I'm in no way convinced that NBA games are fixed. NBA refs are human and can definitely be influenced by home crowds (like Frank Drebin in The Naked Gun). The NBA is somewhat unique in that there are far more instances where officials make calls that have an influence on the game - it's the nature of basketball. Granted, MLB umps make more actual "calls" per game, but basketball is the only sport, other than soccer, where players get in foul trouble or teams are awarded points due to fouls. Therefore, the impact of calls is magnified. We've all heard the line, "They could call a foul or traveling every time down the floor if they wanted," and it's true. Thankfully, they don't.
The subjectivity of the NBA rules offers a gray area that a fan of either team can argue back and forth over any specific call. It's hard to do that when you have visual evidence of a strike in baseball or a hold in football. Blaming the refs is way too easy in basketball.
Refs/officials in all sports earn reputations (see Brad Watson) for how they call a game or for their history with a particular team, so to say the NBA is unique in dealing with these accusations is naive. When talking about game 7 of the Stars-Canucks series last year, the first thing I remember is "The refs fucked the Stars." We remember The Deckinger Game in the World Series. What about Jerry Kramer being offsides in The Ice Bowl? Were these games fixed as well?
These new Donaghy accusations are way too convenient, and are fairly obvious reactions to the league demanding $1 million in restitution from him. He picked a couple of the most infamous instances in NBA history where fans have accused the league of influencing games. When Phil Jackson was asked for his reactions yesterday about the officiating of game 6 of the 2002, he responded:
"Was that after the fifth game [that] we had the game stolen away from us after a bad call out of bounds and gave the ball back to Sacramento and they made a 3-point shot? There's a lot of things going on in these games and they're suspicious, but I don't want to throw it back to there."
Exactly. When people attacked the refs for missing Derek Fisher's foul at the end of game 4 of the Lakers-Spurs series, my first thought was, "What about them missing Fisher's shot hitting the rim that would've reset the shot clock and rendered the final play moot?" So who were the refs favoring there?
Similarly, how does it make sense for the league to unfairly target Yao Ming, as was insinuated by Donaghy, during the 2005 Mavs-Rockets Series. If the bottom line is money for the NBA, doesn't it make more sense that they would actually favor their global poster boy for the league?
Like Richie Whitt writes, it's fun to play Blame the Refs, but I 'm not sold they actually enter games with the outcomes predetermined.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
"...I 'm not sold they actually enter games with the outcomes predetermined."
...Except, of course, for Donaghy, who had bet on the outcomes in advance.
NBA fans better hope that Donaghy isn't the basketball equivalent of Jose Canseco.
It was pretty convenient for Donaghy to come up with those claims during the Finals. But, suppose he's right. If it were you, and you were a dis-credited ex-ref, and you knew nobody would believe you, wouldn't you do the same thing at the same time? At least now people will pay attention.
I thought the same thing -- Donaghy = NBA Canseco -- and I just think that he acted alone. And yes, if I was in a situation like Donaghy is in, where he is looking at 25 years in prison and the league decides to poke him further by demanding he pay them $1 million in damages, I'd lash out with whatever I could come up with. His timing is perfect.
Like Chris Penn said, in one of my favorite lines from Reservoir Dogs, "You can torture this guy until he tells you he started the Chicago fucking fire, but that doesn't necessarily make it fucking so!"
Someone should mention that to Dubya.
Post a Comment