heres another dumbass... here's what I replied to him "You're a journalist but still don't get it. JVG chose to be vague than to be a rat. I guess if you were in the same situation you will sell out your source." Van Gundy's intentional foul deserved far worse By JOHN LEVESQUE SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER COLUMNIST The referees of the National Basketball Association want the head of Houston Rockets coach Jeff Van Gundy. I'll be happy to provide the platter. Yeah, I know. A good referee is supposed to be above the fray, unflinchingly immune to the slings and arrows of outrageous coaches. But instead of turning the other cheek, the National Basketball Referees Association cranked out a news release this week saying Van Gundy should be fired for calling into question "the reputations of all NBA game officials and the integrity of the game itself." Now, anyone who has watched a few NBA games has done the same thing. Calling a basketball game is like trying to sweep a colony of scurrying ants into an envelope whilst tying one's shoes. Invariably, a couple of ants get away, or a shoe goes untied, and the ticket-buying public concludes you're not very good at your job or, worse, you have a bias against a particular team. Of course, the difference in the Van Gundy case is that he supposedly "crossed the line" by suggesting the fix was in, that the NBA was essentially no better than pro wrestling, minus the silly spandex. Van Gundy did this by saying May 1 that he had talked with an NBA official who indicated referees were looking at Rockets center Yao Ming a little more closely during the first round of the playoffs against Dallas because of complaints made by Mavericks owner Mark Cuban. An entirely plausible scenario, since Cuban is to complaining what Martha Stewart is to decorating. After Van Gundy spoke about this upgraded interest in Yao, the media reported the "official" who talked to Van Gundy was a referee not involved in the Rockets-Mavericks series. Van Gundy didn't correct the apparent misimpression until May 9. "When I referred to an NBA official," Van Gundy said in a statement Monday, "people inferred that I was talking about a working NBA referee, instead of an official with the league. I was purposely vague because I had given my word that I would keep his name out of it." Gee, how noble. So Van Gundy let many of the league's 62 active referees twist in the wind for eight days as the NBA went on a mole hunt. And he let a zillion media outlets misreport the story for a week, allowing a bazillion fans to jump to improper conclusions. Now, don't get me wrong. I believe there are refs who hold grudges. I believe there are refs who let stars get way with stuff that rookies get whistled for every time. And I believe traveling could be called on every possession. But Van Gundy shouldn't be coaching an NBA team. With that sort of flair for inciting and obfuscating at the same time, he should be running the league. Then he might be able to explain to us why the NBA has not exactly denied the charge that it instructed referees to call a tighter game against Yao. Indeed, commissioner David Stern left wide open the possibility that such "adjustments" go on all the time. "Everybody talks to somebody," he told ESPN Monday night. "I got phone calls today about officiating. ... As commissioner ... I encourage calls from coaches, GMs, owners." It only makes sense that the squeaky wheels get a hit of WD-40. It's how the NBA works, for crying out loud. Or did you think the coaches work over the refs the way they do just because they like to vent? The NBA simply doesn't like the idea that a referee might have spilled some of these home-cooked frijoles to a coach, because it doesn't want to be seen as susceptible to peddlers of influence. Stern says the matter is resolved, and that the hunt for Van Gundy's confidant has not switched from the refs' locker rooms to the NBA's executive suites. Still, for misleading the league, his bosses, the referees, the media and the fans, Van Gundy deserves more punishment than the record $100,000 fine Stern imposed. Houston fans have offered to help him pay the fine because it's always fashionable to blame the officials, but Van Gundy purposely set out to create a tempest and then didn't have the courage or the inclination to quell it when it raged out of control. "I didn't want the issue to continue," he said in his statement, "so rather than clarifying my original comments I chose to let the matter die since I was wrong to bring the official into it to begin with. I have been honest during this process, loyal to those involved and have apologized for my comments. I look forward to putting this behind me." Honest? If Van Gundy had been honest from the get-go, the whole fuss wouldn't have happened, assuming one accepts Stern's description of the "everybody talks to somebody" ethos in the NBA. Thus, Van Gundy needed to keep things fuzzy to create the stir he desired. "I may have been purposely vague," Van Gundy told the Houston Chronicle, "but I made sure I was telling the truth." If Van Gundy is coaching in the league next year, I can't wait till a referee hits him with a double technical for being truthful and purposely vague. Sometimes, you just have to crack down on the bad boys.
I stopped the reading after this. The referres Association, which when relating to this Jeff van Gundy matter, basically consisted of Mcsorrin and Mcsorrin, has come to a mutual agreement with itself and changed it's attitude and stance and moved on. What people like this guy don't understand is that when Mcsorrin gets together with Mcsorrin, the right decisions are made.
The press made it sound like JVG was calling the refs crooked. VG didn't correct them because it served a purpose for the Rockets. You can't suspend stupid publicity seeking journalists, so frying Jeff is the best answer they can give. The point of the story is: Either Jeff is very smart or very stupid.
This guy doesn't make any sense. On the one hand he wants Van Gundy tarred and feathered (for what, exactly, I can't quite make out). But, on the other hand, he points out that what Van Gundy was complaining about may actually be true and the league (read: Stern) just doesn't want it to get out. So, uh... what was your point again?
jeff never attacked the integrity of the refs anyway. if anything he attacked the integrity of the management.
This is a curious article. On one hand, the writer is attacking Gundy hard....but in another way, he's saying Gundy has brought up a valid point. Why hasn't the NBA denied that it is focusing in on Yao????
Jeff Van Gundy is not responsible for David Stern's controlling and vindictive nature. Jeff Van Gundy is definetly not responsible for sensationalist journalists jumping the gun. Let me try something. "Coach Van Gundy, when you say official do you mean league official, or referee?"
I don't know if any of you periodically check in on thebrushback.com, a satire of sports headlines, but the current edition has a picture of JVG with the headline, "Defiant Van Gundy Pays Entire Fine In Quarters", which I found sort of amusing. I wish it had done a complete fake article. thebrushback.com
I saw recent evidence that supports JVG's comments. In game 3 of PHX vs DAL, 4 minutes left in the 3rd quarter. Amare fouled Marquis Daniels on a layup. The refs incorrectly called it against a different PHX player. Avery threw a fit, and they changed the call, giving the foul to Amare (and Avery got a technical for his fit). The point is... the only reason they changed the call was because Avery threw a fit. Just proves that the Mavs own the refs.
Am i the only one who doesn't think what Gundy said was that damning?? Other than the insinuation that the league was influenced by Cuban, is it really so bad to think the league may have a 'book' on certain players?? I'm not agreeing that Yao should be a target. Just that if tapes reveal certain players flop, or travel, or otherwise bend the rules...shouldn't the ref's have a heads-up on what to expect from various players?
If they're gonna whistle Yao for a moving pick, then they need to make those calls against both teams. To analyze Yao's game, identify that he sets moving picks, and only call moving picks against him and nobody else is wrong.
With dueling statements ¡X the league suggesting Houston Coach Jeff Van Gundy lied and Van Gundy noting he said it was an "NBA official," rather than a referee, who warned him about a change in approach ¡X the episode was concluded. Stern had a legitimate concern but overreacted, blowing it up from a note to an issue by fining Van Gundy $100,000 and suggesting he might ban him, too¡K. Said Stern, obviously tired of the issue he created: "The Affair Van Gundy is closed. Praise the Lord. He apologized. He accepted the fine and acknowledged the statement that he got a call from an NBA referee was, shall I say, in error, inaccurate. That makes it over." ¡K A review of the tape by the Houston Chronicle's Jon Feigen showed Van Gundy never said "referee," and when a questioner said it, Van Gundy told him, "Just put 'official.' ¡K Said Van Gundy, who is one of the league's smartest people when not involved in trying to gain an edge: "You don't get do-overs in this position. You walk out and you speak and sometimes when you see what you said or see what you do, running out on the court tackling somebody, you just hope your career is viewed in its totality, not in little four or five seconds [of] temporary insanity." LA Times column
I agree entirely! And if moving picks are the call of the day, they should be on the lookout for everyone who does them. And the decision to enforce that rule should be a league one...not dictated from Dallas! It's just the contention that it's somehow shamefull that the league would use tape to see who does what, and alert the ref's based on this knowledge that i don't find as upsetting as some people seem to. I don't think it's necessarily a indication of game fixing. In fact, if they would use that info to target floppers i think it would be a good thing. Of course it HAS to be impartial.
Another great example is in the Sonics series. Allen whines about Bowen's physical defense in game 1, and then gets every call imaginable in game 2. About 3 or 4 of them were complete phantom calls on Bowen. Maybe no one issues directives about how to call games, but it sure seems like it. Either that or the refs read every article from the media and then change their calls accordingly.
from Keep Kenny: I think it's always been like that in the playoffs. Honestly, the directive about the moving screens didn't have much affect, but I think JVG's comments were just about the overall frustration of the calls that do go against Yao, and Cuban's influence in the league. Every team sends videos to the league for "clarification" which, of course, is really complaining. Rudy, in the 90's remarked that they'd send the league Jazz videos in hopes the Stockton/Malone p'n'r would be called better, but it never was.
The problem is 'whistleblowers' are not popular with object of their whistleblowing. In other words, if the refs don't like what JVG said it is going to be a long year next year. JVG did what may be an ultimately stupid thing to p*ss off all the refs at one time. If they are a vindictive lot, and they almost certainly are, he may be forced to resign or watch the Rockets go down the crapper for the next few years. I don't think Les will watch MILLIONS evaporate without doing something. It's like attending the company picnic and announcing to the gathered employees the the Board and all the Senior Executives are crooks and going back to work Monday morning and expecting everything to be the same.
If Jeff admitted that it was a ref that told him, it could've caused a riff between refs, and might've damaged the playoffs in the eyes of the public. Jeff would've opened a can of worms that needed immediate fixing. You can't just stop the playoffs, but every other city would want an assurance that the refs don't play favorites.
I just dont get why it's van gundy's fault if journalists dont do their job... He said an official...the sharp reporter should ask questions to clarify...to corner him into clarifying. The dumb reporter makes assumptions. John Levesque clearly belongs in the dumb catagory. Why should JVG make the press' job easier? As much as this John guy said he wanted Van Gundy's head on a platter - I think he'd prefer to get his story handed to him on one. I've been a journalist...you dont let people slip through your net of questioning by accepting vague answers. The guy complains about a "misimpression" that JVG failed to clear up for several days. The thing is - it's not his job to make sure jounalists have the right story. It's theirs. If it's in JVG's interest to claify, you can bet that he would. If it's not in his interest, the responsibility of clarity falls to the journalist. In this case, they missed the catch.
If you have been in the press, I have not, you should realize that the press didn't say anything! JVG said something and the press merely reported their version of what he said. He did not correct them for nearly 10 days, and until his team was finished. Do not misinterpret this post. I am a fan of the Rox and a supporter of JVG as a good coach, but he may have stepped over the line and it may cost him. I have a lot of trouble blaming the press for him opening his mouth.
Total spin here folks. If the press tell their version then they are liars when saying it is Van Gundy's version. Liberals love this ploy ala "what is the word 'is'?".
