Tim Donaghy interview
 

Howdy.

Thought you might find this interesting. Tim Donaghy was interviewed on the Dan Patrick Show today. Among his comments:

"Donaghy said that the way the playoff series have played out confirm his theory on how officials extend series by giving the trailing teams an edge. Donaghy said they're trained that way because it helps the league financially."

Here's the link to the show: Dan Patrick.com

Many posters on both this Forum and the NFHS Basketball Forum know my background and know my passion for the basketball officiating profession. Tim Donaghy had the best and greatest job in basketball officiating and he pi$$ed on every man and woman who has ever officiated a basketball game at any level, so why in the wide world of basketball offficiating in particular and sports officiating in general would I giving a flying f*** about anything that an a$$hole like Tim Donaghy has to say.

MTD, Sr.

Don't Hold Back, It'll Give You An Ulcer ...
 

Oh c'mon Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. Don't pussy foot around the issue. Please tell us what you really think.

Can you say Jose Canseco? Dumped on his colleagues, has an axe to grind. Lots of similar claims.

Canseco was right.

Once you get by the fact that he is a douchebag, unfortunately you are right. In that particular case, you can't kill the messenger.

A similar scenario is going on right now with Floyd Landis and Lance Armstrong.

Canseco was right about some things.

Peace

The fact anyone is giving this lying cheating SOB the time of day is sad enough -- but if you want some actual analysis of the "facts" he is claiming, there was a great piece done last year on ESPN calling a spade a spade:

Tim Donaghy's claims on trial - TrueHoop Blog - ESPN

This is obviously true. Just look at how this year's playoff series have played out. The officials obviously gave Chicago the edge in the first round because they took the Cavs to -- 5 games. Ok, so that's not a good example. But look at the Charlotte series. It's their first time ever in the playoffs, so obviously the officials helped them to extend the series to -- oh wait, they were swept.

Well, never mind the first round. In the second round, the refs were giving the edge to the Hawks, except that -- oh, they lost 4 straight. But in the other Eastern semi, the league OBVIOUSLY needed a Game 7 in Cleveland. I mean, ratings-city for a Celts/Cavs, Bron/KG Game 7, right? Um, no. Boston wrapped it up in Game 6.

But the Western Semis were really close matchups. The officials surely played a part in prolonging the Lakers/Jazz series, except that the Lakers swept. And that great Suns/Spurs rivalry series? Yeah, a sweep.

So, uh. . . what were we talking about?

Good point Scrapper,

His so-called theory works out once in a while and we're supposed to buy it.

Picky, picky, picky.....
 

At least the refs kept all the games close anyhow........well, except for the ones that were blowouts! :rolleyes:

I appreciated the fact that Dan Patrick "hard balled" him on the interview.

Tim Donaghy's voice carries some weight, whether we like it or not. That's why you should care.

Carries weight with whom (Or is that who? :D)?

And no, we should not care and we have the right to dismiss his point of view. For one he is a convicted felon that was not accused of extending series, he was accused of giving inside information on betting information and making money off that information. Sorry, he might have been in the league, but he is still a liar and I would take his response with a grain of salt. And I have a feeling that Dan Patrick did not really challenge his perspective on this. Considering that many of the series have been one sided this year and other years. The NBA Finals last year was basically a sweep too.

Peace

1) No one is questioning your "right to dismiss his point of view." I didn't write about, nor do I care about rights in this case. I care about shoulds.

2) "Carries weight with whom...?"

It carries weight with all of the conspiracy theorists out there who lap up any and every piece of information that would "confirm" their suspicions about how big-money sport works in this country. You and some others seem to be of the opinion that if you find an idea to be nonsensical, then it's completely meaningless and unworthy of your attention. But I don't think it's silly to pay attention when someone with a big microphone slanders me or a group with which I identify.