Can the "nature" of the game be changed?

[King_B_Mack]

Re: Can the "nature" of the game be changed?

Dan Crawford was assigned because of the horrible officiating in the first game....well....according to that video PortlandBlazer posted in the thread. That was brutal.

And yes, Dre's right. If it's human error, you don't have the same morons reffing the most important games. And if they keep reffing and making "human errors", then maybe their old asses need to be given the boot and bring in people with better vision and ability to get into position. Of course that won't happen, because they're Company Men.

This is what I've been saying man. If you're this awful at your job then you should be fired. I'm not one to go around calling for someone's job like that, but you can't allow someone to just continue being THIS bad consistently.

[The 24th Letter]

Re: Can the "nature" of the game be changed?

I have the same question as Dice. If it's just about them being bad, then it is what it is and has always been. The bigger/stronger/faster players get... and the more creative they get with both moves within the rules (LBJ does some things that we've never seen before so it looks illegal to the naked eye, so how do you call the next move?) and working the system (drawing a shooting fould when someone puts their hand too close) the harder it becomes to officiate the game.

I can't get behind the idea that things are rigged, mostly because I've seen too many refs just get overwhelmed by all that goes on at times, and have had conversations with some about their thought process on some calls/no calls (that were wrong but I could see how they came to their conclusion). If there is still some of that going on then you all have a right to be pissed, of course, but I think some guys think of every conspiracy theory and obvious miscue whenever they see a bad call (which happens every game) and just ruins it for them.

Definitely not saying that it isn't worth talking about, but if someone were still talking about the Mavs getting robbed years ago (for example), then they're just missing a beautiful product on the court. Unfortunately (or fortunately in some cases imo), it's part of the game we love.

I was wondering what was wrong with Rose when he went nuts after getting called for a foul on Price... certainly looked like a foul. That is until the replay showed that Price pulled his arm while shooting. That's part of the game. Maybe I'm just in the minority who are ok with that part of the game too.

I agree, and no, your not the minority....

[BlueNGold]

Re: Can the "nature" of the game be changed?

If the league was rigged, San Antonio wouldn't have been winning all those titles the past 10 years and we would have seen a Cleveland/LA Finals at least once.

Don't get me wrong, I do think certain refs have rigged certain games in their favor like Donaghy said happened, but I don't think Stern is sitting there saying "You guys need to make sure that no matter what, it's Boston/LA in the Finals." or something like that.

[videobastard]

Re: Can the "nature" of the game be changed?

If you believe donaghy that officials try to extend playoff series when they can. Then the officials have influence in certain situations to keep things going. Rigged may not be right word but influence is what is going on.

In the end talent can overcome official influence. If you play dominant, make stops, shoot a higher shooting percentage, make crucial shots, you take it out their hands.

Over the years the spurs and teams like the pistons although not high profile teams played great enough basketball and shut down their opponents in their runs.

Its not cut and dry this year. But with the renewed success with the rivalry of lakers and celtics over these previous years in this current era your going to have to beat the officials as well when playing them.

The key team this year though is miami they have enough high profile talent that would generate a big buzz finals that i can see the heat getting the benefit of calls this year in a series with the celtics.

As some others have said its like boxing you cant go to a decision with the champs, or favored teams and expect to have the games called cleanly in the system thats in place.

[jeebs9]

Re: Can the "nature" of the game be changed?

I also would like to add. That we wouldn't have some plays happen if refs weren't the way they are. I mean think about how often the refs would blow their whistle if they called everything. In my opinion most games wouldn't score more than 60 in some games.

[sportyguyfl31]

Re: Can the "nature" of the game be changed?

If I had to choose the worst of two evils, Id rather have the way NBA games are officiated, then have what happens in say college basketball...where referees routinely take the game out of the player's hands.


I never want to know the name of a referee, umpire, or judge..in any sport. Ever. The less I know about them the better. If I know who he is, it is never for anything praise worthy that he has done.

NBA officiating has the reputation it does for a reason, and David Stern has done it no favors, by creating a culture of perimeter players who cannot be touched.which only creates more opportunites for dicey calls.

These players throw themselves into the lane and dare officials to not call something.

[jeebs9]

Re: Can the "nature" of the game be changed?

^^ Exact my thinking ^^

If they called everything they saw it would take away from the entertainment value.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not defending the bad calls. Could you imagine the refs calling a offensive foul on Michael Jordan last shot with the Bulls? When he sort of pushed off Russell. Or when a player breaks on a fast break and does 3 step instead of 2 steps to get a dunk. I have never seen a ref dare make that call. I've seen the call made consistently overseas and in FIBA. It is the right call. But is it the right call when you paid $1000 for court side seat tickets to see LeBron James/Blake Griffin.

[LingeringRegime]

Re: Can the "nature" of the game be changed?

^^ Exact my thinking ^^

If they called everything they saw it would take away from the entertainment value.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not defending the bad calls. Could you imagine the refs calling a offensive foul on Michael Jordan last shot with the Bulls? When he sort of pushed off Russell. Or when a player breaks on a fast break and does 3 step instead of 2 steps to get a dunk. I have never seen a ref dare make that call. I've seen the call made consistently overseas and in FIBA. It is the right call. But is it the right call when you paid $1000 for court side seat tickets to see LeBron James/Blake Griffin.

That is what is wrong with the whole mindset to me. A foul is a foul, in the first minute of the game, or the last minute of the game. I would pay my hard earned money more to go sit courtside if the games were called consistently. First and foremost, I love the game more than the superstars of the league. But, I know most of the Sportscenter fans out there just want to see someone get dunked on.

I would actually like the refs let players play more physical to a degree, but what gets me is when say for example, a Kobe Bryant raises up to shoot and flails his arms and screams (while not being touched), and gets the call and goes to the line. But, on the other end he is slapping at the player he is guarding and hitting him on the arm constantly and they let that go. It happens with other superstar players as well.

[King_B_Mack]

Re: Can the "nature" of the game be changed?

^^ Exact my thinking ^^

If they called everything they saw it would take away from the entertainment value.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not defending the bad calls. Could you imagine the refs calling a offensive foul on Michael Jordan last shot with the Bulls? When he sort of pushed off Russell. Or when a player breaks on a fast break and does 3 step instead of 2 steps to get a dunk. I have never seen a ref dare make that call. I've seen the call made consistently overseas and in FIBA. It is the right call. But is it the right call when you paid $1000 for court side seat tickets to see LeBron James/Blake Griffin.

I feel like we're going around in circles here and some of you are missing the point. We're not saying 'be perfect,' or 'call every single thing.' That's not what people are looking for here. Like said above, the problem is things being multiple ways over the course of a game. Hell it would be fine if in the first half it was called tight, but in the second half they let them play. But one or two plays it's called tight, the following play is let them play only for the following play to be back to being tight. That's a problem, period. If you are going to call it tight, stick with that, if you're going to let them play, do that. People are going to bitch about officiating regardless, you guys are right about that. But that's not a friggin excuse to do nothing about the steaming pile of crap officiating that goes on night after night. 'Someone is gonna bitch no matter what, so may as well suck as much *** as we can.' That don't make any sense.

[jeebs9]

Re: Can the "nature" of the game be changed?

You see, even what you said there is a problem with that mindset.

"I would actually like the refs let players play more physical to a degree"

They is a fine line. You either want the players to play or you want every single thing to be called.

[LingeringRegime]

Re: Can the "nature" of the game be changed?

You see, even what you said there is a problem with that mindset.

"I would actually like the refs let players play more physical to a degree"

They is a fine line. You either want the players to play or you want every single thing to be called.

If they let both teams play physical I would be fine with it. If they call things on both sides tight I would be fine with it. I am not hard to please. I realize that there are going to be some missed calls once in a while. I get that. But, when you see the same patterns over and over again, it just gets frustrating.

[23]

Re: Can the "nature" of the game be changed?

You see, even what you said there is a problem with that mindset.

"I would actually like the refs let players play more physical to a degree"

They is a fine line. You either want the players to play or you want every single thing to be called.

See, when a guy like Melo gets busted up by a ref in the closing seconds of a game, but they allow Dirk to full elbow clearout on crash, thats where you continue to have problems.

You never know what they're going to do and why... The rules are so vague at times they have plenty of room to make a bogus call and not be held accountable.

[jeebs9]

Re: Can the "nature" of the game be changed?

I feel like we're going around in circles here and some of you are missing the point. We're not saying 'be perfect,' or 'call every single thing.' That's not what people are looking for here. Like said above, the problem is things being multiple ways over the course of a game. Hell it would be fine if in the first half it was called tight, but in the second half they let them play. But one or two plays it's called tight, the following play is let them play only for the following play to be back to being tight. That's a problem, period. If you are going to call it tight, stick with that, if you're going to let them play, do that. People are going to bitch about officiating regardless, you guys are right about that. But that's not a friggin excuse to do nothing about the steaming pile of crap officiating that goes on night after night. 'Someone is gonna bitch no matter what, so may as well suck as much *** as we can.' That don't make any sense.

But that's going to happen at every level of basketball. You guys took my post a little too literally. I'm not defending the bad calls. But you need to understand that this stuff is subjective. It's different to every single person.

[King_B_Mack]

Re: Can the "nature" of the game be changed?

But that's going to happen at every level of basketball. You guys took my post a little too literally. I'm not defending the bad calls. But you need to understand that this stuff is subjective. It's different to every single person.

And I get that. Different refs are going to have they're styles of how they call the games. That would be an acceptable defense if it was like going into the game you can say. "Okay this is who we got, he/they call things tight so I can't do this or that." However that's not the case cause every single one of them, from game to game call things differently throughtout the game. They have a rep for calling things tight, but they'll let them play on a string of possesions before going back to calling it tight on another play. That's where the problem is.

[OSUFan_88]

Re: Can the "nature" of the game be changed?

But you need to understand that this stuff is subjective. It's different to every single person.

This is the biggest thing that, to me, is the most correctable thing in the NBA.

Unfortunately, it's also the biggest thing that will never change under David Stern's watch. He's determined to give enough power to the refs and allow vague rules to be pushed.

I think the only rules in the NBA I feel confident are well defined is things dealing with when a player can and cannot player. But the NBA does not want to define what a travel is, nor enforce what a travel is. The NBA does not want to define what a touch foul is, nor do they want to enforce the difference between a touch foul and an impediment foul.

These are the rules *Blocking, Shooting, Traveling* that the NBA should have a clear and consistent definition on instead of vague bull**** that allows the ref to decide what a foul is. And until that is fixed, the NBA and it's "nature" will always have an aura of shadiness around it. And that's unfortunate, because I believe basketball is the best, more entertaining sport in the world.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

To get with another issue, on the fixing, rigging, whatever...

I do not believe the NBA can fix every game of a series.

I do believe the NBA can and has fixed a game in a series to either extend the series or end the series to maintain a favorable outcome.