NBA fixed? Could Sheed Have Been Right?
In the midst of a great NBA finals match-up between Boston and LA, disgraced NBA ref Tim Donaghy – in the wake of felony sentencing for his role in fixing and gambling on NBA games – has accused the NBA of fixing playoff games. The main game in note was the 2002 Western Conference Finals between LA and Sacramento – perhaps the Kings last shot at a title. The Lakers shot 26 free throws to the Kings’ 9, prompting even Ralph Nader to cry foul. The Lakers won the series and went on to win the finals.
Hmmm. All I can think of now is Rasheed calling out the NBA all these years for being nothing more than entertainment, and comparing the league to the WWF. Many times after a playoff loss, Rasheed would put the blame on the NBA, saying that’s they wanted the Pistons to lose. Maybe it was Sheed being Sheed, but maybe he had a point. Refs are human, and it’s only natural to think that they may develop some bias over the years, or be motivated by a different agenda.
That being said, things sort of even out over the course of a season and the playoffs, regardless of the refs. The best teams end up winning the title. When the Pistons won in 2004, the Lakers were the heavy favorites and the darlings of the league, with Shaq, Kobe, Karl Malone and Gary Payton. But the Pistons won easily in 5 games, with nobody crying over that one.
So I don’t know. I don’t think by any means that these new allegations will ruin the NBA. I do think that it will help the way games are officiated in the long run. There might be stricter rules about referees developing relationships with owners and coaches and players. David Stern might open the discussion about the foul discrepancy of the home and visiting teams.
I watch a lot of NBA games, and I have to say that 99% of the time, the refs do an outstanding job. It’s got to be an extremely hard game to call. I’m just not a big believer in conspiracy theories – the league itself is successful enough without having to resort to fixing games. I’m guessing this will blow over. Sorry Sheed!
June 13, 2008 at 12:58 pm
One of the biggest problems is that the rules in the NBA don’t reflect how the game is played—if they called every infraction, ever travel, the games would be six hours long and score 38-20.
So then you’ve got refs. Refs who call more fouls on black dudes (even black refs!), refs who make subjective calls, and refs who have league bosses over them, deciding who gets assigned to which games.
2004 isn’t much of an argument, though I realize I’m totally biased here, because in 2004, the Pistons won despite massive amounts of foul calls against them. The league tried to stop them and they were just too good. But if you think back to their games against the Spurs, or the Heat, and you look back at the foul differential versus what the tape showed—the Pistons got jobbed. They weren’t able to rise above that, sure, but it was an extra disadvantage. It’s like shaving dice—it doesn’t guarantee a seven, but it makes it more likely. Or counting cards in blackjack—you still lose, but not as often and not as much.
I think you’re right regarding the full season, that these things do tend to even out more. The real problem is that the playoffs aren’t the season. One game can mean a huge amount there, and it’s too easy to change things with even unintentional bad calls. That was clearly evident in the Lakers games against the Jazz, even though I think the better team won. But they wouldn’t have won as easily, or as quickly, and they’d be even more tired now.
What’s the solution? Well, you can look to more replays, or you can try to change the rules so that fouls and penalties don’t have as much of an impact, or you can try to change the rules to make calling things easier and more obvious. All of those have obvious advantages and drawbacks, but without changing them, you’re forever going to have people (like me) thinking that the league, especially in the playoffs, has the weaker team from the bigger market win more than they deserve.
June 13, 2008 at 6:50 pm
Well, I wrote this post before watching David Stern’s press conference yesterday. Given his shakey answers, I think there is something there that could be viewed as slightly corrupt. Plus, it looks like Dick Bavetta was heavily questioned by the FBI.
Phil Jackson had a good suggestion – the NBA should hire a separate entity from the NBA to supply refs instead of doing it in-house.
September 23, 2008 at 9:55 am
Open the debates! First one is Friday!
I’m not a bot, I know you care about the democracy of our government, so we need to get this done. Let’s flood the email inbox and the phone lines with: Open the Debates.
It takes 5 mins. Please help me make a difference . Below is a script but please feel free to appropriately modify it to support your candidate .
Step one:
Call Barack Obama at 866-675-2008.
Hit 6 to speak with a campaign volunteer.
Once connected, politely deliver the following message:
Hi, my name is …
I was wondering if Senator Obama, being a believer in equal opportunity and equal rights, could insist that Ralph Nader and other ballot qualified third party candidates be included in the upcoming Presidential debates?
After all, Nader is on 45 state ballots.
And he’s polling well nationwide. And he could help Senator Obama challenge the corporate Republicans.
True, Ralph would critique Senator Obama for his corporate ties also. But isn’t that what democracy is about? Could you please leave this message for the campaign manager? Thank you.
Step two:
E-mail Janet Brown jb@debates.org, the executive director of the Commission on Presidential Debates.
Here’s a sample e-mail:
Dear Janet Brown:
Greetings. You must be busy. Preparing for the first Presidential debate this Friday. So, I won’t take much of your time. Just wanted to let you know that the American people were not born yesterday. We know the deal. Take that little private corporation that you run. Controlled by the two corporate parties. And funded by big business. For the purpose of excluding independent minded candidates. Friday, two Wall Street candidates are scheduled to be in the ring. Barack Obama and John McCain. The one candidate who represents the American people, Main Street, if you will, will be on the outside looking in. So, here’s a simple request. Drop your exclusionary restrictions. And let Ralph Nader into the debates.
It will be good for your conscience. Good for the American people. (I believe it was The League of Women Voters that called your corporatized debates “campaign-trail charades devoid of substance, spontaneity, and honest answers to tough questions.”) And good for democracy. Let the American people have a real debate for once. Main Street vs. Wall Street.
Thank you.
Signed
your name.