last name as one of the top players. People complained because of this fact and those did not realize that the two had no tie to each other. If people make that assumption based on nothing more than a last name, what do you think people start to accuse people of when the team that gets a close call or two is called by a crew that looks nothing like them?

Originally Posted by Berkut

That deserves an answer regardless of whether you think it happens, or regardless of whether someone or anyone thinks that it is peachy if in fact it does happen.

If you had read everything I said you would have known the answer. Also if you do not mind that someone accuses you of what is perceived as racism or racial bias, then keep doing what you are doing. Then there should be no reason to be upset by what people accuse you of. You are doing what works.

Peace