PDA

View Full Version : NBA Ref to be arrested for fixing games.....



Pages : 1 [2]

Peck
07-23-2007, 02:07 AM
It's going to take more than Donaghy's word at this point for me to get too concerned about other refs. Not saying it's not possible, but it's obvious this guy has no integrity what so ever. I'll wait for other confirmation before going into panic mode.

I can't find the quote right now but when I was in Florida last week and this story first broke I read one of the papers (I just can't remember which one)
that said that Donaghy was on FBI wiretap (he didn't know it at the time) telling his mob handlers on differant times when which Ref. was going to be at which game. He was recorded saying that certain refs. had biases against certain players so the bookies would use this info.

As sad as this is to say, but really how far of a stretch would you have to imagine that some of those same refs. didn't only have biases against certain players but also had biases for certain players or teams?

The min. I heard about this my mind shot all the way back to the early 90's and a quote about Micheal Jordan from Hersey Hawkins. "If Michael touches you it's a steal, if you touch him it's a foul".

Yea, yea I know there is nothing there to go on, but come on even I who does not believe the league is fixed,well I didn't want to anyway, always had a very very very hard time trying to explain why certain players could get by with Murder and other players couldn't do anything.

This also brings up the one other smoking gun that was somehow just lost in the course of time.

Why was it when the Washington (D.C.) t.v. station caught one of the refs. admitting that he moved a foul off of Chris Webber because it would have been his sixth, why was that never big giant news?

For God's sake they had it on tape with him saying it.

I don't know that I will go with Jose here and say that the NBA is over as we know it, but I will say this, if he can prove that even one other NBA ref. has manipulated games or outcome of games then I can see radical radical changes coming.

As David Stern once said himself when questioned about the league being fixed.

"That would be fraud and that is a felony".

Let's just hope those words don't come back to haunt him.

Trader Joe
07-23-2007, 02:11 AM
I can't find the quote right now but when I was in Florida last week and this story first broke I read one of the papers (I just can't remember which one)
that said that Donaghy was on FBI wiretap (he didn't know it at the time) telling his mob handlers on differant times when which Ref. was going to be at which game. He was recorded saying that certain refs. had biases against certain players so the bookies would use this info.

As sad as this is to say, but really how far of a stretch would you have to imagine that some of those same refs. didn't only have biases against certain players but also had biases for certain players or teams?

The min. I heard about this my mind shot all the way back to the early 90's and a quote about Micheal Jordan from Hersey Hawkins. "If Michael touches you it's a steal, if you touch him it's a foul".

Yea, yea I know there is nothing there to go on, but come on even I who does not believe the league is fixed,well I didn't want to anyway, always had a very very very hard time trying to explain why certain players could get by with Murder and other players couldn't do anything.

This also brings up the one other smoking gun that was somehow just lost in the course of time.

Why was it when the Washington (D.C.) t.v. station caught one of the refs. admitting that he moved a foul off of Chris Webber because it would have been his sixth, why was that never big giant news?

For God's sake they had it on tape with him saying it.

I don't know that I will go with Jose here and say that the NBA is over as we know it, but I will say this, if he can prove that even one other NBA ref. has manipulated games or outcome of games then I can see radical radical changes coming.

As David Stern once said himself when questioned about the league being fixed.

"That would be fraud and that is a felony".

Let's just hope those words don't come back to haunt him.

To me the easiest and maybe most comforting explanation for why some players get by with things other players don't is that refs are human too. No one can be 100% unbiased its just not in human nature to completely detach oneself from what is going on around you. Refs here the same stuff we do from ESPN but how so and so is a great player. I think its possible that will occasionally affect their officiating.

Peck
07-23-2007, 02:42 AM
To me the easiest and maybe most comforting explanation for why some players get by with things other players don't is that refs are human too. No one can be 100% unbiased its just not in human nature to completely detach oneself from what is going on around you. Refs here the same stuff we do from ESPN but how so and so is a great player. I think its possible that will occasionally affect their officiating.

Not that I believe this happened but just to play devils advocate here, while agreeing with you.

But how far outside of reality would it be to think that there may have been something a little more organized going on as well?

Look Michael Jordan was by far and away the greatest player I ever saw play, there was no close second. (I'm to young to have seen Wilt)

However Michael Jordan was also one of the most protected players in the NBA as well. How impossible is it to say that someone somewhere not only saw his greatness on the floor but also saw what Michael Jordan meant for $$ to the NBA.

The greater he got the bigger the ratings got, the more popular the NBA got, etc., etc.

I'm not saying any of this is true, but really how much of a strech of the imagination would it be to think that somebody somewhere might have mentioned that everybody could get more money the more popular the entire NBA was.

DisplacedKnick
07-23-2007, 07:15 AM
I've posted this before and being as the conversation has turned I'll throw it in again.

A couple of years back I had a conversation with a very well respected college ref who said he'd never dream of officiating in the NBA. His reasoning on why reffing at the NBA level is so inconsistent is that the refs are intimidated by the players.

He said it's drummed into them all the time that the league is about its players and especially its stars, that officials are almost afraid to call anything questionable against big time players and invariably officiate in their favor. The NBA is a culture of stars and that's part of the organization at every level.

He never saw anything blatantly corrupt in that - just that the refs are caught up in all the star marketing the NBA does and have a hard time calling things evenly. He didn't like it but didn't think there was much to be done about it unless the league wanted to start looking so closely at officiating as to evaluate individual calls in a game which he thought was crazy since nobody has ever officiated a game without at least 1 blown call.

indygeezer
07-23-2007, 07:42 AM
Peck, Icannot believe you never saw Wilt play :)

Some facts for you:
http://hoopedia.nba.com/index.php/Wilt_Chamberlain

and this one
http://www.ringsurf.com/info/Sports/Basketball/NBA/Featured_Article_NBA/Remembering_Wilt_Chamberlain/

I reprint part of it here, because Jordan wan't the first to receive special treatment:

Despite his astonishing strength, Chamberlain never did retaliate, despite the continuation of hard fouls he would receive on a nightly basis. One indication of this was the amazing statistic that not once in his 14-year career, in more than 1,200 regular and postseason games, did he foul out.

Now tell me how is that possible without "special" attention?

rexnom
07-23-2007, 08:01 AM
Geez, Wilt never fouled out? If that doesn't tell you something about that era of hoops, I don't know what does.

Unclebuck
07-23-2007, 08:14 AM
So we are making the leap that game #3 was fixed, when we have no idea if this idiot even bet on that game, or was being pressured to fix that game. Besides maybe he only had to adjust the final score to and not the actual outcome.

The Spurs were the better team in that series and the leaving the bench rule is not only a good rule it is a consistant rule and isn't that what everyone wants and aren't most of the complaints about the NBA being inconsistant about things.


Me personally (unless we find out several refs are fixing games) this will not cause me to lose any interest in the nBA, and it won't make me look any different at the refs, when I see a bad call, it is a bad call - but the players decide the game. Oh and when I see Joey Crawford reffing a game again, I'll be happy.


Edit: I read ti morning that the NBA had a private investigator looking into the gambling of this ref a year ago

indygeezer
07-23-2007, 09:48 AM
And today from the NY Post....aw, poor baby...is this to make us feel sorry for him (Hmmmm another conspiracy)

REF'S HIT WITH SOME BAD CALLS
COPS RESPOND TO DEATH THREATS
By JAMES FANELLI in Bradenton, Fla., and JANA WINTER in Cape May, N.J.
POSTING UP: Police stand watch outside the Florida home of disgraced ref Tim Donaghy yesterday.
July 23, 2007 -- The allegedly dirty NBA referee who's set to sing in a mob point-shaving scandal sought police protection yesterday - after receiving threats that he could be whacked, cops said.

Three Manatee County Sheriff's squad cars screeched up to the Bradenton, Fla., home of terrified former NBA official Tim Donaghy to investigate menacing telephone calls against him.

"Our concern is for his safety and his family's safety," said Sheriff's Lt. Robert Mealy. "We are definitely going to share any information we get with the FBI."

The rogue ref's family is even urging him to enter the federal witness-protection program, one friend said.

"They think he will be killed if he goes to prison, or even if he doesn't, just because he's probably talking, cooperating, and that's ratting on the mob," the pal said. "I don't think [the Mafia] would take that very well.

"[Relatives] are very concerned for his safety," the friend added. "I think they knew something serious was going on, but not like this, not this big, whole life-or-death issue with the Mafia. I mean, it's the Gambinos."

Mealy declined to reveal more details of the threats against Donaghy, who is being investigated by federal authorities for allegedly working with mobsters tied to the Gambino crime family to fix the scores of NBA games to pay off his gambling debts.

The disgraced ref is said to be set to spill all - threatening to bring down anyone and everyone with him, sources said. He'll be naming names of other refs, coaches, players and game "validators," who sit unobtrusively in the stands to review calls on the court, the source said.
"There are other allegations of gambling that the FBI will run down," based on Donaghy's talk so far, one source said.

"Everybody's pointing a finger at everyone else." (Head fer the hills boys, the revenuers are a-comin'!!)

Donaghy's name came to the attention of feds during wiretap probes of Gambino mobsters.

Yesterday, "he received some threatening phone calls, and he wanted them documented," Mealy said. "I know Mr. Donaghy was concerned."

Donaghy, 40, resigned from the NBA shortly after this past season amid then-undisclosed allegations that he bet on games he officiated.

Feds have not yet revealed which games they are probing.

Several friends in Cape May, N.J., where his parents summer, said Donaghy's co-workers grew suspicious of his behavior about three years ago, when he would offer to trade free tickets to certain games with some refs in exchange for others - and then suddenly renege.

"He just started screwing them," one friend said. "Tickets started going missing, misplaced . . . It was no longer, 'Hey, Tim's kind of an a- - hole.' It became, 'Tim is f- - - ing with the NBA.' And that's when they stopped trusting him completely."

Retired dentist John Minutella of West Chester, Pa., where Donaghy grew up and worked at a golf course, recounted a horrific prank Donaghy pulled on him 10 years ago, when the embattled ref put a dead bird in his golf bag. Minutella found the maggot-infested carcass 24 hours later.

"Nobody wanted to play golf with him," said Minutella, 64. " I can't say one nice thing about him. I believe this guy was almost soulless."

Additional reporting by David K. Li and Stefanie Cohen in New York and Tom Liddy in West Chester, Pa.

jfanelli@nypost.com

BTW...The italics part about head fer the hills was added by Geezer not the column author.

Hicks
07-23-2007, 09:51 AM
I don't care how involved you are in basketball or the NBA, you should never take these death-threats lightly. I hope they can deal with those jerks who are making threats.

indygeezer
07-23-2007, 09:54 AM
I don't care how involved you are in basketball or the NBA, you should never take these death-threats lightly. I hope they can deal with those jerks who are making threats.


Agreed....I just wish they'd do the same for Geezer Jr.

Hicks
07-23-2007, 09:55 AM
The disgraced ref is said to be set to spill all - threatening to bring down anyone and everyone with him, sources said. He'll be naming names of other refs, coaches, players and game "validators," who sit unobtrusively in the stands to review calls on the court, the source said.

"There are other allegations of gambling that the FBI will run down," based on Donaghy's talk so far, one source said.

"Everybody's pointing a finger at everyone else." I get the feeling this thing may be a lot deeper than we think.

indygeezer
07-23-2007, 09:56 AM
I get the feeling this thing may be a lot deeper than we think.

Or he may be pulling an AI to deflect attention away from himself.

Unclebuck
07-23-2007, 09:58 AM
I get the feeling this thing may be a lot deeper than we think.

I get the exact opposite feeling. We'll see

indygeezer
07-23-2007, 10:12 AM
Would you favor federal legislation that would make sports betting illegal? That means no published point spreads either.

Pacersin2033
07-23-2007, 10:29 AM
There is an Indystar post reporting Donaghy is turning states' evidence and ratting out OTHER REFS. If this is true (corrobated here: http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/basketball/2007/07/22/2007-07-22_rogue_ref_may_blow_whistle-3.html)
I don't see Stern surviving as commish this time.

Hmm I am starting to like the fact we have crooked refs.

Kegboy
07-23-2007, 10:32 AM
Game 1... Nash put his head into Tony's... Not the Spurs fault.
Game 3: Spurs beat the Suns because the Suns don't play defense.
Game 5: EVERYONE AND THEIR MOTHERS KNOW ABOUT THIS RULE... IT'S NOT SOME RULE THAT THE NBA DECIDED TO BRING OUT FOR THE PLAYOFFS.

Now that being said... Any team that Steve Nash has been on has NEVER, and I mean NEVER beaten the Spurs in ANY 7 games series.

This whole ref thing is just the tip of the ice berg. The Spurs had nothing to do with this and neither did any of the other NBA teams. The real crook here has to be Ronnie Garrison... IMO.

Sam, I just want you to know, as a non-Spurs fan, that there's somebody out there that agrees with you. Look, we got royally-****ed by the bench rule in the '98 ECF with Jalen, but I still say it's a good rule. If you get rid of it being absolute and judge it by circumstance or "intent", then that's just gonna open up a mess. It's a simple rule that's easy to understand, no gray area to try and play in. It may be counter to human nature, but so is not retaliating when you get punched.

As for the Spurs in general, I was just telling somebody last night how glad I am for you guys that you've already won multiple titles, because this one is gonna be questioned from now until eternity. It'd just be our luck to finally win a title, then have this **** come out and everybody would want to put an asterisk next to it. :rolleyes:

King Tuts Tomb
07-23-2007, 10:33 AM
Peck, Icannot believe you never saw Wilt play :)

Some facts for you:
http://hoopedia.nba.com/index.php/Wilt_Chamberlain

and this one
http://www.ringsurf.com/info/Sports/Basketball/NBA/Featured_Article_NBA/Remembering_Wilt_Chamberlain/

I reprint part of it here, because Jordan wan't the first to receive special treatment:

Despite his astonishing strength, Chamberlain never did retaliate, despite the continuation of hard fouls he would receive on a nightly basis. One indication of this was the amazing statistic that not once in his 14-year career, in more than 1,200 regular and postseason games, did he foul out.

Now tell me how is that possible without "special" attention?

Wilt was never ejected from a game either.

Kegboy
07-23-2007, 10:35 AM
Would you favor federal legislation that would make sports betting illegal? That means no published point spreads either.

Wouldn't work because of the internet. It's better for it to be legal so the feds can better regulate it, at least in this country.

Pacersin2033
07-23-2007, 10:36 AM
The Thing about Game 5 Sambear is not that Amare and Barbi were suspended, its that Duncan wasn't for an equally damning infraction that was less excusable.

Unclebuck
07-23-2007, 10:39 AM
The Thing about Game 5 Sambear is not that Amare and Barbi were suspended, its that Duncan wasn't for an equally damning infraction that was less excusable.

That wasn't even close to being the same thing. There was no altercation when Duncan stepped onto the court and there was when Amare ran onto the court. Please

Pacersin2033
07-23-2007, 10:48 AM
That wasn't even close to being the same thing. There was no altercation when Duncan stepped onto the court and there was when Amare ran onto the court. Please

Please what, I don't remember an altercation. You'll have to inform me of htis mysterious altercation that Amare caused.

Duncan Walked onto the court after a questionable call. They stood up and went over to see if a teammate was ok after their teammate got decked.

Both are poor instict, but coming to the aid of a fallen teammate is alot different that just wandering out onto the court because your angry. Either way whether or not you agree, they both warrant punishment, but Duncans was conveniently ignored. Either way its BS.

Unclebuck
07-23-2007, 10:51 AM
Please what, I don't remember an altercation. You'll have to inform me of htis mysterious altercation that Amare caused.

Duncan Walked onto the court after a questionable call. They stood up and went over to see if a teammate was ok after their teammate got decked.

Both are poor instict, but coming to the aid of a fallen teammate is alot different that just wandering out onto the court because your angry. Either way whether or not you agree, they both warrant punishment, but Duncans was conveniently ignored. Either way its BS.

I guess we disagree and the NBA agrees with me. I really didn't care who won the Suns vs Spurs series, I wanted it to go 7 games because I figured it was really the NBA Finals - so I had no rooting interest, so I believe my view on the situation is unbiased. Besides the Suns draw higher ratings than the Spurs, so if anything the NBA "wanted" the Suns to win that series

Pacersin2033
07-23-2007, 10:54 AM
I guess we disagree and the NBA agrees with me. I really didn't care who won the Suns vs Spurs series, I wanted it to go 7 games because I figured it was really the NBA Finals - so I had no rooting interest, so I believe my view on the situation is unbiased. Besides the Suns draw higher ratings than the Spurs, so if anything the NBA "wanted" the Suns to win that series

Obviously not or else they would have either ignored the rules for the Suns like they did the spurs, or they would have enforced the rules to both teams.

And congrats the NBA agrees with you, right now the NBA doesn't have enough integrity to scowl at OJ Simpson. The NBA might agree with you, the Rules(the things that really matter) don't.

Kegboy
07-23-2007, 11:18 AM
I need to go back and read the Sunday articles:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/blog/index?entryID=2945745&name=sheridan_chris


<TABLE width="100%"><TBODY><TR vAlign=bottom><TD class=sport>ESPN.com: Sheridan </TD><TD class=sport align=right></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
Sunday, July 22, 2007
Ref scandal: 3 big questions


<HR width="100%" noShade SIZE=1>
As we head into a monumental week for the NBA, it's time to look at some of the questions that need to be answered by commissioner David Stern and others concerning the Tim Donaghy case.

Here are three of the biggest ones:

1. How big is this scandal?

The New York Daily News reported Sunday (http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/basketball/2007/07/22/2007-07-22_rogue_ref_may_blow_whistle-3.html) that federal authorities believe Donaghy will cooperate with investigators and possibly name other officials or players involved in the scandal. Stern has already come out publicly and said that Donaghy was the one and only referee under suspicion of affecting the outcome of games he officiated, but if the opposite is true and even more referees are involved, Stern's credibility will take another enormous hit. The Daily News said Donaghy has hired former federal prosecutor John Lauro, who specializes in representing whistleblowers, as his defense attorney.

2. When was the NBA informed that Donaghy was under investigation by the FBI?

The Denver Post reported Sunday (http://test.denverpost.com/sports/ci_6434030','231) that the answer to that question is January, which, if true, would mean the NBA allowed Donaghy to continue refereeing games, including playoff games, despite knowing he might be crooked. Who in the league office signed off on that?

3. What about all the red flags?

According to data compiled by Stats LLC and reported in the New York Post (http://www.nypost.com/seven/07222007/news/nationalnews/foul_deeds_of_hoops_fix_ref_nationalnews_tom_liddy _in_west_chester__pa___james_fanelli_in_bradenton_ _fla___and_patrick_gallahue_in_n_y_.htm) Donaghy led the NBA in technical fouls called, whistling 177 of them -- 20 more than anyone else. Donaghy also ranked fourth in blowing personal fouls; was third in ordering free-throws, and second for fouling-out players for the 2006-2007 season.

The NBA is meticulous in gathering data on its referees and the calls they make, and if it had a referee calling an inordinate number of technicals, you'd expect they'd speak to Donaghy about it, no?

Also, The Post reported that NBA officials knew that Donaghy was gambling on football and ordered him to stop.

Further, the New York Times reported Sunday (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/22/sports/basketball/22nba.html?_r=1&ref=basketball&oref=slogin','781)that Donaghy refereed in 11 games after Jan. 1, 2007, in which the consensus Las Vegas line moved 2 points or more. The team on which bettors wagered heavily enough to move the line that far won 7 of those 11 games. On Jan. 15, the Philadelphia 76ers were originally favored to beat the Toronto Raptors by a point. Bets came in so heavily on the Raptors that they eventually were favored to win by a point instead. The Raptors won in a blowout, 104-86. Two nights later, so much money was bet on the Phoenix Suns against the Houston Rockets that the consensus Las Vegas line, which opened at the Suns favored by 4 points, moved to 8 by tip-off. The Suns won by 9, 100-91.

Kegboy
07-23-2007, 11:21 AM
Note the Raptors example above, which shows the fallacy of the "fixing point spreads is not the same as fixing games" argument.

Naptown_Seth
07-23-2007, 11:58 AM
I'm not saying any of this is true, but really how much of a strech of the imagination would it be to think that somebody somewhere might have mentioned that everybody could get more money the more popular the entire NBA was.
Counter-point: Derrick McKey 98, and I doubt the NBA was protecting him in favor of Jordan

But having made that point I do think that MULTIPLE factors do go into the process and that one of those factors clearly is (per this story) organized manipulation of games. The danger is that people take that and run with it as the 100% reason.

Very likely bad calls are a potpourri of reasons, probably 20 different ones. Favoritism, organized choice, shoddy refs, hard sport to call, familiarity with a player's game and moves, personal choices by the ref on what type of game he thinks the NBA should be (like more or less contact), and so on.

5 different people can make the same wrong call and do it for 5 different reasons. How do we know which reason is in play at any given time? And at that point how much does it matter, the wrong call is the wrong call.


Honestly one aspect that this undermines is the fantasy that sports represent a fair, rules based system with absolute scoring and outcomes. Life isn't this way which is why I think so many of us are drawn to sports, it's a small attempt to put some control and "fairness" into our daily lives. Unfortunately it's an artificial creation built on the same flaws of life that we are trying to escape. And this jerk just reminded us of that and spoiled it for everyone.

ps - I also think this is a big appeal with video games, or just games in general really.

sweabs
07-23-2007, 11:59 AM
Just another reason to watch college ball.

RWB
07-23-2007, 12:02 PM
Just another reason to watch college ball.

Except at this point there have been more scandals in college ball with possible fixed games.

Naptown_Seth
07-23-2007, 12:07 PM
Geez, Wilt never fouled out? If that doesn't tell you something about that era of hoops, I don't know what does.
But see this fits with what I said above. Wilt also had a massive physical advantage that afforded him the luxury of not having to push the edges of fouling. I mean guys do foul less when they are quicker, faster, jump higher or are stronger than other players.

So you have star treatment (which no doubt exists) but you also have guys that are simply better and therefore don't end up relying on iffy attempts to beat their opponent. I mean in the sense that a perfect robotically called game would still feature them fouling less. Being a better player also includes the ability to avoid fouling as much; it's a skill just like shooting or dribbling.


When Payton in his prime reached for your dribble he got there before you knew what was happening and was able to get all ball. If a slower PG tried to make the same steal the player would have time to react a bit and moving enough to turn that steal into physical contact and a foul instead.

sweabs
07-23-2007, 12:14 PM
Except at this point there have been more scandals in college ball with possible fixed games.
Right now, at this current point in time - I will take the NCAA game over the NBA 10 times out of 10. It's just a better product. And a lot of that has to do with the officiating.

JayRedd
07-23-2007, 12:21 PM
I have a much longer diatribe on this whole thing of why refs favor stars, but I don't have the time to type it all out right now.

But I do want to put the point out there that you have to realize that refs are also realistically in awe of some of these players and what they can do on the court. The whole notion of NBA players standing around and just watching Michael Jordan do his thing also must apply to referees as well.

I don't care how professional you are or how much you actively try to concentrate on enforcing the particular rules of basketball......when you see a guy like Michael Jordan do some of the things he did, the first thing that goes through your mind is "WHATTTTT THE FCCCCUUUUUCKKKKK!!!!!! HOOOOLLLLLLY SIHHHHHHHIIIIITTT!!!!! DID THAT JUST GDAMN HAPPEN!!!!1111"

He was that impressive and all uber-stars also fit into that category as well. You can't expect a guy to watch Kobe make a ridiculous crossover, get into the lane, spin to the other block and go up for a fadaway from 6 feet in the most fluid and athletically impressive manner imaginable and expect a referee (who in addition to being at work also has a basketball mind that is one of the most knowledgable, historically-aware and simply best apt to be impressed by true greatness on the planet) who is staning 4 feet away to be able to block out every bit of what he just saw and instead be able to say with 100% certainty that the defender did or did not bump Kobe's shoulder as he spun.

I just don't believe it's possible for a human being to do.

Naptown_Seth
07-23-2007, 12:22 PM
2. When was the NBA informed that Donaghy was under investigation by the FBI?

The Denver Post reported Sunday (http://test.denverpost.com/sports/ci_6434030%27,%27231) that the answer to that question is January, which, if true, would mean the NBA allowed Donaghy to continue refereeing games, including playoff games, despite knowing he might be crooked. Who in the league office signed off on that?
IMO this is the end of discussion point regarding Stern. That's reason enough to fire him. There is no GOOD reason to let a ref under investigation anywhere near the playoffs, period. Of course the owners are probably in bed with Stern so much that they don't care, they probably all knew too for all we know.

JayRedd
07-23-2007, 12:30 PM
IMO this is the end of discussion point regarding Stern. That's reason enough to fire him. There is no GOOD reason to let a ref under investigation anywhere near the playoffs, period. Of course the owners are probably in bed with Stern so much that they don't care, they probably all knew too for all we know.

I agree basically. There is seemingly no good reason.

But, just to play devil's advocate, there could have been some FBI pressure on him to allow the investigation to run its course. I can't say I know much about criminal investigations, but it would seem possible that the FBI was trying to get "higher up food chain" by using wire-tapping, monitoring, undercover agents or whatever else it is the Feds do to get an indictment.

I mean, it was reportedly a year-and-a-half long investigation so it's doubtful the FBI was just looking to bust Donaghy's bookie and that guys immediate bosses.

From an NBA integrity and fan standpoint, of course allowing Donaghy to ref a playoff game is unforgivable. But it's conceivable that a criminal FBI mafia investigation takes precedent over those concerns.

Naptown_Seth
07-23-2007, 12:38 PM
Great Q&A at ESPN with star odd-maker and subject of the film "Two for the Road", Brandon Lang
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?page=expertexplainsNBAbets

He implies that more than point spreads that a ref would most likely work over/unders, which in his opinion a single ref could pretty reliably control.


ESPN.com: So explain then, how a referee could control the outcome of a game so that he or associates of his could win a bet?
BL: Totally with the fouls he calls. If he has fixed the total and has a number he's thinking of, he can get the team in the bonus earlier in the quarter. Let's say he wants a final score where both teams tally more than 205 points and he needs 59 points in the fourth quarter to make that happen. If he puts both teams in the penalty with 8:00 to go and every foul is a free throw, it's not too hard to have a 60-point quarter.


ESPN.com: So what do you think, given your experience, might have happened with Tim Donaghy?
BL: You see a lot of calls in the NBA, "Hey -- he didn't even touch him." But he's [under suspicion] because they will go back and watch every game he officiated, know the spread, know the totals, they'll watch the fourth quarter and they'll know exactly what games he [allegedly] fixed. One hundred percent, no questions asked, they'll know exactly.
They just have to look at the fourth quarter. That's where you'd be able to tell. I'm telling you -- it would have to be the total, not the winners or losers. You can't dictate a side, especially in the NBA. He couldn't take that chance. If someone gets injured or doesn't show up or is having a terrible night or whatever, you can't do it. But manipulating the total you can control from the very tip. If you need an over, a referee can dictate a high- or low-scoring game just by how he's calling it. It's going to come out.


ESPN.com: Given your expertise in watching and wagering on games, what influence does a referee or official have in the gambling outcome?
BL: If he has action on the game and wants something in particular to happen, I'd say 75 percent. I've been asked for years if games could be fixed. And I always told people not by players. Because the guys in the key positions who could get something done, your quarterbacks and running backs, are making millions and aren't going to risk it all to help some friend make $100,000. An official, though, could do it. In the NFL, there's a task force that on Monday reviews every critical call that came anywhere near the point spread. I don't believe that's ever been done in the NBA.

Pacersin2033
07-23-2007, 12:39 PM
IMO this is the end of discussion point regarding Stern. That's reason enough to fire him. There is no GOOD reason to let a ref under investigation anywhere near the playoffs, period. Of course the owners are probably in bed with Stern so much that they don't care, they probably all knew too for all we know.

Yep pretty much, Stern should have been fired long ago.

This might be a good thing, use the oppurtunity to get a strong intelligent commissioner. Why does the NFL have to be the only league with one.

Shade
07-23-2007, 12:40 PM
Right now, at this current point in time - I will take the NCAA game over the NBA 10 times out of 10. It's just a better product. And a lot of that has to do with the officiating.

I dunno about that. Big Ten officials are just about as bad as they get in any sport. The home court favoritism is so blatant as to be laughable.

Shade
07-23-2007, 12:42 PM
Yep pretty much, Stern should have been fired long ago.

This might be a good thing, use the oppurtunity to get a strong intelligent commissioner. Why does the NFL have to be the only league with one.

Or at least one without a ****-eating grin and a Napolean complex.

Shade
07-23-2007, 12:44 PM
Great Q&A at ESPN with star odd-maker and subject of the film "Two for the Road", Brandon Lang
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?page=expertexplainsNBAbets

He implies that more than point spreads that a ref would most likely work over/unders, which in his opinion a single ref could pretty reliably control.

Does anyone know what the over/under was on the Brawl game?

Shade
07-23-2007, 12:47 PM
I agree basically. There is seemingly no good reason.

But, just to play devil's advocate, there could have been some FBI pressure on him to allow the investigation to run its course. I can't say I know much about criminal investigations, but it would seem possible that the FBI was trying to get "higher up food chain" by using wire-tapping, monitoring, undercover agents or whatever else it is the Feds do to get an indictment.

I mean, it was reportedly a year-and-a-half long investigation so it's doubtful the FBI was just looking to bust Donaghy's bookie and that guys immediate bosses.

From an NBA integrity and fan standpoint, of course allowing Donaghy to ref a playoff game is unforgivable. But it's conceivable that a criminal FBI mafia investigation takes precedent over those concerns.

That's the big picture, really. And if Donaghy was allowed to ref a playoff game, why one in a series which was sure to swing on a critical game or two? Why not, say, a first-rounder in an obviously lopsided match-up?

I wouldn't be surprised if this scandal went all the way to the top.

JayRedd
07-23-2007, 12:49 PM
A ref can easilly influence the over/under in basketball. You don't even have to call an unbalanced game. All it takes is giving each side 4-8 more free throws, and the score will be artificially at least 10 points higher.

And if you run into a low-scoring night, you just start calling the second half very tight and getting guys to the line. Leading the league in techs (177 total sounds ridiculous) means he was adding a point or two in that way too.

Check out his Covers profile (probably the best gambling site on the web)
http://www.covers.com/pageLoader/pag...ree403935.html

The "over" was 10-2 in the games he reffed with a line of 184.5 or less. These are the games Vegas sets as low-scoring, meaning that it might only take adding 10 points or so to the score to make the over hit.

Very dubious.

BoomBaby31
07-23-2007, 12:52 PM
ESPN just said Donaghy might start naming names of other referees and PLAYERS likely to be involved. IF this is indeed true, the NBA won't be the same for years and years and years.

Shade
07-23-2007, 12:54 PM
The Spurs were the better team in that series and the leaving the bench rule is not only a good rule it is a consistant rule and isn't that what everyone wants and aren't most of the complaints about the NBA being inconsistant about things.

I'm going to have to completely disagree with you on both points, UB.

I undoubtedly believe that Phoenix was the better team. The Spurs won THREE games under questionable circumstances.

I don't have a problem with a bench rule, but this zero tolerance nonsense is just that...nonsense.

Shade
07-23-2007, 12:55 PM
ESPN just said Donaghy might start naming names of other referees and PLAYERS likely to be involved. IF this is indeed true, the NBA won't be the same for years and years and years.

Now, what players would be dumb enough to get wrapped up in such things, unless they were working under threats from the mafia or something? They sure as hell don't need the $$$.

Pacersin2033
07-23-2007, 12:56 PM
I'm going to have to completely disagree with you on both points, UB.

I undoubtedly believe that Phoenix was the better team. The Spurs won THREE games under questionable circumstances.

I don't have a problem with a bench rule, but this zero tolerance nonsense is just that...nonsense.

The Bench rule is a good rule, but so is the rule that players can't just walk onto the court. The NBA can't blindly enforce a rule on one team, and pretend like an infraction occurred in regards to another.

Zero tolerance for one rule is ok, as long as theres not tolerance for an equally valid and needed rule. Thats the issue.

Shade
07-23-2007, 12:58 PM
Would you favor federal legislation that would make sports betting illegal? That means no published point spreads either.

All day, every day.

Frank Slade
07-23-2007, 01:00 PM
:reporter: Jim Gray:

So.. Mr Stern, is it a safe bet to assume this may hurt the progress of awarding Las Vegas a NBA team anytime soon?

:brick:

Los Angeles
07-23-2007, 01:10 PM
I went to Spurs Report.

There's extremely high comedy going on over there. Evidently they have more information than anyone else and can say with absolute certainty that there was no tampering with the point spread in Game three and the officiating was appropriate. Oh, and the NBA hates the spurs and everyone else has an anti-spurs bias.

They know for a fact that suspensions were warranted against the Suns for leaving the bench, but not against Tim Duncan for leaving the bench in an identical manner. Evidently one was a real "altercation" and the other involved pre-teen girls playing hop-scotch, so Tim would have been allowed to run onto the court and dunk the ball if he wanted to.

I love homerism. It's a better pick-me-up than a cup of coffee.

Naptown_Seth
07-23-2007, 01:18 PM
I agree basically. There is seemingly no good reason.

But, just to play devil's advocate, there could have been some FBI pressure on him to allow the investigation to run its course. I can't say I know much about criminal investigations, but it would seem possible that the FBI was trying to get "higher up food chain" by using wire-tapping, monitoring, undercover agents or whatever else it is the Feds do to get an indictment.

I mean, it was reportedly a year-and-a-half long investigation so it's doubtful the FBI was just looking to bust Donaghy's bookie and that guys immediate bosses.

From an NBA integrity and fan standpoint, of course allowing Donaghy to ref a playoff game is unforgivable. But it's conceivable that a criminal FBI mafia investigation takes precedent over those concerns.
Good point. Playoff games are given out based on performance and seniority as I understand, so pulling him off games might have put up a red flag.

Then again the case didn't exactly run a long time past the last playoff game he worked so did they really need those last few weeks? Maybe I suppose but it's questionable from the outside looking in.

Unclebuck
07-23-2007, 01:19 PM
Obviously not or else they would have either ignored the rules for the Suns like they did the spurs, or they would have enforced the rules to both teams.

And congrats the NBA agrees with you, right now the NBA doesn't have enough integrity to scowl at OJ Simpson. The NBA might agree with you, the Rules(the things that really matter) don't.

No, it is a fact the Suns get higher TV rationgs than the Spurs

JayRedd
07-23-2007, 01:21 PM
For the record, Tim Duncan essentially stood up and took precisely three steps forward. There was nothing even remotely resembling an "altercation" of any conceivable kind. A guy fell down is all that happened. Players stand on the court all the time in the NBA to cheer or react. It's only against the rule if there is a fight occuring at the time.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y39nRO5keRM

This one below isn't the best angle, but Amare (and to a lesser extent Diaw) clearly runs towards Horry and Bell, who are clearly flailing at their arms at each other at half-court. I mean, he goes past the hash-mark.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3RDYD0EUBzY

Disagree with the rule all you want, but there was nothing "unfair" about it's enforcement (although Diaw really didn't go that far down the sideline).

Naptown_Seth
07-23-2007, 01:22 PM
Does anyone know what the over/under was on the Brawl game?
160

"Oh ******, 97-82, gotta get this thing stopped ASAP!!!"

;)
IDK actually.

JayRedd
07-23-2007, 01:33 PM
Then again the case didn't exactly run a long time past the last playoff game he worked so did they really need those last few weeks? Maybe I suppose but it's questionable from the outside looking in.

Of course it's questionable.

I just don't think we should hang Stern on this one until (if?) we find out the details and timeline of the investigation.

I know yall like to call Stern the "Dictator" or "Fuhrer" but in the real-world of racketeering, extortion and RICO investigations outside the NBA, he is an absolute nobody and probably can't exert much power.

The FBI trumps NBA, so Stern may have either had very little authority on anything related to this or been highly persuaded to let the investigation run its course. He's already said that the NBA has cooperated 100% with the Feds. That could include allowing this to go on even after suspicision was found or even hard evidence was produced. Regardless, I doubt FBI agents were exactly telling him all that much outside of, "we're investigating one you refs for mafia ties. Don't do anything out of the ordinary and we'll keep you posted on a need-to-know basis."

Remember, this was a mafia case and not a sports scandal as far as the Feds are concerned.

BoomBaby33
07-23-2007, 01:36 PM
:reporter: Jim Gray:

So.. Mr Stern, is it a safe bet to assume this may hurt the progress of awarding Las Vegas a NBA team anytime soon?

:brick:

You beat me to it. :eek: Exactly what my first thought was after reading through this thread.

More NBA refs could be involved too. Jeez.

Where will it stop? Maybe this was the whole issue with Jack and Fingers at the strip club. :rolleyes:

What if player involvement comes out of this? Goodbye NBA!

David Stern anybody? On the bright side of this, if Stern is real man about this, he would resign.
Bring on Commisioner Roger Goodell? :dance: So far, he has proven that he wont take crap from anybody!

wilcoxfunk
07-23-2007, 02:09 PM
Sh4d3-- If the govt made sports betting illegal, there would be even more underground betting and more problems because of it. Why don't people understand this about the prohibition of anything: it just breeds more illegal activities, possibly far more dangerous (i.e. threatening one's family with death, physical harm, etc.) than the 'illegal' activity itself.

Since86
07-23-2007, 02:22 PM
Sports betting is illegal.

Second line.

Pacersin2033
07-23-2007, 03:22 PM
No, it is a fact the Suns get higher TV rationgs than the Spurs

I never denied that, I suggest you read posts more clearly.


Disagree with the rule all you want, but there was nothing "unfair" about it's enforcement (although Diaw really didn't go that far down the sideline).

Whats unfair is not that they enforced that rule, its that they didn't enforce rules that would have forced Duncan out a game. Its unfair by the fact that they are the only team having rules enforced for. Its kinda like how the Pats got the best of both worlds.

When it was beneficial to them to have a rule enforced(tuck rule) it got enforced. When it was beneficial for a rule to be overlooked(Pass interference) it got overlooked.

wilcoxfunk
07-23-2007, 03:37 PM
Sports betting is illegal.

Second line.

Casinos are managing some racket then.

Speed
07-23-2007, 03:40 PM
How big a deal is Donaghy?

Posted by Mark Montieth

The NBA has a knack for inspiring over-reaction. So now that a legitimately big story has emerged, we can brace ourselves for a landslide.


Referee Tim Donaghy, who is being exposed as a punk regardless of the level of his involvement with developmental league mobsters, will be filling airwaves for talk radio shows and cyberspace for newspapers during a slow news period.


Just how big a story it deserves to be depends upon a couple of things:


* Did he act alone, or is he merely one of a group of officials working to shave points?

* How many games did he try to influence, and did his actions in any way help shape the outcome of the playoffs?

If so, this is a story that brings more public relations damage than actual damage. He’ll be barred from the league for life and probably do jail time. The bigger problem for the league will be clearing the cloud cover Donaghy has cast upon the rest of the referees, who will pay for his stupidity by putting up with all the heckling fans and having every crucial call dissected by suspicious observers.

Fortunately, much of the commentary has run along those lines. Sam Smith, for example, wrote a level-headed column about it in the Chicago Tribune, which can be found at

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/columnists/cs-070722smith,1,2178930.column?coll=chi_sports_util.

The part of the story people don’t want to hear at the moment is that most NBA referees are competent, professional and likeable. Not all of them, of course, but certainly at the same percentage as the people in any other profession.

Most of the new officials in recent seasons haven’t been as good as the veterans, which shouldn’t be surprising, really, since rookie players coaches and GMs endure growing pains as well.

Some people, however, react as if the league’s officiating is worse than ever at best and a travesty at worst. Excuse me, but did I miss the era when everyone loved the referees? In any sport? Fans were booing calls in the 1950s. They’ll be booing calls in the 2050s.
Coaches haven’t changed, either.

Slick Leonard once threw a ball rack onto the court to protest calls in the ABA. I also recall Bob Knight waging a personal campaign against Big Ten referees for a year or two back in the 1980s. He even screamed at then-commissioner Wayne Duke during a game at Assembly Hall once, something along the lines of “The ---------- officiating in this league is terrible, -------- you!”
Officiating can always be improved, but the breaks tend to even out in the long run. And while the NBA’s three-man crew has its drawbacks, it does neutralize the impact of an incompetent (or corrupt) referee.

The problem for the NBA is, and always will be, where to find better refs? They’re diligent in their training and analysis, but they have to tap into the existing workforce like every other industry. Safe to say, they’re not hiding a colony of outstanding refs somewhere and refusing to let them work.

The ongoing challenge for the league is walking the fine line between all-out warfare and free throw shooting contests. The games aren’t as entertaining as they once were because defenses are more aggressive, which leads to more foul calls, which leads to more whistles.

That challenge will last to eternity. The challenge of Tim Donaghy is much more dangerous and immediate, but it will pass.


http://blogs.indystar.com/pacersinsider/

Speed
07-23-2007, 03:46 PM
He downplays this, I'm really surprised. I don't think the league is at jeopardy in any way, but this is as serious as it gets. It won't just pass, maybe never. If that freaking brawl can live forever, so can this deal.

Oh ya, and the subtleties of Bob Knight invoked, love it.

Los Angeles
07-23-2007, 03:51 PM
Oh, Montieth. We need your calm guidance. We need your soothing touch.

Touch me Montieth, you know how I like it.

Speed
07-23-2007, 03:56 PM
made me do a spit take at work, thanks

Speed
07-23-2007, 04:06 PM
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/basketball/nba/07/23/betting.probe.ap/index.html

NEW YORK (AP) -- Police staked out former NBA referee Tim Donaghy's home after he received two telephone threats following disclosure that the FBI is investigating him for betting on games he worked.


Both calls seemed to come from the same unidentified caller, Manatee County Sheriff's Office spokesman Randy Warren said.

"There is reason for us to keep an eye on his place and follow up," he said.

Three squad cars arrived at Donaghy's home in Bradenton, Fla., on Sunday after he received the calls, according to a sheriff's office report. Donaghy did not have a listed phone number at his home.

A person with knowledge of the FBI investigation said the NBA was unaware of the FBI investigation until after the NBA finals. The person requested anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the ongoing case.

According to a law enforcement official, authorities are examining whether the referee made calls to affect the point spread in games on which he or associates had wagered thousands of dollars over the past two seasons. The official spoke on condition of anonymity, because he wasn't authorized to discuss the ongoing investigation.
The referee had a gambling problem and was approached by low-level mob associates through an acquaintance, the official said.

The New York Daily News, citing unidentified law enforcement sources, reported Sunday that Donaghy will cooperate with authorities and possibly name other officials and players involved in the betting scandal. On Monday, the newspaper reported former neighbors of Donaghy in Pennsylvania said they were approached more than a year ago by a private investigator they believed was hired by the NBA to check into Donaghy's gambling habits.

Kit Antsey, a real estate agent in West Chester, Pa., who helped Donaghy buy a home, told The Daily News a private investigator contacted him 18 months ago and asked him whether Donaghy bet on sports and at an Atlantic City casino.

NBA commissioner David Stern said Friday he plans to speak publicly about the investigation this week.

---------------
Sorry if this has been posted I didn't see it. Plus I didn't see the bolded part posted. You can delete if this is old news.

Kegboy
07-23-2007, 04:26 PM
Oh, Montieth. We need your calm guidance. We need your soothing touch.

Touch me Montieth, you know how I like it.

The bunny makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside. Thank you bunny.

:montieth: :montieth: :montieth:

Unclebuck
07-23-2007, 04:35 PM
I always feel like I'm running upstream, but I agree 100% with Mark Montieth. I'll repeat what I said before, I think this is a one ref thing, no one else will be involved and the level of even this one ref involvement as far as number of calls he made that were purposely wrong will be a lot less than most will believe or want to believe.

Now I am going to read the Sam Smith article - OK, just read it, I agree with him also.

I always find it so amusing that so many of you are apt to believe the worse, there is one line in one artical that this one ref might name names and immedietely everyone thinks a good portion of all NBA refs are involved. People are always so quick to believe the worst and seldom believe what is a more likely scenerio

Los Angeles
07-23-2007, 04:39 PM
On what evidence are you basing your beliefs on, UB? Or is it just a hunch? If it's a hunch, then you are just as wrong as those shouting "conspiracy".

Let the facts be your guide. Until the facts are in, you can't say it's only one man.

Unclebuck
07-23-2007, 04:42 PM
On what evidence are you basing your beliefs on, UB? Or is it just a hunch? If it's a hunch, then you are just as wrong as those shouting "conspiracy".

Let the facts be your guide. Until the facts are in, you can't say it's only one man.

It is a very educated hunch and I believe I'll be proven correct - but hey I'm more than willing to wait for the facts to come in, it seems others are less willing to wait on facts and more willing to shut down the NBA entirely. (yes that is a little hyperbole)

Arcadian
07-23-2007, 04:45 PM
Shouldn't we be waiting for facts before saying it is widespread?

Los Angeles
07-23-2007, 04:49 PM
I'd give you 60% on that, UB.

Several sources are reporting that Donaghy is set to name other officials and players. Who knows what that means.

By the way, I'm sorry I don't have a link, but I've read that the League was informed of the investigation in January. At that point, Donaghy should have been removed from the playoff roster, investigation be damned.

indygeezer
07-23-2007, 04:55 PM
I'd give you 60% on that, UB.

Several sources are reporting that Donaghy is set to name other officials and players. Who knows what that means.

By the way, I'm sorry I don't have a link, but I've read that the League was informed of the investigation in January. At that point, Donaghy should have been removed from the playoff roster, investigation be damned.

And I've read that the league was informed after the PO's. If they had prior knowledge they could have easily removed him and not said a word about it....not 1 in 500 would have noticed.



UB....I don't want the league shut down but I do see this as an opportunity for a "cleansing".

Unclebuck
07-23-2007, 04:56 PM
I'd give you 60% on that, UB.

Several sources are reporting that Donaghy is set to name other officials and players. Who knows what that means.

By the way, I'm sorry I don't have a link, but I've read that the League was informed of the investigation in January. At that point, Donaghy should have been removed from the playoff roster, investigation be damned.

I think you are probably correct that the league was informed of the investigation at some point, but to suggest that the NBA had any idea that this guy was betting on NBA games that he was officiating and changing outcomes and still allowing him to ref games is somehting I simply don't believe. They knew he had some sort of gambling problem, but from what I've read the NBA had no idea he was betting on the NBA.

Regardless I think they should have told him he wasn't working any playoff games (mainly because he isn't that good of a ref) but also if there is any knowledge of gambling and I don't care if it is a $5 NCAA basketball pool - he should not be working playoff games.

JayRedd
07-23-2007, 05:23 PM
I'm not gonna post all of these, so I'll just leave a link to today's "bullets" from TrueHoop.

There's about 5 Donaghy links in here that are very worth reading. The "wiki project," "sports law blog," and the "NY/NJ game breakdown" are all good reads.

http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-26-81/Monday-Bullets.html

Los Angeles
07-23-2007, 05:29 PM
BINGO.

The Denver Post has reported that the league was informed of the Donaghy investigation in January (according to a "source").

http://test.denverpost.com/sports/ci_6434030','231

They've also reported that the league hired a private investigator to investigate Donaghy's gambling problem a full 18 months ago.

Neither of these pieces of information put the league in a good light. Again, we'll see how the facts play out.

Unclebuck
07-23-2007, 05:34 PM
BINGO.

The Denver Post has reported that the league was informed of the Donaghy investigation in January (according to a "source").

http://test.denverpost.com/sports/ci_6434030','231

They've also reported that the league hired a private investigator to investigate Donaghy's gambling problem a full 18 months ago.

Neither of these pieces of information put the league in a good light. Again, we'll see how the facts play out.



But the key question is what did the NBA know and when did they know it. Sure they were informed of the Donadhy investigation - but what was the NBA told - were they told that Donaghy was betting on NBA games? and game he was officiating? and they let him keep his job - that just doesn't seem within the realm of possibility

VF21
07-23-2007, 05:46 PM
This is gonna get really sticky from a legal perspective.

The league has contracts with the officials and their union. Their hands were probably tied about how much they could do or say about an ongoing investigation.

For example, they couldn't very well relieve Donaghy of his duties simply because of the investigation. That's a breach of contract. He hasn't been found guilty of anything and until/unless he has his day in court OR confesses, he could have sued the NBA for violating his right to work.

Stern and Co. have been in a nearly impossible situation. And there are two entirely different issues here, of course, as far as Donaghy's impact on games is concerned.

There's the "point shaving" issue which, while influencing gambling outcomes wouldn't most likely change the standings of the league except in those few instances where point totals might determine ranking.

The other issue, however, is the really troubling one. If Donaghy actually FIXED games, instead of merely changing the point spread, the league will face much tougher criticism from fans, team owners, etc.

I don't even want to think about how Mark Cuban might react if he finds a game where Donaghy directly impacted the outcome itself.

::shudder::

JayRedd
07-23-2007, 05:51 PM
I don't even want to think about how Mark Cuban might react if he finds a game where Donaghy directly impacted the outcome itself.

::shudder::

His take is actually pretty tempered and even optimistic so far.

Or maybe the last paragraph is tongue-in-cheek and it's over my head. Read for yourself.

http://www.blogmaverick.com/2007/07/20/calamity-as-catalyst/

Calamity as Catalyst - My Vote of Confidence in the NBA

Jul 20th 2007 9:39PM

Every company of any size has had a problem(s) that its CEO and stakeholders have lost sleep over. Its the law of big numbers. If enough things go on, something is going to go wrong.

Products get recalled or are tampered with. There are workplace disasters. There is corruption. No industry is immune. Churches, consumer products, law enforcement, cars, planes, trains and plenty more. No profession is immune. From the CEO who misrepresents corporate numbers or events at the expense of shareholders, to the doorman who tips himself from the cover charge at the expense of the club owner, people of every profession make bad decisions.

**** happens. Bad **** happens. When it does, there are two options. Cry over it and do nothing or recognize the problem and do the best you possibly can to not only fix it, but make the entire organization stronger..

As bad as the allegations facing the NBA today are, its also an opportunity to face every allegation that has ever been directed towards the NBA and its officials and pre empt them from ever occuring in the future.

Calamity can be a catalyst for significant change.

There are any number of examples in the business world where calamity led to better management, better communications, greater transparency and even better products. As the proverb goes, Necessity is the Mother of Invention.

The NBA took a hit today. Behind that hit is a catalyst and opportunity for significant change that could make the NBA stronger than it ever has been. Its a chance to proactively put in place people, processes and transparency that will forever silence those who will question the NBA's integrity.

I have complete confidence that David Stern and Adam Silver will do just that and the NBA and our officiating will be all the stronger for it.

<!-- google_ad_section_end -->

VF21
07-23-2007, 05:59 PM
His take is actually pretty tempered and even optimistic so far.

Or maybe the last paragraph is tongue-in-cheek and it's over my head. Read for yourself.

http://www.blogmaverick.com/2007/07/20/calamity-as-catalyst/

Calamity as Catalyst - My Vote of Confidence in the NBA

Jul 20th 2007 9:39PM

Every company of any size has had a problem(s) that its CEO and stakeholders have lost sleep over. Its the law of big numbers. If enough things go on, something is going to go wrong.

Products get recalled or are tampered with. There are workplace disasters. There is corruption. No industry is immune. Churches, consumer products, law enforcement, cars, planes, trains and plenty more. No profession is immune. From the CEO who misrepresents corporate numbers or events at the expense of shareholders, to the doorman who tips himself from the cover charge at the expense of the club owner, people of every profession make bad decisions.

**** happens. Bad **** happens. When it does, there are two options. Cry over it and do nothing or recognize the problem and do the best you possibly can to not only fix it, but make the entire organization stronger..

As bad as the allegations facing the NBA today are, its also an opportunity to face every allegation that has ever been directed towards the NBA and its officials and pre empt them from ever occuring in the future.

Calamity can be a catalyst for significant change.

There are any number of examples in the business world where calamity led to better management, better communications, greater transparency and even better products. As the proverb goes, Necessity is the Mother of Invention.

The NBA took a hit today. Behind that hit is a catalyst and opportunity for significant change that could make the NBA stronger than it ever has been. Its a chance to proactively put in place people, processes and transparency that will forever silence those who will question the NBA's integrity.

I have complete confidence that David Stern and Adam Silver will do just that and the NBA and our officiating will be all the stronger for it.

<!-- google_ad_section_end -->

Heheheheh.

Gotta love how Cuban can get his digs in. What I see is him attempting to be magnanimous while whispering "See, I told you the officials were WRONG!"

I may heartily dislike Cuban, but he's no fool. He owns a successful franchise in the NBA. He's not about to call for its destruction.

Los Angeles
07-23-2007, 06:01 PM
Maybe ... maybe not.

THIS IS ENTIRELY MY OWN SPECULATION: The league could have been informed that there was an ongoing investigation at that time because the FBI needed some form of access in order to acquire the information needed to earn a conviction. In turn, the league could have been ordered to keep the ref rotations intact for fear of tipping off the culprits.

Under this scenario, the league could have known early on AND done nothing.

Now that I've typed all of that out, I find the scenario highly unlikely. What's swaying me in that direction is this: I think the ONLY appropriate action is to suspend a ref (with pay) the moment that he is suspected of gambling. He should remain out of officiating until he is exonerated. I don't see any other option.

Here's the rub: assuming that the NBA will do the right thing is a foolish position.

indygeezer
07-23-2007, 06:36 PM
Maybe ... maybe not.

Here's the rub: assuming that the NBA will do the right thing is a foolish position.


Der Fuhrer has no option in this case. He must be completly transparent with the facts. At least as much as the law allows. This is the absolute worse case scenario for any sports league imaginable and to keep any sense of confidence that the fans/viewers/sponsors felt toward the NBA will require the utmost in honesty. THey will have to show that they are working to rebuild the public trust. This league was already perceived as a league of thugs and now it willbe seen as a league of thugs with MAFIA ties. The public won't care if it was one or all. Everyone will be smeared with the same brush...everyone will be looked upon as being "made".

The NBAPTB MUST act quickly and forthrightly to retain it's integrity. It is an opportunity to repair itself and it's image but it will require steps that improve the "as-is" condition absolutely. The NBAPA and the Refs bargaining unit may squawk all they want but the owners will have to stand firm to make them understand the the league and their livilihoods are at stake. They may not have killed the goose yet, but said goose may be laying pewter eggs shortly.

Frank Slade
07-23-2007, 06:37 PM
I'd give you 60% on that, UB.

Several sources are reporting that Donaghy is set to name other officials and players. Who knows what that means.

By the way, I'm sorry I don't have a link, but I've read that the League was informed of the investigation in January. At that point, Donaghy should have been removed from the playoff roster, investigation be damned.

Yes, I'm not sure either where I heard it, although I it had to either be MSNBC or Fox Sports this morning, that claimed the League was aware of a non specific investigation into Donaghy in January.

indygeezer
07-23-2007, 06:44 PM
Yes, I'm not sure either where I heard it, although I it had to either be MSNBC or Fox Sports this morning, that claimed the League was aware of a non specific investigation into Donaghy in January.

When an employer hears that an employee is the subject of an on-going federal investigation one would normally think "Fraud, theft, drugs, racketeering, or in the case of sports...gambling" And if it is a Fed investigation the first thaought would be ....Mafia or terrorist.


SIDENOTE...I'm amuzed to think that RealGM has a column called WIRETAP where they give a synopsis of wire stories. They may need to change that name.

VF21
07-23-2007, 06:52 PM
I'm not absolutely sure of the law, but being aware of a "non-specific investigation" about someone and having legal grounds to remove them from their job (with or without pay) could be entirely different things.

In addition, there are major felonies that can be assessed against those who hamper federal investigations.

If the FBI informed the league they were investigating Donaghy, it was most likely in a "we're only telling you so you'll give us access to certain things" scenario. I don't know the legal ramifications but the NBA could easily have been between a rock and a hard spot, with the FBI on one side and Tony Soprano on the other.

Not something I'd ever want to have to face in my business.

Kegboy
07-23-2007, 06:54 PM
This appeared in a since deleted thread, but I felt the article is worth reading.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=aw-stern072207&prov=yhoo&type=lgns

I'll warn you, this article is just dripping with anger. Wojnarowski's no nut, either, so it's rather surprising.

Kegboy
07-23-2007, 06:56 PM
I'm not absolutely sure of the law, but being aware of a "non-specific investigation" about someone and having legal grounds to remove them from their job (with or without pay) could be entirely different things.

In addition, there are major felonies that can be assessed against those who hamper federal investigations.

If the FBI informed the league they were investigating Donaghy, it was most likely in a "we're only telling you so you'll give us access to certain things" scenario. I don't know the legal ramifications but the NBA could easily have been between a rock and a hard spot, with the FBI on one side and Tony Soprano on the other.

Not something I'd ever want to have to face in my business.

Considering Stern's Star Jones routine ("You know, I'm a lawyer"), I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if he put the letter of the law above what's best for the game. Don't want to be accused of any impropriety while the league goes down in flames.

JayRedd
07-23-2007, 07:10 PM
I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if he put the letter of the law above what's best for the game. Don't want to be accused of any impropriety while the league goes down in flames.

I tried to make this point before, and I'm not sure what the actual laws are but.....do any of us really have any idea what Stern can and cannot do when his "company" (read, League) is a prime player in a RICO investigation? If someone informed Bill Gates that it was investigating a Microsoft employee for interstate rackeetering, is the next move really up to Bill Gates? Or do the Feds run the show?

I honestly have no idea. I'm just not sure a lot of yall or most of the people writing about this stuff so far do either.

I'm just saying...."What's best for the game" may have had to take a backseat to FBI mandates no matter what Stern wanted to do.

VF21
07-23-2007, 07:18 PM
I tried to make this point before, and I'm not sure what the actual laws are but.....do any of us really have any idea what Stern can and cannot do when his "company" (read, League) is a prime player in a RICO investigation? If someone informed Bill Gates that it was investigating a Microsoft employee for interstate rackeetering, is the next move really up to Bill Gates? Or do the Feds run the show?

I honestly have no idea. I'm just not sure a lot of yall or most of the people writing about this stuff so far do either.

I'm just saying...."What's best for the game" may have had to take a backseat to FBI mandates no matter what Stern wanted to do.

That's what I was referring to.

Once the feds begin an investigation of a business, and the NBA is a business, there are certain things anyone contacted can and cannot do. And the punishment for not following those rules can be felony hampering of an investigation. Not something to be trifled with... And not something a lawyer such as Stern is going to ignore with impunity.

aceace
07-23-2007, 08:24 PM
The worlds full of "what if" scenarios.

What if the FBI went to Stern in January and said Donaghy is crooked and fixing games. We can prove this! Don't do anything yet because we believe there are others and we don't know who they are. If you suspend Donaghy now we probably won't get the others and you may still have the same problem for years to come.

What would you do in this situation?

What if the FBI did nothing more than request information on Donaghy. Supposedly all refs have to release their bank account records to the NBA. Maybe thats all that they asked for.

When a sting operation is going on, the fewer people that know the more likely it will be successful.

ESPN said News conf from Stern 11am Tuesday. 7/24

DisplacedKnick
07-23-2007, 08:32 PM
The worlds full of "what if" scenarios.

What if the FBI went to Stern in January and said Donaghy is crooked and fixing games. We can prove this! Don't do anything yet because we believe there are others and we don't know who they are. If you suspend Donaghy now we probably won't get the others and you may still have the same problem for years to come.

What would you do in this situation?

That one's easy - I'd let him keep officiating but he wouldn't ref a playoff game and I'd try as much as I can (I don't know how far in advance ref assignments are made) to keep him out of any games of consequence down the stretch.


What if the FBI did nothing more than request information on Donaghy. Supposedly all refs have to release their bank account records to the NBA. Maybe thats all that they asked for.

When a sting operation is going on, the fewer people that know the more likely it will be successful.

ESPN said News conf from Stern 11am Tuesday. 7/24

The second scenario is entirely different. The league wouldn't know enough to do anything.

Roaming Gnome
07-23-2007, 08:46 PM
I know this will be mana from heaven for all those who already hate the league, feel it's leadership doesn't do enough to make the league appealing to them, or feel that the NCAA game is short changed because of the NBA, but honestly and strangely enough.........I'm not outraged or even concerned. My thoughts on the NBA or its officials remain unchanged. A bad call to me is just that..."a bad call". I'm not going to even ruin a good time by wondering if any game I go to is rigged.

Yeah, I know that it will be bad pub for the league, but personally...I really don't care about casual fans, or the "hate the NBA" crowd. I don't subscribe to "conspiracy theories" about the league directing the officials in the play-offs.

Is this honestly going to effect my anxiousness for the next season? Nope!

Ransom
07-23-2007, 09:11 PM
I know this will be mana from heaven for all those who already hate the league, feel it's leadership doesn't do enough to make the league appealing to them, or feel that the NCAA game is short changed because of the NBA, but honestly and strangely enough.........I'm not outraged or even concerned. My thoughts on the NBA or its officials remain unchanged. A bad call to me is just that..."a bad call". I'm not going to even ruin a good time by wondering if any game I go to is rigged.

Yeah, I know that it will be bad pub for the league, but personally...I really don't care about casual fans, or the "hate the NBA" crowd. I don't subscribe to "conspiracy theories" about the league directing the officials in the play-offs.

Is this honestly going to effect my anxiousness for the next season? Nope!

To a degree, I agree.

I absolutely hate listening to conspiracy theories being spun out of every possible scenario. I heard recently someone claiming Oden to Portland and Durant to Seattle was rigged because they're both in the same division!

It probably won't effect me personally watching the games, but hearing all over the talk, on radio, Tv, internet, IRL, is going to be more grating and tiring than ever.

indygeezer
07-23-2007, 10:55 PM
And to a degree I agree, but I'm not talking about us diehard fans. I'm concerned with the casual fan. You know the casual fan don't you. The ones that give a boost to ticket sales and tv ratings above the minimal level we diehards attain. They are the ones that boost clothing sales whenever the next MICHAEL comes on the scene. Like it or not, they are integral to the lifeblood of the NBA. Let them slip away and watch TV ratings drop even lower than they are.

You may not care but the average sports fan might and you should care what they think. For without them tv advertisers will sit up and seriously take notice.

The NBA is already ignored in the daily media (radio), it will not take much to drop us down to Major League Soccer level. IOW, tape delayed PO games and it wasn't that long ago that we had to suffer thru that, and I for one don't wish to see it again.

bulldog
07-23-2007, 10:56 PM
Yeah, I know that it will be bad pub for the league, but personally...I really don't care about casual fans, or the "hate the NBA" crowd. I don't subscribe to "conspiracy theories" about the league directing the officials in the play-offs.

I agree. I guess we'll find out more soon, but so far it seems relatively isolated and can hopefully serve as a catalyst for change. Casual fans were leaving for a long time anyway, and I look forward to the day when I'm the basketball equivalent of a Canadian spouting off about how great the NHL playoffs were.

DisplacedKnick
07-23-2007, 11:09 PM
I tried to make this point before, and I'm not sure what the actual laws are but.....do any of us really have any idea what Stern can and cannot do when his "company" (read, League) is a prime player in a RICO investigation? If someone informed Bill Gates that it was investigating a Microsoft employee for interstate rackeetering, is the next move really up to Bill Gates? Or do the Feds run the show?

I honestly have no idea. I'm just not sure a lot of yall or most of the people writing about this stuff so far do either.

I'm just saying...."What's best for the game" may have had to take a backseat to FBI mandates no matter what Stern wanted to do.

Stern can be required to notify law enforcement before taking any action regarding an individual.

If, frex, Stern wanted to fire Donaghy - or at least alter his schedule, if he's been informed of an ongoing investigation he'd have to tell law enforcement before taking any action.

Law enforcement would then go to court to get a judgement to not allow Stern to do this. The burden in this case is on law enforcement and they have to do two things. First, they have to convince a judge that not firing/suspending Donaghy is critical to their investigation. Second, they have to prove that leaving Donahy in place would not unduly harm the NBA.

Stern has such a simple argument here that a slobbering mongoloid idiot could make it. The NBA is a league for a sporting event. The very credibility of the league hinges on its fan base believing that the games are not tampered with - that the sporting event is a true and fair test between two teams. Leaving a ref who tampers with games in place would greatly damage the league.

No judge will rule against the NBA in such a case. Law enforcement does not have the right to conduct an investigation in such a way as to seriously harm an innocent party. Now I don't know if this would hold true for a national security threat but it sure would hold true for an under the table book investigation.

If Stern knew what was going on, getting Donaghy off the court would be a slam dunk.

Kegboy
07-23-2007, 11:14 PM
Good points, Rim.

ESPN said Stern's having a PC at 11am tomorrow. Wonder who all will cover it.

DisplacedKnick
07-23-2007, 11:22 PM
Good points, Rim.

ESPN said Stern's having a PC at 11am tomorrow. Wonder who all will cover it.

Yeah except I just noticed Jay mentioned it was a RICO investigation. Those are a bit different though I'd still think due process would have to take place - IIRC, most of RICO involves special penalties and allowing the freezing of assets pretty early in the process. The Courts have a duty to protect the innocent and in this case that's the NBA - if things played out that way.

Shade
07-23-2007, 11:44 PM
Sh4d3-- If the govt made sports betting illegal, there would be even more underground betting and more problems because of it. Why don't people understand this about the prohibition of anything: it just breeds more illegal activities, possibly far more dangerous (i.e. threatening one's family with death, physical harm, etc.) than the 'illegal' activity itself.

So, then, we should just give up "because everyone else is doing it?"

Well, why not legalize an abundance of other things, then?

The world needs to stop stooping to the lowest common denominator.

JayRedd
07-24-2007, 12:07 AM
Yeah except I just noticed Jay mentioned it was a RICO investigation. Those are a bit different though I'd still think due process would have to take place - IIRC, most of RICO involves special penalties and allowing the freezing of assets pretty early in the process. The Courts have a duty to protect the innocent and in this case that's the NBA - if things played out that way.

Pretty stupid for me to even discuss this stuff since I really have no idea what I'm talking about, but I just wanted to clarify three things before we hopefully find out some more concrete stuff tomorrow from Stern...

A) I have no idea if it's a RICO trial. I just hear FBI, mafia, gambling, 1 1/2 year investigation, interstate, possible racketeering/extortion and am juggling that all around inside my brain based on what I've learned on The Wire and The Sopranos mostly. Might not be RICO at all. I'm not 100% on what constitutes such an investigation and what is just "regular hunting bad guy" work for the Feds.

B) I was also not assuming that the NBA was being viewed as 100% innocent party here. Part of the investigation could have been investigating the NBA. Now, I'm not saying the Feds would think there were any "top down, Costra Nostra" ties coming out of Stern's New York NBA office or nothing....just that if the FBI thought there may be several referees involved in this whole thing and they are employed by the NBA, the Association itself necessarilly be an altogether "innocent bystander" in this whole thing would it? It would be the games played by NBA teams and reffed by NBA employees that were the whole reason the illegal acts of gambling and extortion were occurring, no?

C) I have no idea what I'm talking about. I'm certainly not a lawer, I just play one on PD.

DisplacedKnick
07-24-2007, 06:38 AM
Pretty stupid for me to even discuss this stuff since I really have no idea what I'm talking about, but I just wanted to clarify three things before we hopefully find out some more concrete stuff tomorrow from Stern...

A) I have no idea if it's a RICO trial. I just hear FBI, mafia, gambling, 1 1/2 year investigation, interstate, possible racketeering/extortion and am juggling that all around inside my brain based on what I've learned on The Wire and The Sopranos mostly. Might not be RICO at all. I'm not 100% on what constitutes such an investigation and what is just "regular hunting bad guy" work for the Feds.

B) I was also not assuming that the NBA was being viewed as 100% innocent party here. Part of the investigation could have been investigating the NBA. Now, I'm not saying the Feds would think there were any "top down, Costra Nostra" ties coming out of Stern's New York NBA office or nothing....just that if the FBI thought there may be several referees involved in this whole thing and they are employed by the NBA, the Association itself necessarilly be an altogether "innocent bystander" in this whole thing would it? It would be the games played by NBA teams and reffed by NBA employees that were the whole reason the illegal acts of gambling and extortion were occurring, no?

C) I have no idea what I'm talking about. I'm certainly not a lawer, I just play one on PD.

The only thing is, if the league itself was being investigated I doubt Stern would know the details of it - and the FBI would be under no duty to tell him anything. Discovery doesn't take over until charges are filed. And I don't know all the laws - I've just had to testify a time or two at injunction hearings.

Unclebuck
07-24-2007, 08:59 AM
I don't expect Stern to say too much today - legally he really can't.


Here is a pretty good article on this mess

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/23/AR2007072301630_pf.html

What NBA Knew Is an Issue
League May Have Suspected Referee Had Gambling Problem

By Ivan Carter
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, July 24, 2007; E03



The NBA may have suspected that Tim Donaghy had a gambling problem but did not know that the veteran referee was possibly betting on games he worked, a league source familiar with the situation said yesterday.

Donaghy, who recently stepped down after working NBA games for 13 seasons, has not yet turned himself in to authorities, although several reports said he is expected to do so soon. The reports said he plans on cooperating with investigators.

NBA Commissioner David Stern scheduled a news conference for today to discuss the situation. He almost certainly will be asked to explain how long the league knew about the FBI investigation and whether league officials had any reason to believe that Donaghy was betting on games he worked.

"There is no way David Stern would have allowed a referee to continue working games, especially playoff games, if he thought there was even a chance that the guy was crooked," said the league source, who spoke on condition of anonymity. "This is a nightmare scenario for any sports league."

According to several reports, the FBI is examining whether Donaghy made calls to affect the point spread in games on which he or his associates wagered thousands of dollars over the past two seasons. NBA referees are contractually prohibited from gambling on any sports.

Donaghy worked 131 regular season games and 20 postseason contests the last two seasons. Referees are selected for playoff assignments based on their performance during the regular season. Donaghy called seven Washington Wizards games last season but did not work any of Washington's first-round playoff games against the Cleveland Cavaliers.

The NBA assigned a special investigator to look into Donaghy's possible gambling activity more than a year ago, the New York Daily News reported. Authorities said the referee had a gambling problem and was approached by low-level mob associates through an acquaintance.

Donaghy's attorney, John Lauro, did not return a telephone message left at his office yesterday.

According to a report in the New York Post, Donaghy called local law enforcement officials to his Florida home on Sunday because he has received threatening phone calls.

So far, investigators have not said what specific games they are looking into. Donaghy last worked on May 12, in Game 3 of the Western Conference semifinals between the Phoenix Suns and San Antonio Spurs. That game, won 108-101 by the Spurs, has drawn scrutiny because the crew of Donaghy, Greg Willard and Eddie F. Rush made several controversial calls that went against Phoenix. The Spurs were favored by four points going into the game.

Donaghy also worked a game involving the Miami Heat and New York Knicks in February. The Knicks, who were favored by 4 1/2 points, won 99-93 after attempting 39 free throws to Miami's eight. Also, Heat Coach Pat Riley and assistant Ron Rothstein were assessed technical fouls.

According to the Web site Pregame.com, which tracks sports gambling trends, the teams playing in games worked by Donaghy the last two seasons scored more points than Las Vegas bookmakers expected more than 57 percent of the time. According to RJ Bell, a sports gambling expert who runs the site, the odds of that happening naturally are 19-1.

In the statement released by the NBA on Friday, Stern said the league is cooperating with the FBI and said the allegations involved a single referee.

Pacersin2033
07-24-2007, 10:28 AM
Hey guys, I don't know what a point spread means exactly. I have never bet on sports, except casually with friends, and we never used those. Little help to understand the situation please.

Unclebuck
07-24-2007, 10:57 AM
Hey guys, I don't know what a point spread means exactly. I have never bet on sports, except casually with friends, and we never used those. Little help to understand the situation please.

OK, every game there is a point spread.

For example the Spurs might be favored to beat the Pacers by 9 points. So if you bet on the game and take the Spurs, that means the Spurs have to win the game by 10 points or more, if they win by 8 points or less than you lose the bet. If you bet on the Pacers and they lose the game by 8 points or less, then you win the bet.

If the game ends and the Spurs win by 9 it is called a push and I guess you get your money back. But that is why often times you'll see a team favored by 9 and a half, that takes the push out of the equation


Hope that makes sense


Stern is coming up here in a minute

Slick Pinkham
07-24-2007, 11:02 AM
Hey guys, I don't know what a point spread means exactly. I have never bet on sports, except casually with friends, and we never used those. Little help to understand the situation please.


let's say Indiana is playing Detroit in Indy.

Detroit is the better team, but Indy has home court, so the best guess is that Detroit should win, but it might be close.

In Las Vegas, where sports betting is legal, a person called an oddsmaker (working for a casion or another agency sponsoring gambling) decides what would be the predicted margin of victory that would entice as much betting as possible on both sides (for Indiana and for Detroit).

He could predict Detroit by 20, but then nobody would want to bet on Detroit, since it is hard to win by that much on the road. That is because to win the bet, if you are betting on Detroit, the Pistons would have to win by at least 20. A 19 point win would essential be a Pacers victory in the eyes of betters. the oddsmaker could set the point spread as the Pacers by 5 points, but nobody would then be betting on the Pacers to beat a clearly better team by at least 5 points.

The oddmaker picks a comfortable margin to get maximum volume of betting, say establishing Detroit as a 3 point favorite.

The lets say Jermaine is injured the day before. The oddmaker would then adjust the line and say Detroit by a larger margin.

But lets say JO is healthy and her sets the line at 3 favoring Detoit. If the ref wants to influence the outcome of the game, he seeks to help Detroit win by more than 3 (if the gambler he is working for has bet on Detroit) or have the pacers win or lose by less than 3 (if the gambler he is working for has bet on Indiana)


besides point spreads you can bet on other things, like total points scored by both teams (the over/under).

Unclebuck
07-24-2007, 11:04 AM
Two minutes until Stern

it is being shown on ESPN, ESPNNEWS, Fox News, MSNBC, CNN - and maybe more.

Although the false comments are in full force by Skip Bayliss - he's an idiot

indygeezer
07-24-2007, 11:10 AM
Tell the a-hole to quit talking over the Commish :mad:

DisplacedKnick
07-24-2007, 11:11 AM
I "There is no way David Stern would have allowed a referee to continue working games, especially playoff games, if he thought there was even a chance that the guy was crooked," said the league source, who spoke on condition of anonymity. "This is a nightmare scenario for any sports league."


It is my sincerest hope that this is true. In fact, I expect this to be true and will be appalled to learn otherwise.

sweabs
07-24-2007, 11:20 AM
Stern: "In January of 2005, it came to our attention that he was in disputes with his neighbour".

"We hired an investigator to look into that through our security office, and looked at the allegations and the complaint."

"It had to do strictly with a dispute, and we had to call Mr. Donaghy in where he informed us in Jan 2005 that the allegations against him were untrue...and that HE was the person being harassed by his neighbour and not the opposite".

"At that time, and as part of that investigation there was an allegation made to our investigators on the ground...which by that time we had retained the group to continue the investigation...somebody suggested that he had gambled at the hotel in Atlantic City...at either the gaming tables or card tables..."

"He had denied that he did that...we checked every casino in Atlantic City and Las Vegas to determine if he had any presence in any of those places and all of our investigation came up negative. The only thing that persisted was this ongoing dispute with his neighbours and we informed him that this made us unhappy."

Unclebuck
07-24-2007, 11:23 AM
I hope everyone is listening to this press conference.

A side note: I'm sure when this hit Sterns desk - he probably wanted to kill this ref, and I do mean kill

NBA knew nothing of this until Jun 20th 2007. This being the gambling of this ref. Once again the false reporting is rampant. FALSE

indygeezer
07-24-2007, 11:24 AM
So when he finally gets into the meat of things they switch to commercials.

:mad:

sweabs
07-24-2007, 11:25 AM
NBA knew nothing of this until Jun 20th 2007. This being the gambling of this ref. Once again the false reporting is rampant. FALSE
More speculation on my part - but is it not feasible that this dispute in 2005 had gambling/mob ties? How much did they really look into things? I'm just being speculative here...

Unclebuck
07-24-2007, 11:25 AM
So when he finally gets into the meat of things they switch to commercials.

:mad:

What station are you watching man.

Unclebuck
07-24-2007, 11:26 AM
Stern: He is the only referee to have bet on NBA games.

indygeezer
07-24-2007, 11:26 AM
What station are you watching man.

ESPN 950 Radio.....is that Cowherd?????????????

Unclebuck
07-24-2007, 11:28 AM
More speculation on my part - but is it not feasible that this dispute in 2005 had gambling/mob ties? How much did they really look into things? I'm just being speculative here...

I don't think so, it seemd like a neighbor dispute and the omount of investigation the NBA did into this seems like wya, way overkill and the NBA told him he wasn't going to work any second round playoff games in that seaosn 2005 as punishment for this. .


Stern: NBA did not know he was betting NBA games and still let him work

DisplacedKnick
07-24-2007, 11:32 AM
Stern: He is the only referee to have bet on NBA games.

I hope this is true but I don't know how Stern could know that at this point.

Hopefully there will be a webcast available at some point. I'd like to catch the press conf - or at least have a chance to read the transcript.

Unclebuck
07-24-2007, 11:33 AM
NBA did not know anything about this ref having a gambling problem until June 20th of 2007. (that is soemthing that Stern would not lie about because that could be prove false later and Stern was just asked about and he repeated that they did not know

aceace
07-24-2007, 11:33 AM
Stern looks completely humbled. I almost felt sorry for the guy.

Unclebuck
07-24-2007, 11:34 AM
I hope this is true but I don't know how Stern could know that at this point.

Hopefully there will be a webcast available at some point. I'd like to catch the press conf - or at least have a chance to read the transcript.

Yes he can know who the FBI is investigating. I suppose there could be some other ref who independtly is gambling but I think as far as if anyone ism connected to this one ref, seems like that is not the case.

DisplacedKnick
07-24-2007, 11:37 AM
Stern looks completely humbled. I almost felt sorry for the guy.

I'm sure it was a complete shock when he found out. Even folks who hate the guy have to admit that he's thrown everything he has into the NBA - I bet he takes this very personally and feels completely betrayed.

In fact that's maybe the best reason I have for thinking it's time to step down - that it's become too personal for him and he's lost some objectivity. Not right away, but maybe it's time for him to start thinking about scheduling a date to leave - say, a year or so from now.

Unclebuck
07-24-2007, 11:37 AM
I also hope everyone heard the part about how the refs are monitored with respect to good calls, bad calls, and non-calls.

Stern isn't going anywhere anytime soon , the owners won't allow it, the NBA needs a strong hand during this time

indygeezer
07-24-2007, 11:39 AM
I'm sure it was a complete shock when he found out. Even folks who hate the guy have to admit that he's thrown everything he has into the NBA - I bet he takes this very personally and feels completely betrayed.

In fact that's maybe the best reason I have for thinking it's time to step down - that it's become too personal for him and he's lost some objectivity. Not right away, but maybe it's time for him to start thinking about scheduling a date to leave - say, a year or so from now.


I'm thinking more in the line of weeks from now.

DisplacedKnick
07-24-2007, 11:41 AM
I'm thinking more in the line of weeks from now.

I think you have to give him time to clean this up. Once that's done it would be an appropriate time to walk away.

Fool
07-24-2007, 11:51 AM
I hope this is true but I don't know how Stern could know that at this point.

Hopefully there will be a webcast available at some point. I'd like to catch the press conf - or at least have a chance to read the transcript.


The stream.

http://sports.yahoo.com/

grace
07-24-2007, 12:04 PM
The stream.

http://sports.yahoo.com/

:sleep:

Someone else is going to have to tell me if anything interesting or important comes out of this.

To all the people who said this was going to blow over by now not only is the press conference streamed on the internet it's also on ESPN, ESPN2, and the news. Since it's not on ESPN Classic I guess it doesn't meet their criteria for an instant classic.

Bball
07-24-2007, 12:06 PM
Numbers indicate unlikely outcomes in games Donaghy officiated

When noted sports gambling expert R.J. Bell began crunching numbers from the last four years of NBA referee Tim Donaghy's career Monday, what he discovered sent him on a public relations ride he never thought possible.

"It's been a crazy day," said Bell, the president of sports betting information site pregame.com. "But this is some groundbreaking stuff."

The biggest eye opener, Bell said, came when he compared the number of points scored in the games Donaghy officiated versus the number of points the Las Vegas sports books had expected.


In the two seasons in which the FBI is investigating Donaghy for allegedly fixing games for gambling purposes, Bell found that, in games when Donaghy was part of the officiating crew, NBA teams scored more points than Las Vegas expected (hitting the over) 57 percent of the time. With a league average of 49 to 51 percent, the odds of such an occurrence are 19 to 1.

When Bell analyzed the numbers from the two seasons before the two in question, he discovered that, in games Donaghy officiated, NBA teams scored more points than Vegas expected just 44 percent of the time.

Although the 13 percent difference might not seem that jarring to the casual observer, it's jaw-dropping in the world of sports gambling. Bell said the odds of a 44 percent probability happening 57 percent of the time are about 1 in 1,000.

"There's a 99.9 percent chance that these results would not have happened without an outside factor," Bell said. "Something abnormal was going on here."

ESPN.com's own research into Donaghy's last two seasons supports Bell's claims. In the 66 games Donaghy refereed in the 2005-06 season, the two teams in his games combined to score an average of 196.8 points. The average over/under, according to BoDog.com, was 186.6, a difference of almost 10 points.

In 2006-07, Donaghy refereed 73 games. In those contests, the two teams combined to score 201.37 points and the average over/under was 187.9 points, a difference of more than 13 points per game.

"Vegas is too good for that to happen," Bell said. "The standard range should be somewhere around five or six, maybe. Not 10 or 13."

The surprising trends aren't limited to total bets, when a gambler wagers on the total number of points scored in a game. Side bets, when a gambler picks one side or the other to win the contest, also raised some concern.

At the start of the 2007 calendar year, Bell said, there were 10 straight games in which Donaghy was part of the officiating crew and the point spread moved a point and a half or more before tip-off, indicating big money had been wagered on the game. In those 10 contests, according to Bell, the big money won all 10 times.

"They say follow the money, right?" Bell said. "Well, when the money is right 10 straight times, something is going on. To me, that's the gavel clicking down."

Just as interesting are the numbers from April 15 to the postseason. During that stretch, there were eight games in which Donaghy was part of the officiating crew and the line moved more than a point and a half before the tip, Bell said. And in those games, including over/under bets and win/loss wagers, the big money was just 2-7.

"It means one of two things," Bell said. "Perhaps in the playoffs, they felt too much scrutiny and they weren't trying to do anything and the results are just random. Or perhaps there was some sort of turnabout with the individual in question and he went the other way."

Yet despite such surprising numbers, in an environment in which every gambler is looking for every advantage he can find, Bell said it's highly unlikely anyone outside the individuals who had knowledge of Donaghy's alleged involvement would have been able to identify his tendencies.

"There's a strong indication that this was not going around on the buzz, as they like to say. Without the benefit of hindsight, two years wouldn't have been enough for these tendencies to reveal themselves," he said. "In three or four years, maybe. But not two."

According to FoxSports.com, over the last two seasons, Donaghy led the NBA in technical fouls, free-throw attempts per game and foul outs per game.

Bell said officials are studied to find possible gambling advantages in the ways they call a game. But the majority of that work, he said, is done in baseball; umpires are given ample attention because of their strike zone size. On any given night, the umpire can affect the over/under. In the NBA, Bell said the only real attention paid to the referees is whether that official is a "homer," in other words whether he has a tendency to be influenced by a home crowd in a big game.

"There's research that if it's a nationally televised game or a rivalry game with a large, boisterous crowd, some officials will get freaked out," Bell said. "A sophisticated gambler knows that and will consider that when placing his bets."

Wayne Drehs is a senior writer for ESPN.com. He can be reached at wayne.drehs@espn3.com.


http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?page=expertstatsdonaghy

Unclebuck
07-24-2007, 12:09 PM
:sleep:

Someone else is going to have to tell me if anything interesting or important comes out of this.

To all the people who said this was going to blow over by now not only is the press conference streamed on the internet it's also on ESPN, ESPN2, and the news. Since it's not on ESPN Classic I guess it doesn't meet their criteria for an instant classic.

I've watched the whole thing and the two key points

1) NBA did not know anything of this until June 20th 2007

and

2) that no other referee, player, coach, team official, NBA employee is involved in the investigation

Doug
07-24-2007, 12:10 PM
:sleep:

Someone else is going to have to tell me if anything interesting or important comes out of this.

Stern just said that not only did he know about Donaghy, Stern was also fixing games. 4-point play. Bent 'Ewing' envelope. That was all him. Quote: "I've determined the NBA champion for the last 15 years." He finished with: "Good luck extraditing me from Venezuela, suckers!" as he apparently ran out the door to catch a private jet.

Unclebuck
07-24-2007, 12:11 PM
Stern just said that not only did he know about Donaghy, Stern was also fixing games. 4-point play. Bent 'Ewing' envelope. That was all him. Quote: I've determined the NBA champion for the last 15 years. He finished with: Good luck extraditing me from Venezuela, suckers! as he apparently ran out the door to catch a private jet.

I'm convinced that a lot of people would believe that or they do already








Tim made $260,000 this past season.


In all honesty, that was a masterful press conference by Stern. I think he is a master at what he does, I really do. (could you imagine Selig handling this)


There has been so much false reporting on this it is amazing. From big things to small things.

Bball
07-24-2007, 12:17 PM
:sleep:

Someone else is going to have to tell me if anything interesting or important comes out of this.

To all the people who said this was going to blow over by now not only is the press conference streamed on the internet it's also on ESPN, ESPN2, and the news. Since it's not on ESPN Classic I guess it doesn't meet their criteria for an instant classic.

Stern just said that he, Ron Artest, and Larry Bird conspired to bring down the Pacers and he hopes that their work will not go unfinished even tho he realizes he will no longer be able to be a part of it and that Las Vegas is no longer a potential destination for the Pacers. He added 'at this time'.

-Bball

Unclebuck
07-24-2007, 12:28 PM
Skip Bayliss is a complete a-hole


The false reporting is continuing, I've seen enough

BoomBaby33
07-24-2007, 12:46 PM
Stern: Gambling allegations against Donaghy an isolated case

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR vAlign=top><TD width=10> </TD><TD><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR vAlign=top><TD noWrap>July 24, 2007
CBS SportsLine.com wire reports </TD><TD width=10> </TD><TD align=right><SCRIPT language=JavaScript><!--//var dclkFeaturesponsor='http://ad.doubleclick.net/adj/sponsorships.spln.com/fs/stories/'+vTag+';'+vTarget+';'+uID+';sz=234x42;tile=5;ord= '+random+'?';if (switchDclk != 'off') { if (location.search.substring(1).indexOf('DCLK')>-1) document.write('<input type="text" value="'+dclkFeaturesponsor+'" style="width:">
'); document.write('<scr'+'ipt src="'+dclkFeaturesponsor+'"><\/script>'); }// --></SCRIPT><SCRIPT src="http://ad.doubleclick.net/adj/sponsorships.spln.com/fs/stories/nba;arena=nba;feat=stories;type=psa;user=Named;ct= USA;st=IN;ac=317;gend=M;age=C;occ=10;seg=nonaol;ct ype=lan;lang=en-us;lang=en-us;adv=b;cust=yes;fteam=NFL-PIT;fteam=NBA-none;fteam=MLB-none;fteam=NHL-none;fteam=NCAAF-none;fteam=NCAAB-none;pteam=NFL-IND;pteam=NFL-ARI;pteam=MLB-none;pteam=NHL-none;pteam=NCAAF-none;pteam=NCAAB-none;fplay=TEN-none;fplay=AUTO-none;pplay=TEN-none;pplay=AUTO-none;u=indysports;sz=234x42;tile=5;ord=90330475881 92844?"></SCRIPT>http://m1.2mdn.net/dot.gif<NOSCRIPT>http://ad.doubleclick.net/ad/sponsorships.spln.com/fs/stories/nba;arena=nba;feat=stories;type=psa;user=Named;ct= USA;st=IN;ac=317;gend=M;age=C;occ=10;cust=yes;ftea m=NFL-PIT;fteam=NBA-none;fteam=MLB-none;fteam=NHL-none;fteam=NCAAF-none;fteam=NCAAB-none;pteam=NFL-IND;pteam=NFL-ARI;pteam=MLB-none;pteam=NHL-none;pteam=NCAAF-none;pteam=NCAAB-none;fplay=TEN-none;fplay=AUTO-none;pplay=TEN-none;pplay=AUTO-none;sz=234x42;tile=5;ord=964011185295003? (http://ad.doubleclick.net/jump/sponsorships.spln.com/fs/stories/nba;arena=nba;feat=stories;type=psa;user=Named;ct= USA;st=IN;ac=317;gend=M;age=C;occ=10;cust=yes;ftea m=NFL-PIT;fteam=NBA-none;fteam=MLB-none;fteam=NHL-none;fteam=NCAAF-none;fteam=NCAAB-none;pteam=NFL-IND;pteam=NFL-ARI;pteam=MLB-none;pteam=NHL-none;pteam=NCAAF-none;pteam=NCAAB-none;fplay=TEN-none;fplay=AUTO-none;pplay=TEN-none;pplay=AUTO-none;sz=234x42;tile=5;ord=964011185295003?)</NOSCRIPT> </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR vAlign=top><TD width=10> </TD><TD>
<TABLE style="MARGIN: 5px 0px 5px 5px" cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 align=right border=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="PADDING-LEFT: 8px; BORDER-LEFT: #cccccc 1px solid"></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><!-- T10267199 --><!-- Sesame Modified: 07/24/2007 11:58:53 --><!-- sversion: 1 &#036;Updated: ***an&#036; -->NEW YORK -- David Stern insisted allegations a former referee bet on games was an isolated case and called it the worst situation he had experienced during his tenure as commissioner.
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

"Mr. Donaghy is the only referee alleged to have bet on NBA games and disclosed confidential information to others," Stern said Tuesday during a packed news conference. "I'll say it again, I understand this is an isolated case."
The FBI is investigating former referee Tim Donaghy for allegedly betting on games he officiated during the past two seasons. He is expected to turn himself in at U.S. District Court in Brooklyn later this week or early next week, according to a person familiar with the investigation.
"We understand he's accused of betting on games in the NBA," Stern said. "We're not positive it's games he worked."
However, he said, there still was the possibility that Donaghy did gamble on games he worked and that was part of the investigation.
"I understand that he will likely be accused of providing information to others for the purpose of allowing them to profit by betting on NBA games," he said.
Stern called it the "worst situation I've every experienced either as fan of the NBA, a lawyer for the NBA or commissioner of the NBA."
The FBI first contacted the NBA on June 20 to talk about a referee alleged to be gambling on games, and the two sides met on June 21, Stern said. Donaghy resigned July 9.
"Suffice to say, we would have liked to have terminated him earlier, but our understanding was the investigation would best be aided if we did not terminate Mr. Donaghy," Stern said.
The June call from the FBI was not the first time Donaghy faced gambling allegations.
In January 2005, Stern said the NBA investigated a dispute between Donaghy and a West Chester, Pa., neighbor. During the investigation, there were allegations that Donaghy was gambling -- not on sports -- in Atlantic City. Stern said the league contacted every casino in Atlantic City and Las Vegas and found no evidence of gambling by Donaghy.
Authorities are examining whether Donaghy made calls to affect the point spread in games on which he or associates had wagered thousands of dollars over the past two seasons, according to a law enforcement official. The referee had a gambling problem and was approached by low-level mob associates through an acquaintance, the official said.
"We take our obligation to fans in this matter very seriously," Stern said. "I can stand here today and pledge that we will do every look back possible to analyze our processes and seek the best advice possible to see if there are changes that should be made and procedures that should be implemented to continue to assure fans we're doing the best we possibly can."
Stern said league officials observed no inappropriate behavior by Donaghy the last two seasons.
Those familiar with the investigation and the law enforcement official spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren't authorized to discuss the ongoing probe.
Stern said league officials had been following the officiating scandal that rocked a German soccer league.
"My reaction is I can't believe it's happening to us," Stern said.
AP NEWS
The Associated Press News Service

Copyright 2006-2007, The Associated Press, All Rights Reserved


:bs:

Stern is very naive if he is truely surprised that this could happen.

He needs to resign effective immediately!

indygeezer
07-24-2007, 12:54 PM
Honestly, I am much placated by Der Fuhrer's words. He handled it properly IMO and should calm the storm a bit.

If as he says this is an isolated incident involving one ref and noone else then we can move on and let justice run it's course. I have no doubt he spoke honestly.

But, I expect him to fall on his sword sooner rather than later. He is the man at the helm and it happend on his watch. He must and should suffer the consequences.

Pacersin2033
07-24-2007, 01:10 PM
How is allowing a ref who is under suspicion for cheating to ref playoffs games(especially ones that determined the eventual champions) handling the situation properly. They could have just not let him ref important games in the playoffs, there was a middle ground between firing and do nothing. They chose to do nothing.

RWB
07-24-2007, 01:14 PM
How is allowing a ref who is under suspicion for cheating to ref playoffs games(especially ones that determined the eventual champions) handling the situation properly. They could have just not let him ref important games in the playoffs, there was a middle ground between firing and do nothing. They chose to do nothing.

The FBI first contacted the NBA on June 20 to talk about a referee alleged to be gambling on games, and the two sides met on June 21, Stern said. Donaghy resigned July 9

Pacersin2033
07-24-2007, 01:17 PM
The FBI first contacted the NBA on June 20 to talk about a referee alleged to be gambling on games, and the two sides met on June 21, Stern said. Donaghy resigned July 9

The June call from the FBI was not the first time Donaghy faced gambling allegations.

Granted they were never substantiated, but even having that over his head. Hell that was before he had ever reffed a playoff game, so they let him start after that. There were plenty of other refs who could have blown calls in the playoffs.

DisplacedKnick
07-24-2007, 01:19 PM
How is allowing a ref who is under suspicion for cheating to ref playoffs games(especially ones that determined the eventual champions) handling the situation properly. They could have just not let him ref important games in the playoffs, there was a middle ground between firing and do nothing. They chose to do nothing.

Game 4 of the NBA Finals - June 14, 2007
NBA First Contacted about the Investigation - June 20, 2007

Kegboy
07-24-2007, 01:35 PM
The June call from the FBI was not the first time Donaghy faced gambling allegations.

Granted they were never substantiated, but even having that over his head. Hell that was before he had ever reffed a playoff game, so they let him start after that. There were plenty of other refs who could have blown calls in the playoffs.

Did you watch the press conference?

Unclebuck
07-24-2007, 02:19 PM
How is allowing a ref who is under suspicion for cheating to ref playoffs games(especially ones that determined the eventual champions) handling the situation properly. They could have just not let him ref important games in the playoffs, there was a middle ground between firing and do nothing. They chose to do nothing.

Did you not watch or listen to the press conference. THE NBA HAD NO IDEA OF ANY OF THIS UNTIL June 20th 2007

Unclebuck
07-24-2007, 02:21 PM
The June call from the FBI was not the first time Donaghy faced gambling allegations.

.

Yes it was, the only other rumor was that he gambled once at an Atlantic City casino. The NBA looked into this and could not confirm he was ever in a casino which in and of itself is a fireable offense

Your fact are way off base

avoidingtheclowns
07-24-2007, 02:25 PM
am i the only one who feels that you can't necessarily believe everything you hear in a press conference? maybe actually working in media/public relations makes me more cynical. i don't think what stern said should be taken 100% as gospel. nor am i saying he is intentionally misleading or lying. i'm just saying there are no absolutes at this point... so maybe both sides should ease up and maybe 'buck should take a valium.

Unclebuck
07-24-2007, 02:30 PM
am i the only one who feels that you can't necessarily believe everything you hear in a press conference? maybe actually working in media/public relations makes me more cynical. i don't think what stern said should be taken 100% as gospel. nor am i saying he is intentionally misleading or lying. i'm just saying there are no absolutes at this point... so maybe both sides should ease up and maybe 'buck should take a valium.

I understand what you are saying, but Stern is not going to go before everyone in this environment and day that June 20th 2007 is the first they knew of this if in fact they knew about it since January - because that sort of thing will eventually come out.

(I don't know this "buck" that you speak of). I'm very calm, but the amount of false reporting on this case is shocking to me, so I'm trying to set the record straight

Now if you want to suggest that Stern spun a few things in hopes of looking better, perhaps, but he's not going to do that would facts that could be proven wrong

avoidingtheclowns
07-24-2007, 03:15 PM
I understand what you are saying, but Stern is not going to go before everyone in this environment and day that June 20th 2007 is the first they knew of this if in fact they knew about it since January - because that sort of thing will eventually come out.

thats certainly possible. its also possible that there could be an entirely new explanation in a few weeks if more evidence appears, who knows. his job is to make the league money, not be honest with the public. my point is its not gospel, one way or another its just some more evidence to consider... until you have absolute proof that faulty reporting is taking place any of this could be true / false


Now if you want to suggest that Stern spun a few things in hopes of looking better, perhaps, but he's not going to do that would facts that could be proven wrong

has that stopped government officials or CEOs before? its happened before, it will happen again. what makes david stern above this type of damage control?


(I don't know this "buck" that you speak of). I'm very calm, but the amount of false reporting on this case is shocking to me, so I'm trying to set the record straight

i guess i assumed capitalization implied yelling. as you can tell from most of my posts, capitalization frightens me :)

Kegboy
07-24-2007, 03:21 PM
i guess i assumed capitalization implied yelling. as you can tell from most of my posts, capitalization frightens me :)

Might I suggest you start a ROT IN HELL, CAPITALIZATION!!! thread? You'll feel much better.

Or, maybe not.

Pacersin2033
07-24-2007, 03:38 PM
Did you watch the press conference?

Did you? It even said in that transcript he was under investigation in January 05 for different claims, before he had ever reffed a playoff game. So why in earth would you let a ref who had ever had allegations of gambling ref a playoff games. Poor handling of the situation seems to be the most likey, the most damning would be incompetence.

Los Angeles
07-24-2007, 03:42 PM
2033, please read the last 20 posts or so. The casino gambling allegations in Jan 05 were not corroborated.

Pacersin2033
07-24-2007, 03:46 PM
2033, please read the last 20 posts or so. The casino gambling allegations in Jan 05 were not corroborated.

I know that, I even stated that. Why don't you read the last 20 posts.

Just because something is not corroborated doesn't mean you don't do things a bit differently. And most certainly don't increase a guys responsibility a mere 3 months later.

waxman
07-24-2007, 03:47 PM
I like seeing a sober looking Stern... how bout' that.... your officials beyond reproach?..... beyond questioning huh? It must feel good to brush off those old linguistic gymnastics you learned so long ago. You wouldn't want to implicate yourself or the league would ya?.

CEO's.... government officals....lawyers.... they never lie do they?

Oh.... and i like the bit about comparing this to the CIA or FBI uncovering a rogue agent..... good stuff there Sterny. Yup... CIA, FBI..........N B A. All three letter acronyms. Similar in so many ways.

Los Angeles
07-24-2007, 03:50 PM
2033, if even one casino had a sales receipt in his name, he would have been canned. You can't fire a guy over a rumor, especially not over a rumor possibly spread by a neighbor who already hates him. that's just ... well ... un-American.

Pacersin2033
07-24-2007, 03:52 PM
2033, if even one casino had a sales receipt in his name, he would have been canned. You can't fire a guy over a rumor, especially not over a rumor possibly spread by a neighbor who already hates him. that's just ... well ... un-American.

Heres a suggestion, read my posts. Ok before you go trying to lecture me, read my posts. I NEVER said to fire him. But to increase his responsibility after the suspicion is stupid. Once again Read before you lecture.

JayRedd
07-24-2007, 03:52 PM
Yup... CIA, FBI..........N B A. All three letter acronyms. Similar in so many ways.

They all have guns.

Unclebuck
07-24-2007, 03:57 PM
Heres a suggestion, read my posts. Ok before you go trying to lecture me, read my posts. I NEVER said to fire him. But to increase his responsibility after the suspicion is stupid. Once again Read before you lecture.

The NBA did punish him, they did not allow him to work the second round of the playoffs

Naptown_Seth
07-24-2007, 03:58 PM
In all honesty, that was a masterful press conference by Stern. I think he is a master at what he does, I really do. (could you imagine Selig handling this)


There has been so much false reporting on this it is amazing. From big things to small things.
I agree he spun this as well as you could imagine, but I disagree on the false reporting aspect, at least at this point. I don't understand how you could say otherwise given the fact that you just admitted that Stern had this masterful spin/presser.

Just because Stern comes out and says this stuff doesn't make it any more true than Vick's lawyers saying "it wasn't him" or Jayson Williams saying "it wasn't me" or Ron Artest saying "I didn't mean it, I'll be focused from now on".

Clearly someone will be the fall guy, which implies the need for a fall guy which implies that someone beyond the fall guy did or should have known.


The FBI first contacted the NBA on June 20 to talk about a referee alleged to be gambling on games, and the two sides met on June 21, Stern said.Stern even covered his own butt on getting busted for lying in the future...that's not true and if it turns out that it is true then I never knew that it wasn't. Wow, how convenient to have no knowledge of anything that you might be saying is 100% true when it really isn't.

Nixon - "That was an isolated thing and none of my people were involved in the Watergate break-in and if it turns out they were then I didn't know about it." Oh, well our mistake, sorry about that. Sheesh.


What exactly is the product that Stern's "company" makes? Oh yeah, NBA basketball. Maybe a little humility in the face of the mad-cow beef/poison dog food/explodes when rear-ended screw-up pops up in your product. You want the credit for being the great commish when things go right, then you better step up and own the ****** outta this too.


Oh.... and i like the bit about comparing this to the CIA or FBI uncovering a rogue agent..... good stuff there Sterny. Yup... CIA, FBI..........N B A. All three letter acronyms. Similar in so many ways.
I agree. That was Karl Rove caliber mastery. Talk about branding, that's a prime example in action right there as he attempted to associate this situation with others of a completely different nature.

The irony is that the FBI is who uncovered the NBA's "rogue agent". Let me know when Stern and the NBA uncover rogue agents in the CIA or FBI to return the favor.

Pacersin2033
07-24-2007, 03:59 PM
The NBA did punish him, they did not allow him to work the second round of the playoffs

How is that a punishment, he had never even worked in the playoffs before. That was still a step up for him, and his Mob buddies.

Naptown_Seth
07-24-2007, 04:11 PM
Did you not watch or listen to the press conference. THE NBA HAD NO IDEA OF ANY OF THIS UNTIL June 20th 2007
Yeah, this helps Stern's case.

Hey, I had no idea my kid was walking down the middle of 465 for the last 3 hours, therefore I didn't screw up. It's not like I knew and let him keep doing it.
:hmm:

He's F'd either way. Not knowing about a situation this bad when your league keeps massive stats to watch for exactly this and when you are RIPPING into guys like Van Gundy and Cuban for questioning the integrity of the game even while it's being undermined (apparently to no one's knowledge except a bunch of gamblers and the FBI)? How is that any better?

How much money is at stake here, how many refs have to be watched? You got tipped off on Donaghy once and you couldn't even sniff it out despite the fact that clearly it was true, at least in some variation? You found NOTHING on a guy with a big gambling problem and ties to the mob?

Sounds like you need new investigators then...and you definitely shouldn't be calling it an isolated event because by your (Stern) own admission YOU DON'T FREAKING KNOW any better than you knew with Donaghy!

What, it's isolated because your investigators and stats didn't turn up "anything else" either? Or are you just counting on the FBI to have found out everything?

Slick Pinkham
07-24-2007, 04:14 PM
Pacersin2003,

Say you are the boss. Lets say that gambling, for people in your business, is cause for dismissal.

Now lets say you get a tip that one of your employees was seen gambling.

You confront the employee. He denies it.

You hire detectives who ask the tipster, some friend-of-a-friend-of-a-friend, to give you some hard evidence. Photos, another witness, anything. He doesn't have anything. Your detectives ask him what casino it was. Your detectives then contact everybody you can think of at the casino-- security, the dealers, the valet... They say they never heard of the guy and have never seen him before. There seems to be absolutely no corroborating evidence.

Your detectives say "Sorry boss, we've got nothing on this guy."

Do you fire or suspend the guy for something he denies, when you absolutely have no way of confirming it?

I don't think so.

wilcoxfunk
07-24-2007, 04:17 PM
So, then, we should just give up "because everyone else is doing it?"

Well, why not legalize an abundance of other things, then?

The world needs to stop stooping to the lowest common denominator.

What, is gambling in and of itself really such a despicable act!? Free will exists so that you can abstain from something if you don't like it. As for rigging games or working the spread, that is inherently wrong and has nothing to do with the millions of people who enjoy gambling as a hobby, sports gambling in particular.

RWB
07-24-2007, 04:23 PM
Pacersin2003,

Say you are the boss. Lets say that gambling, for people in your business, is cause for dismissal.

Now lets say you get a tip that one of your employees was seen gambling.

You confront the employee. He denies it.

You hire detectives who ask the tipster, some friend-of-a-friend-of-a-friend, to give you some hard evidence. Photos, another witness, anything. He doesn't have anything. Your detectives ask him what casino it was. Your detectives then contact everybody you can think of at the casino-- security, the dealers, the valet... They say they never heard of the guy and have never seen him before. There seems to be absolutely no corroborating evidence.

Your detectives say "Sorry boss, we've got nothing on this guy."

Do you fire or suspend the guy for something he denies, when you absolutely have no way of confirming it?

I don't think so.

Beautiful PT, and that's not even throwing in the ruckus the ref's labor union would be doing.

Pacersin2033
07-24-2007, 04:26 PM
Pacersin2003,

Say you are the boss. Lets say that gambling, for people in your business, is cause for dismissal.

Now lets say you get a tip that one of your employees was seen gambling.

You confront the employee. He denies it.

You hire detectives who ask the tipster, some friend-of-a-friend-of-a-friend, to give you some hard evidence. Photos, another witness, anything. He doesn't have anything. Your detectives ask him what casino it was. Your detectives then contact everybody you can think of at the casino-- security, the dealers, the valet... They say they never heard of the guy and have never seen him before. There seems to be absolutely no corroborating evidence.

Your detectives say "Sorry boss, we've got nothing on this guy."

Do you fire or suspend the guy for something he denies, when you absolutely have no way of confirming it?

I don't think so.

Did I say to fire or suspend the guy, No, its amazing how not reading my posts leads to mass confusion on what I believe in regards to the situation.

RWB
07-24-2007, 04:27 PM
Yeah, this helps Stern's case.

Hey, I had no idea my kid was walking down the middle of 465 for the last 3 hours, therefore I didn't screw up. It's not like I knew and let him keep doing it.
:hmm:

He's F'd either way. Not knowing about a situation this bad when your league keeps massive stats to watch for exactly this and when you are RIPPING into guys like Van Gundy and Cuban for questioning the integrity of the game even while it's being undermined (apparently to no one's knowledge except a bunch of gamblers and the FBI)? How is that any better?

How much money is at stake here, how many refs have to be watched? You got tipped off on Donaghy once and you couldn't even sniff it out despite the fact that clearly it was true, at least in some variation? You found NOTHING on a guy with a big gambling problem and ties to the mob?

Sounds like you need new investigators then...and you definitely shouldn't be calling it an isolated event because by your (Stern) own admission YOU DON'T FREAKING KNOW any better than you knew with Donaghy!

What, it's isolated because your investigators and stats didn't turn up "anything else" either? Or are you just counting on the FBI to have found out everything?

Nap, other than the statement that Donaghy may expose other (nba associated members, not mob) people where are these other informants that cause you to question if this is isolated?

Unclebuck
07-24-2007, 04:29 PM
Seth, come on, comparing Stern to Michael Vick's atty is not even close to being right

Slick Pinkham
07-24-2007, 04:31 PM
Did I say to fire or suspend the guy, No, its amazing how not reading my posts leads to mass confusion on what I believe in regards to the situation.

I read them alright.

You said that he should not have been allowed to work the playoff game. There is apparently a merit-based system for choosing who is reffing playoff games. His turn came up.

You wanted him not to be allowed to work. Just how is that not a suspension?

As boss you pick up the phone, saying: Hey Fred, don't come in to work today, because I'm not allowing you in the building. No, you're not SUSPENDED or anything. I'm just saying that you can't work here.

Unclebuck
07-24-2007, 04:35 PM
I read them alright.

You said that he should not have been allowed to work the playoff game. There is apparently a merit-based system for choosing who is reffing playoff games. His turn came up.

You wanted him not to be allowed to work. Just how is that not a suspension?

As boss you pick up the phone, saying: Hey Fred, don't come in to work today, because I'm not allowing you in the building. No, you're not SUSPENDED or anything. I'm just saying that you can't work here.

Plus refs get paid extra for every playoff game they work - so Tim lost some money due to his problem with his neighbor

Pacersin2033
07-24-2007, 04:36 PM
I read them alright.

You said that he should not have been allowed to work the playoff game. There is apparently a merit-based system for choosing who is reffing playoff games. His turn came up.

You wanted him not to be allowed to work. Just how is that not a suspension?

As boss you pick up the phone, saying: Hey Fred, don't come in to work today, because I'm not allowing you in the building. No, you're not SUSPENDED or anything. I'm just saying that you can't work here.

Plenty of refs don't work the playoffs its not a suspension. By your logic every ref that doesn't work the playoffs is on suspension. Thats some great logic right there.

Slick Pinkham
07-24-2007, 04:40 PM
Plenty of refs don't work the playoffs its not a suspension. By your logic every ref that doesn't work the playoffs is on suspension. Thats some great logic right there.

Does your amp go up to 11? I didn't say that.

Any ref who is chosen to work a playoff game based upon the ratings system in place to pick playoff refs

and

who is then not allowed to work that playoff

is under suspension, yes.

I would imagine that any ref not working playoff games can ask why, and see how he fared in the analysis of the job he did in the season.

Pacersin2033
07-24-2007, 04:51 PM
Does your amp go up to 11? I didn't say that.

Any ref who is chosen to work a playoff game based upon the ratings system in place to pick playoff refs

and

who is then not allowed to work that playoff

is under suspension, yes.

I would imagine that any ref not working playoff games can ask why, and see how he fared in the analysis of the job he did in the season.

You suggested my belief that he should not have been allowed to work the playoffs = a suspension. So yes you did say that.

And even if him being allowed to ref was the way the system was set up, that still means the system was set up poorly.

Just because you can't prove somebody broke a rule, doesn't mean you don't treat them differently, happens to suspected murderers, rapists and child molesters all the time. Granted thats an extreme set of circumstances.

But seriously how intelligent of a system would take a guy who is fixing games, and say he is good enough to ref in the playoffs, seems like the system was broken.

bulldog
07-24-2007, 04:51 PM
They all have guns.

I don't know how this went unnoticed. Hilarious. :laugh:

I thought it was a well-done job today by Stern. He's got such a weird record, he's masterful at PR and has done a lot for NBA small-market competitiveness, profit margins, and globalization, and yet the league is losing popularity from casual fans like never before. I don't know what to think of him. I contrast how capable he seems to with the actual results, and I wonder: perhaps he simply doesn't care about losing your average american dude watching on NBC, knowing overseas expansion, kids/young adults who play ball (and buy shoes, jerseys, etc.), and business box seats/season tickets can sustain his league and provide good growth.

Also, truehoop on ESPN today has a little bit about how he stuttered/sidestepped his way through the question about whether Donaughy acted alone. Check it out here (http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-26-84/David-Stern-Talks.html?post=true).
Perhaps its a little too far out with the conspiracy theories, but it seems there's more to the story (at the very least, the FBI coached him on exactly what he was allowed to say). This goes along with what was said earlier about not believing everything you hear at a press conference. But in terms of appearing concerned, poised, and in control, Davie gets an A+.

avoidingtheclowns
07-24-2007, 04:53 PM
Nap, other than the statement that Donaghy may expose other (nba associated members, not mob) people where are these other informants that cause you to question if this is isolated?

what is there to indicate otherwise? if one official can fly under the noses of the league, why couldn't several? right now, other than the FBI only investigating one ref and stern saying its an anomaly we don't know whether more could be involved in similar activities, just not with the same mob under FBI investigation. sure donaghy could simply be posturing, but if one ref can do it others could be doing it too.


Seth, come on, comparing Stern to Michael Vick's atty is not even close to being right

its the same thing though, posturing and spinning for an interest other than the truth. vick's atty is representing his client's best interest, not necessarily the justice system's. stern is representing the league's best interests and not the audience's. this is why ESPN/ABC gets a renewed TV deal (it certainly didn't have anything to do with fan-approval as i've yet to meet a fan who was thrilled about that news) and the same reason the playoffs are so spread out -- its not about the fan, its about business interests. stern represents the business interests of the league. some businesses do take it upon themselves to let a scandal genuinely improve the product, other times they try to diffuse a scandal as best they can and sweep it under the rug - minimize the damage (dump the story on a friday is textbook). so while the cases are different the example is essentially the same

Los Angeles
07-24-2007, 04:57 PM
Heres a suggestion, read my posts. Ok before you go trying to lecture me, read my posts. I NEVER said to fire him. But to increase his responsibility after the suspicion is stupid. Once again Read before you lecture.

I'm sorry if I'm coming off as "lecturing." That wasn't intended.

Bball
07-24-2007, 04:57 PM
"Mr. Donaghy is the only referee alleged to have bet on NBA games and disclosed confidential information to others," Stern said Tuesday during a packed news conference. "I'll say it again, I understand this is an isolated case."

Stern is an atty isn't he? The above statement is really not saying the same thing twice. I think he chose his words carefully to get the type of headline he got.

I doubt the FBI would tell him one way or the other if others are under suspicion this early in the process. So I doubt he knows and the headline is speculation on Stern's part. Excellent manipulation of the media on his part.

Since he really made his statement in two parts he covers he rear either way it goes. If this is an isolated case then the first sentence applies.

"Mr. Donaghy is the only referee alleged to have bet on NBA games and disclosed confidential information to others," Stern said Tuesday during a packed news conference.

If it later is learned others were involved (and let's not forget there doesn't have to be ties between the current ref and another ref. The undesirables could be handling two refs separately) then this statement let's Stern off the hook:

"I'll say it again, I understand this is an isolated case."

It's not hard to manipulate the media in the early stages when they are all clamoring for any info they can get.

Stern needed the initial hit to be this is an isolated incident and he got it. He didn't need the media speculating there could be more or digging in that direction. Now, he just needs to hope it holds true or that it can be internally handled if there is anything remotely damaging in this regard that doesn't rise to an indictable offense (where he loses control of the situation).

-Bball

Kegboy
07-24-2007, 05:40 PM
I just wish I'd been smart enough to say I saw Dick Bavetta at the Wynn last time I was in Vegas. Maybe they would have forced him to retire. Darn.

BoomBaby33
07-24-2007, 05:43 PM
They all have guns.

Easy now - your going to upset ajbry and Jack! :D

Slick Pinkham
07-24-2007, 05:44 PM
This is how I understand the system works in picking playoff referees. I heard a radio interview with retired legendary ref Jake O’Donnell, and got most of this information there

Every single referee has a job performance evaluation for the regular season. The top 96 ranking refs are divided into 8 groups of 12 referees. Each group of 12 is assigned to an opening round series. That is not an extra benefit or arbitrary decision to grant extra responsibility. It is based upon your job performance evaluation, your grade if you will.

The refs are continually evaluated. The top 48 ref in the second round. The top 24 the 3rd round. The top 12 group does the finals.

The job performance rating is shared with each individual referee. Not the ranking of every other ref, but certainly where you rank in the overall scheme of things. Each ref knows if he is top 96, top 48, etc. If he is ranked up there and is not named to an officiating group of 12, then the first thing he does is contact David Stern, or whomever below Stern handles officiating.

He asks “Why am I not working and why I’m not being paid when based upon my job performance rating I should be officiating in round 1. Have I been suspended for something?”

Tell me, what is the boss supposed to say? That he just decided to not let you work based upon a rumor that can’t be confirmed?

And what do you do for being not allowed to work with no legal cause? You call your lawyer. And this is not the murderer or rapist where there is a danger to society such that suspicion of innocence can be to an extent compromised.

Slick Pinkham
07-24-2007, 05:54 PM
You suggested my belief that he should not have been allowed to work the playoffs = a suspension. So yes you did say that.


You seem to be missing a very important point. Not being allowed to work the playoffs when your job performance evaluation says you should be working in the playoffs = a suspension.

Is that clear yet or should I just give up?

JayRedd
07-24-2007, 06:15 PM
This is how I understand the system works in picking playoff referees. I heard a radio interview with retired legendary ref Jake O’Donnell, and got most of this information there

Every single referee has a job performance evaluation for the regular season. The top 96 ranking refs are divided into 8 groups of 12 referees. Each group of 12 is assigned to an opening round series. That is not an extra benefit or arbitrary decision to grant extra responsibility. It is based upon your job performance evaluation, your grade if you will.

The refs are continually evaluated. The top 48 ref in the second round. The top 24 the 3rd round. The top 12 group does the finals.

The job performance rating is shared with each individual referee. Not the ranking of every other ref, but certainly where you rank in the overall scheme of things. Each ref knows if he is top 96, top 48, etc. If he is ranked up there and is not named to an officiating group of 12, then the first thing he does is contact David Stern, or whomever below Stern handles officiating.

He asks “Why am I not working and why I’m not being paid when based upon my job performance rating I should be officiating in round 1. Have I been suspended for something?”

Tell me, what is the boss supposed to say? That he just decided to not let you work based upon a rumor that can’t be confirmed?

And what do you do for being not allowed to work with no legal cause? You call your lawyer. And this is not the murderer or rapist where there is a danger to society such that suspicion of innocence can be to an extent compromised.

Thanks, PT...I didn't know exactly how the "grading" and playoff assignments worked.

But this is in general what Stern is talking about when he likes to say: “They are the most ranked, rated, reviewed, statistically analyzed and mentored group of employees of any company in any place in the world.”

And while that may very well be true, I'd give Donaghy 7-1 odds that Stern will not be using that phrase anymore.

JayRedd
07-24-2007, 06:17 PM
I just wish I'd been smart enough to say I saw Dick Bavetta at the Wynn last time I was in Vegas. Maybe they would have forced him to retire. Darn.

I actually did see him there.

It was during All Star Weekend, and right before the race with Barkley, come to think of it. I honestly didn't think anything of it at the time, but now that all these allegations have all come to light, the conversation he was having does seem a little strange.

http://thestockmasters.com/images/Pulp_Fiction_Marsellus_Wallace_Band-Aid.gif

"The night of the race, you may feel a slight sting. That's pride ****ing with you. **** pride. Pride only hurts, it never helps."

Slick Pinkham
07-24-2007, 08:00 PM
Bob Ryan's column today (sorry if it is posted already elsewhere)

http://www.boston.com/sports/basketball/articles/2007/07/24/whistling_a_warning_on_referee_situation/?page=2

Whistling a warning on referee situation

By Bob Ryan, Globe Columnist | July 24, 2007

Basketball referees matter.

All sports officials matter, of course, but basketball referees have a particular importance because they a) determine who will play and b) how the game will be played. A referee is at least as important as a good player in the determination of any game's outcome.

That's why this whole Tim Donaghy business is so damaging to the NBA. Incompetence, however aggravating in the short run, is something everyone can live with to a degree. Human beings are fallible, and anyone can blow a key call or have a completely off night. But outright dishonesty changes the equation entirely. Outright dishonesty on the part of an official invalidates the entire process. Outright dishonesty shatters the trust that must exist between the participants and the sporting public.

They're poring over the Tim Donaghy dossier now, finding games in which the disgraced official made an excess of calls or strange calls. They'll never figure it all out, but already there is evidence of some bizarre goings-on, enough to excite and anger the aggrieved players, coaches, owners, and fans. "I knew it!" they'll shriek. "I knew something fishy was going on!" No, they really didn't. It's still hyperbole. But it all plays to an inherent cynicism so many harbor toward our sports. How many times have we heard someone mutter, "Aw, they're all fixed, anyway!"?

So the real issue isn't Tim Donaghy, the NBA, or even basketball. The real issue is the fact that Donaghy allegedly got himself in trouble because he was a sick gambler. Were he not, none of this would have happened.

Our society has a frightening tolerance for gambling. And, yes, I realize we're not alone. There are other cultures in which gambling has an even bigger hold. Football (soccer), rugby, and cricket are among the international sports that have had massive match-fixing scandals in recent years, and none of them are of much interest in our country. But I can assure you that those sports have a massive hold on millions worldwide, and they've all been subject to various sorts of chicanery directly attributable to gambling.

What alternately amuses and irritates me is that so many people in this country are so cavalier about the subject. You know the first person I thought of when I heard about an NBA referee in over his head with the mob because of his gambling habits? Pete Rose, that's who.

Rose was -- and for all I know still is -- a compulsive gambler. After two decades of denial, he finally admitted he bet on baseball games while he was manager of the Cincinnati Reds. But, he assured us, he never bet against his team. He only bet on the Reds. That was supposed to make it all right.

Start with the fact that by betting on selected games he was signaling the bookies that he felt more confident about Pitcher X's chances to win than he did about Pitcher Y's. But that's not the biggest problem.

I cringe when I hear people say, "What was the harm of Pete Rose betting on his team?" The harm was that Rose was not betting legally in Las Vegas. Rose was betting the way millions of others do, with a bookie. And who do these people think was backing the bookie? The ladies of Hadassah? The Sisters of Mercy? The local chapter of the Sweet Adelines? No, no, and no. As people kinda/shoulda/oughta know, when you place an illegal bet with a bookie, you are entering into a world in which you could wind up dealing with some dangerous and nasty people. The implications are rather obvious.

Donaghy is Exhibit A. The allegation is that he owed money to the mob and they were able to intimidate him into doing their bidding. It's that simple.

Basketball long has been an irresistible target for evil manipulation. There were giant college basketball point-shaving scandals in 1951 and 1961, and here in our own backyard we had the Boston College mess that resulted in Rick Kuhn doing hard time. In recent years there have been recurrences involving players at such schools as Arizona State and, believe it or not, Northwestern.

It likewise has been established beyond all reasonable doubt that noted miscreant Jack Molinas succeeded in fixing countless NBA games in the 1950s.

Referees have been floating above the fray through all these things, but it always made great sense to involve a referee. He can affect the game in so many ways. A couple of quick toots takes a star player out of the game. A few more toots gets a team to the foul line. Just consider what a referee could do to influence the over/under. Once you get teams into the bonus, you can put a lot of points on the board.

One thing this Donaghy revelation does is remind us that this contemporary belief that our sports are just part of the greater world of entertainment is utter nonsense. Sport should be "entertaining," of course. Otherwise, why bother? But sport is not entertainment. They couldn't be farther apart.

Sport is, ultimately, about competition, about winning and losing. That is what creates the inherent drama. When Sergio Garcia hunched over that putt on the 18th at Carnoustie Sunday, the primary issue was not one of aesthetics, regardless of anyone's feeling about a 27-year-old using a belly putter that should only be reserved for someone who frequents the Early Bird Special. The issue at that moment was getting the ball in the hole or not getting the ball in the hole. It was about winning The Open or not winning The Open. It was an enormously entertaining afternoon of golf, but because it was sport, and not entertainment, there had to be a resolution, a payoff. It took a playoff, but indeed we all got our payoff. We had proper sport.

Entertainment has no such component. Bruce Springsteen may put on a four-hour show that leaves one immensely pleased and satisfied, but it has nothing to do with winning or losing and is thus a completely different experience. Movies are entertainment. Concerts are entertainment. The scripted WWE is entertainment.

An honest NBA game, meanwhile, is sport. An NBA game manipulated by a crooked official is something else. It may have elements of entertainment. But it is no longer sport.

This is Tim Donaghy's crime. He is charged with being a sick gambler who wound up turning legitimate sport into corrupt entertainment.

Bob Ryan is a Globe columnist. He can be reached at ryan@globe.com.

Kegboy
07-24-2007, 08:18 PM
I actually did see him there.

It was during All Star Weekend, and right before the race with Barkley, come to think of it. I honestly didn't think anything of it at the time, but now that all these allegations have all come to light, the conversation he was having does seem a little strange.

http://thestockmasters.com/images/Pulp_Fiction_Marsellus_Wallace_Band-Aid.gif

"The night of the race, you may feel a slight sting. That's pride ****ing with you. **** pride. Pride only hurts, it never helps."

Of course, my mind just took off racing with that, and the next thing I know I'm seeing Bavetta with a sword saving Barkley from getting raped by the Maloof brothers. :shudder:

Shade
07-24-2007, 08:23 PM
Rather than everyone questioning why Donaghy was allowed to officiate a playoff game, why not question that he was allowed to officiate a playoff game of such high stature? Why wasn't Donaghy assigned to a game in an obviously lopsided series, to minimize any impact he may have on the series?

Kegboy
07-24-2007, 08:30 PM
Rather than everyone questioning why Donaghy was allowed to officiate a playoff game, why not question that he was allowed to officiate a playoff game of such high stature? Why wasn't Donaghy assigned to a game in an obviously lopsided series, to minimize any impact he may have on the series?

Because he was 2+ years removed from an unfounded allegation, and in their "system" he rated as one of the best refs. For all we know, he was the best "2nd round official" and that's why he got to ref a plum series like that.

That's one thing we need to focus on more, IMO, that he graded out as a very good ref when he was dirty. That doesn't say much for the vaunted "system" Stern has been cramming down our throats for years.

Unclebuck
07-24-2007, 08:35 PM
I think the best thing to do right now is wait to see what the investigation uncovers. How many games he bet on and how many of those did he actually officiate. For all we know he didn't even bet on the Suns vs Spurs game. Also there were two other refs doing that Suns and Spurs game

Pacersin2033
07-24-2007, 08:52 PM
I think the best thing to do right now is wait to see what the investigation uncovers. How many games he bet on and how many of those did he actually officiate. For all we know he didn't even bet on the Suns vs Spurs game. Also there were two other refs doing that Suns and Spurs game

If he didn't bet on those games, I can't wait to see the games he officiated that he did have money on.

Bynum Brigade
07-24-2007, 09:38 PM
I would like to pat myself on the back for mentioning this could get deep way before it was brought to light. Although at this point I don't believe other refs were involved in any illegal gambling or "in on it" so to speak. What I do believe is something that has been mentioned before that Donaghy has inside info on some of the other officials biases towards players, coaches or teams. That in it self can be just as damning. The hard part for the NBA will be proving those types of allegations when or if they arise.

VF21
07-24-2007, 09:48 PM
I think the best thing to do right now is wait to see what the investigation uncovers. How many games he bet on and how many of those did he actually officiate. For all we know he didn't even bet on the Suns vs Spurs game. Also there were two other refs doing that Suns and Spurs game

By the time it got to game 3 of the Suns-Spurs playoffs, my strong hunch is that Donaghy wasn't betting on anything. From what's being reported, he was most likely by then in the position of having to shave points to try and settle the score with Tony Soprano and crew. They quit taking his action the moment they started to dictate how they wanted the games called.

RWB
07-25-2007, 09:08 AM
what is there to indicate otherwise? if one official can fly under the noses of the league, why couldn't several? right now, other than the FBI only investigating one ref and stern saying its an anomaly we don't know whether more could be involved in similar activities, just not with the same mob under FBI investigation. sure donaghy could simply be posturing, but if one ref can do it others could be doing it too.


So, am I to assume you would have been happy if Stern would have said were really investigating stuff and hopefully no one else is involved, but there could be?

Honestly, what should he have said?

avoidingtheclowns
07-25-2007, 09:56 AM
So, am I to assume you would have been happy if Stern would have said were really investigating stuff and hopefully no one else is involved, but there could be?

Honestly, what should he have said?

i'm not looking to be satiated by a press conference. stern said what he should have. but saying what is PR savvy and being forthcoming are mutually exclusive. its a semantic minefield...

this specific FBI case is an isolated incident. the idea that only one ref is absolutely involved with the altering of games or betting cannot be known at this time. this ref flew under stern's nose for two years doing this and only (if we believe this) when the FBI told him about it in June did anything ever surface. so if this ref could get away with it, what is to say that others aren't? nothing at this point. the only reason this was discovered was the ref's ties to the mob. the FBI discovered this evidence by happenstance. how can stern be so sure that this is a 'rogue' individual? well the FBI is investigating only one, but there could be others.

from a PR standpoint he said absolutely what he needed to say, he didn't say anything that is necessarily false. he said this case is isolated - meaning later he can say was simply the FBI case if more refs are implicated. but it also could be intentionally misleading by indicating that there is only one ref commiting this villainous acts to the game of professional basketball. i'm not faulting stern ... he did right by the interests he is in office to protect (the NBA, the sponsors). just don't confuse that with being absolutely forthcoming.

Unclebuck
07-25-2007, 10:06 AM
I read an article in the Denver Post this morning about how Donaghy calling 4 technicals on David Harrison. The jist of the article is well that proves this ref on the take, as in how could anyone call 4 T's on David Harrison. When I stop laughing I'll let you know.


There was also a note in the article about how Stern and Joey Crawford are planning to meet in the next couple of weeks, meaning he has not been reinstated. Also Crawford and Donaghy got into a shouting match at one of the refereee preseason meetings. Put me down on the side of Crawford in that dispute. In fact if Donaghy has an "unfortunate incident" I won't think it is a mob boss that got to him, I'll figure it was Joey Crawford

Ragnar
07-25-2007, 10:57 AM
I agree with Bynum Brigade. The daming thing for the NBA in the long run will not just be a reff on the take but he will probably have to testify at some point to what he told the mob. He will tell what reffs have biases towards what players and what teams. The reffs are suposed to be impartial and they clearly are not always so.

JayRedd
07-25-2007, 11:21 AM
At least one ex-NBA ref lays plenty of blame on Stern's system of hiring, evaluating and auditing refs. Although, the article does not that this Mike Mathis guy "admittedly had a contentious relationship with Stern when he was an officer in the referee's union."

http://www.nj.com/sports/ledger/index.ssf?/base/sports-2/1185337745294500.xml&coll=1



Ex-official rips ref supervisors

Mathis: Monitoring system is flawed

Wednesday, July 25, 2007

BY DAVE D'ALESSANDRO
Star-Ledger Staff

David Stern insists the safeguards were in place to ensure that his crew of 60 NBA referees is the best qualified, best trained, best prepared and best supervised group of officials in the world.

Mike Mathis claims that is merely lip service, and he is willing to cite examples.

The former NBA official, widely regarded as one of the league's best referees over 26 seasons until his retirement in 2002, said the Tim Donaghy fiasco results at least partly from Stern's systemic failures, and what Mathis said is the league's "policy" of putting cronyism ahead of competency.

"The NBA has a good ol' boy system that nobody talks about," he said in an interview. "They hire friends and friends of friends. . . .particularly in the case of hiring referee supervisors.

"This has been waiting to go off. Ask people in the league. Stern is holding the key to all hiring. The things that matter -- hiring, teaching, accountability -- if they were executed properly, this wouldn't have happened."

The league refused comment on nearly a half-dozen specific allegations from Mathis, who admittedly had a contentious relationship with Stern when he was an officer in the referee's union. But Mathis said his attention was jolted by one remark from the commissioner yesterday during his press conference called to address the allegations surrounding Donaghy.

"We have retained 30 observers, one at each of our team's games," Stern said. "They are in effect charting the game with respect to the calls and other observations that they make. They then review the game on tape. They then are audited -- not every game -- but selectively audited by the group supervisors that we have employed by the NBA."

The problem, Mathis claims, is with the group, or regional supervisors.
"They say they have qualified supervisors, but it's all bull," Mathis said. "They were once referees, and they were fired. These are guys who should be teaching and training refs, but they have no business in those positions."

A league spokesman refused comment about the qualifications of the four referee supervisors, but the qualifications of each could invite scrutiny in light of how Donaghy is accused of calling games to suit his own purposes and those of his gambling confederates.

Two of the group observers -- Mike Lauerman and Jim Wishmeyer -- both were fired as referees, only to be brought back as supervisors, confirmed an NBA official who requested anonymity because he is forbidden to discuss management personnel.

And according to NBA playoff records, the two other group supervisors, Jim Capers and Tommy Nunez, were never regarded highly enough to merit consistent playoff responsibilities during their officiating careers.



Dave D'Alessandro may be reached at ddalessandro@starledger.com

Hicks
07-25-2007, 11:28 AM
That is pretty bad.

JayRedd
07-25-2007, 11:31 AM
And here's another one with comments from the refs' union saying they'll distance themselves from Donaghy, and that this incident will hopefully lead to wholesale changes.


There's also this from some anonymous official who says the NBA needs to "clean house":
"Donaghy had established a reputation for 'deliberately blowing calls' on the court and for being a hothead off it. But he never was suspended, creating a system that made Donaghy "comfortable that he could cheat."
At least some of the NBA refs it seems believed they have been operating in a messed up system, despite all of Stern's claims over the past few years.




Officials Say Scandal Must Lead to Change

By Michael Lee and Mike Wise
Washington Post Staff Writers

Wednesday, July 25, 2007; E01


Several NBA officials and players said yesterday that although the alleged misconduct by referee Tim Donaghy (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/Tim+Donaghy?tid=informline) is likely an isolated incident, it casts a dark cloud over his colleagues and the league itself.

Lamell McMorris, head of the National Basketball Referees Association, said the union will make a concerted effort to distance itself from Donaghy in the upcoming weeks. The association will have its national conference in Los Angeles (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/Los+Angeles?tid=informline) in late August, but McMorris said it will likely issue a statement before then.

"This is not going to be the final word. This is not going to be how they are portrayed in the eyes of the public," McMorris said from his office in downtown Washington. "Every tragedy leads to the potential of positive change. We think this is a renewed opportunity to instill, believe it or not, confidence in the faith, in the craft. Some of the changes it will lead to will be for the better. We want to be a partner with the NBA to make sure that this never happens again."

McMorris said he was positive that fans again will have faith in the NBA's 58 officials. "I have confidence that the fans in basketball know that the alleged actions of this individual are not indicative of the group," he said, "but those that don't and those in the general public, we are going to do our best to instill confidence in the integrity of this craft and this profession."

One veteran referee said that league will not be able to restore trust unless there is a major change in the way the NBA reviews its officials.
The official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said that Donaghy had established a reputation for "deliberately blowing calls" on the court and for being a hothead off it. But he never was suspended, creating a system that made Donaghy "comfortable that he could cheat."

"If [the NBA doesn't] clean house, nothing will come of this," the referee said in a telephone interview. "I promise you, if the public, if the owners, if the coaches and GMs can see something wrong with the system -- where a guy can deliberately botch calls -- let's forget about the gambling, let's forget about the cheating. If [the league] can't see that it's a problem with the system, the NBA will be fine -- they'll just look at it like wrestling. Everybody'll make all the money that you want to make, but those of us who are serious about what we're doing, forget about it."

Former journeyman guard John Crotty, now an analyst with the Miami Heat (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/Miami+Heat?tid=informline), was struck by NBA Commissioner David Stern (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/David+Stern?tid=informline)'s somber demeanor at yesterday's news conference in New York (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/New+York?tid=informline).

Crotty and several recently retired players interviewed yesterday said they could not recall a specific incident or call made by Donaghy that directly affected the outcome of their game. "But any time the game is being challenged from that standpoint, it really shakes everybody up," Crotty said.

Rick Barry, the Hall of Fame forward who won a championship with the Golden State Warriors (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/Golden+State+Warriors?tid=informline) in 1975, felt Stern's portrayal of Donaghy as one rogue official deserves merit.

"It sounds like the guy has a problem and the problem caused him to get involved with the wrong people," Barry said. "If that's the extent of it, he should go to jail and the league should move on and treat it as an isolated incident. If it goes beyond that and he blows the whistle and others are involved, then it gets serious. But there is not one bit of evidence right now that that's the case."
<SCRIPT>var comments_url = "http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/24/AR2007072402211_Comments.html" ;var article_id = "AR2007072402211" ;</SCRIPT>

Kegboy
07-25-2007, 11:49 AM
It should be noted, that Mathis was the one who called the flagrant on Reggie at the end of the '94 ECF. Perhaps it takes a rat to know a rat.

Nothing said here surprises me.

Slick Pinkham
07-25-2007, 11:59 AM
also it is very important to note that Mike Mathis was one of the refs that "retired" following a guilty plea on Federal charges of TAX EVASION:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Mathis

Pacersin2033
07-25-2007, 12:39 PM
Uh oh Stern. The NBA owners can vote his *** out of office, and while he is not solely to blame for this, we all know how NBA owners and teams love scapegoats.

Whats to keep them from Firing Stern as a scapegoat effort to reduce the hit on thier pocketbooks.

Unclebuck
07-25-2007, 01:02 PM
I heard Mike Mathis yesterday on ESPN radio. He sounds really, really bitter to me (not to suggest there aren't some problems and not to suggest that some of his points aren't valid, but he sounds like someone who feels he got screwed over)

indygeezer
07-25-2007, 01:03 PM
Uh oh Stern. The NBA owners can vote his *** out of office, and while he is not solely to blame for this, we all know how NBA owners and teams love scapegoats.

Whats to keep them from Firing Stern as a scapegoat effort to reduce the hit on thier pocketbooks.



Nothing, it could happen. Although the owners seem to love the international $$$ etc that DS has brought into the organization.

Personally, I think he should be required to resign since it happend while he was Commish.

Knucklehead Warrior
07-25-2007, 01:29 PM
Nothing, it could happen. Although the owners seem to love the international $$$ etc that DS has brought into the organization.
Personally, I think he should be required to resign since it happend while he was Commish.

I don't disagree, but I don't think it will happen either. I imagine the owners are pretty happy that Herr Schtern has put some big buckazoids in their pockets during his reign.

There are plenty of people on this board who believe the ends justify the means (knucklehead players), why wouldn't the owners? Schtern's been good to the nba in a nice pocketbook way, they don't figure on killing the goose......the nba might be broken, but it's still very profitable. There may be a temporary backlash and impact, but it'll blow over unless there are more people involved. Your mileage may vary.

carpediem024
07-25-2007, 01:49 PM
Lol 4 techs on David Harrison.

Kstat
07-25-2007, 08:54 PM
Jim Capers....

JIM CAPERS????

I'm going to throw up now.

He made the single-worst call I've seen in 20 years of watching Pistons basketball, and he's IN CHARGE?

BlueNGold
07-25-2007, 10:19 PM
Not sure if anyone mentioned this.

There is a silver lining to this story.

It's now far less likely the NBA will move the Pacers to Vegas!

BoomBaby33
07-25-2007, 11:28 PM
http://www.cbs.com/latenight/lateshow/top_ten/index/php/20070724.phtml

I thought a humorous view of this subject should be added to lighten the mood! :)

Top Ten Signs A Referee Is Fixing Games! (David Letterman top ten list - 07-24-07)

10. He leads the league in blocked shots
9. When talking about the Spurs, he says "we"
8. After 6 seconds, calls a 24-second violation
7. He's drawing up plays
6. Befores tipoff, scoreboard reads 58 to nothing
5. Teams have scored a record number of two-pointers, three-pointers and eight pointers
4. Tossed one of the other officials out of the game
3. Has Eddie Brill's telephone number on speed dial
2. Miami Heat hasn't lost a game since Shaq promised
to help the referee's fat son
1. The Knicks are winning

I knew it, Gra-ma-ma's 4 point play was fixed. :D

larry
07-26-2007, 01:52 AM
In the finals who called the foul near the end of game 6 that gave Glenn Rice free throws?
The game was tied after Rose hit a 3 I think that brought us even with a minute or less left.
The Lakers missed and Dale Davis snagged the board only to slam it down after there was a phantom foul.
Not saying we would of won 6 or not saying we would of won 7 but the league would have wanted Kobe & Shaq crowned champs in a big market.
I know this is gambling similar to what Pete Rose did, but can anyone answer that question?
The NBA is the only sport where I sometimes see things fixed like wrestling.
I'm almost sure of it. I don't want it like that as a small market fan, but I can't help thinking that.

DisplacedKnick
07-26-2007, 07:06 AM
In the finals who called the foul near the end of game 6 that gave Glenn Rice free throws?
The game was tied after Rose hit a 3 I think that brought us even with a minute or less left.
The Lakers missed and Dale Davis snagged the board only to slam it down after there was a phantom foul.
Not saying we would of won 6 or not saying we would of won 7 but the league would have wanted Kobe & Shaq crowned champs in a big market.
I know this is gambling similar to what Pete Rose did, but can anyone answer that question?
The NBA is the only sport where I sometimes see things fixed like wrestling.
I'm almost sure of it. I don't want it like that as a small market fan, but I can't help thinking that.

The NBA would have made a LOT more money by having a finals game 7 in Los Angeles.

I'm almost sure of it.

And if LA won game 7 they still would have been NBA Champions.

I'm almost sure of that too.

Unclebuck
07-26-2007, 08:08 AM
the league would have wanted Kobe & Shaq crowned champs in a big market.
I know this is gambling similar to what Pete Rose did, but can anyone answer that question?
The NBA is the only sport where I sometimes see things fixed like wrestling.
I'm almost sure of it. I don't want it like that as a small market fan, but I can't help thinking that.

I can answer the question - it was a foul on Dale Davis. It wasn't the most obvious foul in the history of the NBA, but it was a foul.

I often ask this question but I've never gotten a satisfactory answer.

You say the NBA is fixed "I'm almost sure of it"

OK, describe for me the scenerio on how the NBA is fixed. How does the NBA fix games. (And why have they done a horrible job fixing games - I mean the Spurs - there is no conceivable reason the NBA wants the Spurs to win)

But I'm willing to listen, explain it to me.

Unclebuck
07-26-2007, 09:03 AM
I actually think Stephen A. Smith is a decent writer. I really do think Stern will clean house, I would not want to be working for him right now

Link (http://www.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&title=Stephen+A.+Smith+%7C+Stern+will+make+sure+so meone+pays+in+scandal+%7C+Inquirer+%7C+07%2F26%2F2 007&expire=&urlID=23195772&fb=Y&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.philly.com%2Finquirer%2Fcolum nists%2Fstephen_a_smith%2F20070726_Stephen_A__Smit h____Stern_will_make_sure_someone_pays_in_scandal. html&partnerID=166546)

Stephen A. Smith | Stern will make sure someone pays in scandal
By Stephen A. Smith
Inquirer Columnist
RELATED STORIES

How can a game be rigged? Dim the big stars, referees say

Former Wildcat out to resume his NBA career.

More on the NBA
NEW YORK - On Tuesday morning, the czar of the National Basketball Association looked as close to sick as anyone had ever seen him. Staggering to the podium. Surrounded by league officials. Stripped of the arrogance and self-assuredness that normally accompany his every word. But to know David Stern is to know one thing above all else: Someone will pay dearly for this.
You don't spend nearly a quarter-century transforming a league into a multibillion-dollar industry flourishing in prime time only to watch it potentially disintegrate amid an alleged gambling and point-shaving scandal involving a referee, and do nothing. Tim Donaghy will be thrown into a jail cell if Stern has anything to say about it, preventing the referee from doing anything meaningful for the rest of his days.

"This is the Stern everyone knows," an Eastern Conference official said, one of many afraid to say anything publicly in fear of Stern's wrath. "He's known for knowing everything he needs to know, for always being on top of his game and being extremely protective of the NBA's image. There are people who will question that now. Who will wonder if this happened because he was asleep at the wheel, which is ridiculous.

"So in Stern's eyes, this entire fiasco is not only a blemish on the NBA's record, but his own. God help us all."

Stu Jackson, the league's senior vice president known for handing out fines and suspensions on Stern's behalf, should be concerned. As should Ronnie Nunn, the league's supervisor of officials, since neither will experience any peace for quite some time. And most folks sincerely doubt that Bernie Tolbert, the league's head of security, will have his job next week.

To know Tolbert, a good man, is to personally wish for something different. But the proverbial head must roll. As Stern reiterated during Tuesday's news conference, "the only thing we can do [from here on out] is deal with matters as harshly as you can and hope that acts as a deterrent."

Although he certainly exercised that belief on a number of occasions, Stern never had to make such utterances before. For the better part of two decades, he had Horace Balmer, the league's former head of security who retired three years ago and was known by insiders for dispensing a heavy hand at his discretion.

Micheal Ray Richardson was banned from the league for drug use. So was Roy Tarpley. And if a referee, a coach, a scout or any other NBA personnel enjoyed a lifestyle that didn't necessarily correlate with the salary he was being paid, Balmer insisted that the person pay him a visit.

"Horace would call them in the office in a hot second," an NBA security official explained days ago. "It didn't matter what you were doing or how it looked. If Horace thought it was something potentially detrimental to the league, he was all over it. Never mind your guilt or innocence at the time. He just wanted to let you know he was watching you."

Stern didn't hire former FBI and DEA agents, ex-Army officials or retain members of the Secret Service as consultants for problems to occur. They're employed to put fear in the hearts of those who'd dare consider violating the sanctity of competitive sports. That did not seem to happen with Donaghy.

"I can tell you this is the most serious situation, and worst situation, that I've ever experienced either as a fan of the NBA, a lawyer for the NBA, or the commissioner of the NBA," Stern said on Tuesday.

Stern went on to speak of how the NBA takes its "obligation to our fans in this matter very, very seriously." Of how he will "do every look back possible to analyze our processes and seek the best advice possible to see if there are changes that should be made."

It was obvious Stern already knew what those changes would be.

A new evaluation process. More monitoring. Whatever else the law allows, and, of course, a change in personnel.

Anything less and it would seem like everything's OK.

You don't have to know Stern to realize that couldn't be further from the truth.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BoomBaby33
07-26-2007, 01:02 PM
I can answer the question - it was a foul on Dale Davis. It wasn't the most obvious foul in the history of the NBA, but it was a foul.

I often ask this question but I've never gotten a satisfactory answer.

You say the NBA is fixed "I'm almost sure of it"

OK, describe for me the scenerio on how the NBA is fixed. How does the NBA fix games. (And why have they done a horrible job fixing games - I mean the Spurs - there is no conceivable reason the NBA wants the Spurs to win)

But I'm willing to listen, explain it to me.

Probably because they are the ANTI-Pacers.

Seriously - The Spurs are viewed as good upstanding citizens, led by one of the most upstanding respected players in the NBA - Tim Duncan. I mean, look at what Der'Stern did with Joey Crawford, cause he messed with the arguably the face of the league - Tim Duncan. (Ironically like the Colts and Peyton Manning of the NFL, until of course after the XLI win with 3-4 player's bad decisions).

Do you think the NBA wants Kobe to be their face? Not really with his selfish ways and inconspicuous ways with the ladies. With all the other bad things happening in the NBA these days, the NBA need a "good guys win" mentality.

Pacersin2033
07-26-2007, 01:05 PM
Stern wants the Spurs to win because of how many International players they have, yeah viewership is down here by a few million, but the Spurs get South American, Eastern Europe, France, the Caribean(sp) al to an extent interested.

JayRedd
07-26-2007, 01:13 PM
Probably because they are the ANTI-Pacers.

Seriously - The Spurs are viewed as good upstanding citizens, led by one of the most upstanding respected players in the NBA - Tim Duncan. I mean, look at what Der'Stern did with Joey Crawford, cause he messed with the arguably the face of the league - Tim Duncan. (Ironically like the Colts and Peyton Manning of the NFL, until of course after the XLI win with 3-4 player's bad decisions).

Do you think the NBA wants Kobe to be their face? Not really with his selfish ways and inconspicuous ways with the ladies. With all the other bad things happening in the NBA these days, the NBA need a "good guys win" mentality.


Stern wants the Spurs to win because of how many International players they have, yeah viewership is down here by a few million, but the Spurs get South American, Eastern Europe, France, the Caribean(sp) al to an extent interested.


Just like all the good ol' conspiracy theorists in every other field, I enjoy hearing you change your arguments to suit whatever point it is you're trying to make at the time.

Just to recap.....

Stern and the NBA instruct referees to favor:

Large-market teams
Marquee franchises
Uberstars (especially Michael Jordan/Dwyane Wade)
"Faces of the League"
"Good guys"
International players
Anyone playing the Pacers
Not Kobe Bryant
Any team that needs to extend a seriesAm I forgetting anyone?

Pacersin2033
07-26-2007, 01:17 PM
While I do appreciate your clever insults, I have never stated any other theory, so maybe you should find evidence before posting your little theories. Coincidentally thats a trait of a conspiracy theory.

Slick Pinkham
07-26-2007, 01:28 PM
I guess it's a conspiracy when the Spurs win (good guys) and a conspiracy when the Spurs don't win (small market).

It was a conspiracy when the mavs made it all the way to the finals (Stern then has convenient proof that he really doesn't take his hatred of Mark Cuban personally) and it was a conspiracy when the Mavs lost in the 1st round (Stern is really acting upon his hatred of Mark Cuban).

It's nothing but all conspiracy, all the time.

It's very convenient to have beliefs that are so adaptable and also utterly unable to ever be disproven.

JayRedd
07-26-2007, 01:53 PM
While I do appreciate your clever insults, I have never stated any other theory, so maybe you should find evidence before posting your little theories. Coincidentally thats a trait of a conspiracy theory.

No offense meant.

I don't know your opinons on the matter at all and wasn't tryna take jabs at you personally....I'm just talking "you" as in "people that think refs have an agenda in determining the winner of an NBA game."

larry
07-26-2007, 09:13 PM
I can answer the question - it was a foul on Dale Davis. It wasn't the most obvious foul in the history of the NBA, but it was a foul.

I often ask this question but I've never gotten a satisfactory answer.

You say the NBA is fixed "I'm almost sure of it"

OK, describe for me the scenerio on how the NBA is fixed. How does the NBA fix games. (And why have they done a horrible job fixing games - I mean the Spurs - there is no conceivable reason the NBA wants the Spurs to win)

But I'm willing to listen, explain it to me.

I hoped you would chime in. I figured somebody would bring up the Spurs as well. I also know you fully believe everything is legit in the NBA, because I read your posts. That is fine I respect you. I'm not a crazy dude that shook hands with an alien last night. I honestly just think stars get "star" treatment in the NBA. Now I'm no wrestling fan in any way, but I know the writers decide the outcome 100% based on who is the most popular/unpopular or basically who ever draws the biggest crowd wins.
The Spurs are champions again, because the Spurs are just good enough to win, even if and when stars get calls.
I don't think the NBA is all scripted, but I think certain guys get calls.
They can still lose the game.
I'm not sure lottery rigging is going on either. Lebron went to Cleveland. However, I doubt he could of went to the Knicks without serious questions and doubts of the integrity of those ping pong balls.
Lebron is proving you can succeed in a small market just like Peyton does here in football. I may have said small market, but after some thought I really think now its more of a star player gets calls he shouldn't or others wouldn't type thing. That doesn't equal wrestling, but it is still somewhat fixed in my eyes. Of course I love Boxing and it is pretty shady. I just think something about the NBA is more fishy than the NFL, MLB, NHL, or any major college sport.

larry
07-26-2007, 09:18 PM
And I come here for fun, so I'm not going to send you a tape of bad calls to back my argument. It may not satisfy you, but its my honest opinion. The Spurs win because of Duncan, Parker, Bowen, Ginobli, & Pop.
Stern hates it. I'm sure of it.

Naptown_Seth
07-27-2007, 04:57 PM
Seth, come on, comparing Stern to Michael Vick's atty is not even close to being right
???

I didn't.

As for the other question about "what leads me to believe it ISN'T isolated"? Nothing. Nothing leads me to believe EITHER WAY.

I'm not making a 100% claim that there is many cases, or that this is the only one. That's what STERN IS DOING. My question is how can he have confidence in that statement given the fact that every single checkpoint he had in place failed.

Remember when they grounded all the flights after 9-11, why did they do that, did they have any reason to believe that anyone was hijacking a plane beyond the 4 that were crashed? Nope. But they realized that they also DID NOT KNOW either.

Stern would have said "don't worry, keep flying, those 4 were the only ones, we have security checks in place, those hijackers were an aberration".

He clearly does not know this to be true. He just HOPES IT IS. If he said "I'd like to think" and "I hope this turns out to be an isolated case" and "obviously we need to scrutinize the system in new and more effective ways before we can feel comfortable in the integrity of the game again", then he'd be on to something.

He doesn't want to say that because he's not making a statement he's making a SALES PITCH. Keep coming to the park, people's feet don't get cut off normally, let me get you a free hot dog.

He's afraid to admit that they don't know or even that there is the slightest doubt because he's afraid of consumers hearing that and turning it into "it's all cheating". But the truth is at least some of us hear this spin and think "not only is there cheating, but they are in so much denial that they can't even own up and fix it properly".

Naptown_Seth
07-27-2007, 05:02 PM
Say you are the boss. Lets say that gambling, for people in your business, is cause for dismissal.

Now lets say you get a tip that one of your employees was seen gambling.

You confront the employee. He denies it.

You hire detectives who ask the tipster, some friend-of-a-friend-of-a-friend, to give you some hard evidence. Photos, another witness, anything. He doesn't have anything. Your detectives ask him what casino it was. Your detectives then contact everybody you can think of at the casino-- security, the dealers, the valet... They say they never heard of the guy and have never seen him before. There seems to be absolutely no corroborating evidence.

Your detectives say "Sorry boss, we've got nothing on this guy."

Do you fire or suspend the guy for something he denies, when you absolutely have no way of confirming it?

I don't think so.
HUGE PROBLEM HERE.

It was actually true it turns out, at least in some variation. So this is more like you hear a sound in your engine, take it to the mechanic, he finds nothing wrong, and 2 weeks later the clutch goes out or the oil catches fire.

Okay, your description and awareness of the correct problem weren't great, but it was good enough to get someone with expertise in there looking at it closely. Why didn't he find the real problem if he's so good? Is this a mechanic you're going to keep going to after that brilliant vote of confidence?

aceace
07-29-2007, 09:11 AM
HUGE PROBLEM HERE.

It was actually true it turns out, at least in some variation. So this is more like you hear a sound in your engine, take it to the mechanic, he finds nothing wrong, and 2 weeks later the clutch goes out or the oil catches fire.

Okay, your description and awareness of the correct problem weren't great, but it was good enough to get someone with expertise in there looking at it closely. Why didn't he find the real problem if he's so good? Is this a mechanic you're going to keep going to after that brilliant vote of confidence?Your exactly right, as Stern said he was investigated they found nothing. They can't tap phone lines. The FBI can if they have probable cause. The FBI has many more tools it can use to investigate. I think the NBA plays out to large market teams because the teams can spend more money. The Knicks are still making a fortune even though they are paying a huge luxury tax, but they sux because of management decisions. L.A.,Chicago different story better management. I think ref gate will go away eventually. I think the NBA will announce a new policy similar to the NFL's examination of games. They really don't have a choice.

Slick Pinkham
08-02-2007, 09:00 AM
Stern has to be very happy with the Garnett trade.

This story has moved way into the background for now.