Ex-referee Tim Donaghy blows whistle on NBA dirty secrets

Who's this writing for the Los Angeles Times... Magic Johnson? "We was robbed" ??

 

And provide preferential (or distinctly non-preferential) treatment to key players - effectively rigging the game.

 

right.

I just keep hearing people say, "why wouldn't you want the Rockets to win a series when they have such a marketable figure in Yao Ming??"

It sounds to me like what's being said is not that they're favoring a team to move on...but that they're just generally favoring a series to be extended.

 

so we're back to you believe there's a conspiracy?

 

Max - that may be the silliest thing you've ever written. How is "favoring series extension" not rigging the outcome? If you're up 3-0 and the league manipulates a 3-3 tie, you've lost out on 3 opportunites to move on. Turning 4 opportunites into a "sudden death" game implies - THE OUTCOME IS RIGGED.

 

Heck - giving any ref a SPECIFIC instruction is rigging the game. It would be like telling a judge to "be wary of witness x's testimony" - you've impugned the impartiality necessary to make the case (game) fair.

 

I'm recounting what the allegations are, pgabriel. I've already posted in the "what do you think" thread....I said I don't know.

 

No, I suppose we're just defining "rigged" differently. I'm saying the same thing you're saying, though. I'm just saying the motivation is different. I'm saying what's implied here is that the motivation is to simply extend the series...I'm reading a lot of people say it's to have a particular team win a series....but that's not it. As I understand it, what he's saying is that they rigged particular games to extend a series...not to change the outcome of who ultimately wins, because they don't care....but to make sure they're maximizing revenue in certain series. As I understand it, that's what he's alleging.

 

bob delaney is a former state trooper

 

I see. Either way it's nefarious. I've already shared my disgust earlier in this thread - so I'll just move on...

 

how do you feel about it??? do you think he's telling anything remotely close to the truth??

 

I do believe the basic spirit of the allegations about the treatment of star players. This is absolutely a business, and I would believe that at least something mild has been given to referees, along the lines of:
"look, be careful that you don't get caught up in the moment and end up tossing X or Y out of a game. That would be a massively big deal, so make sure they really deserve it."

I think Donaghy's lawyers amplify that type of statement into a systematic conspiracy.

Business-wise, it would be like Apple wanting to make sure they stocked enough iPods and iPhones. Why wouldn't you want to offer to customers what they most want? Why wouldn't you want to make sure you had the product that made you profitable?

That's just the end-product of marketing personalities instead of the game. The NFL is superior in this sense, if you ask me. There are personal stories, but the actual *game* and the *teams* are what matters most to fans. If the NBA sold the game as the product (and they try, sometimes) and you had something like the NCAA type hysteria, then you don't have to suffer the types of player allegations they currently have.

That they NBA would push for a game 7 -- that's hard for me to believe, due to the risk of things blowing up in their faces. I also don't think the data, over the decades, support that we've been seeing more game 7's in the Stern era. (I don't know that for sure.) Whether organized crime / Vegas could get to refs and order a game 7... I don't know, but I give that higher odds than the NBA doing it.

 

I do think he is. And I think the league's reaction to JVG in 2005 confirms it.

As I stated previously - it's been hard to watch the league since the kobe-shaq lakers. That's when the refereeing really became ludicrously inconsistent and highly specialized for certain players. These allegations merely point out the obvious. The refs have control - and the league has manipulated said control. Ideally, it's to promote a fair take - but in retrospect there is no such thing as non-bias from the league, it wants to make money. Whether or not that results in actual rigging of team advancement, or just series length is immaterial - the damage is done.

It's really got me soured at the moment. I was hoping to see some games this coming season (last season was forfeit due to new child). Now I'm not so sure. I'm not sure how much basketball I can even watch after this. I love this team and I love the sport - but it's too painful to watch things unfold without at least an attempt at righteousness.

 

So the NBA needs everybody to start gambling to achieve mass popularity?

 

If enough people feel like that, then the NBA has a big problem.

 

And a part of me hopes they do. Something is rotten here and maybe the only way to rectify it is a dose of painful house-cleaning.

 

jvg confirms that refs discuss the rules?

 

Thanks for carrying the flag. I've been reading articles from various papers this morning and all the journalists seem to be on the League's side too ([aside]do they believe it or are they afraid of losing access for interviews?[/aside]). Many make this same argument that the League does a lousy job rigging outcomes.

They'll say (like the article posted in this thread) that the NBA is lousy at rigging because all these stars go to small-market teams and some small market teams have had uncommon success in the Finals. They answer the generic conspiracy theories but not the accusation from Donaghy -- that they altered the outcome of Game 6 of the WCF in 2002 so they could have the benefits of a Game 7. Not that they wanted the Lakers to win the series; just that they wanted a Game 7. Believing that they did that doesn't require you to believe the lottery is rigged (with the auditors they have, I find that highly unlikely) or that champions are predetermined.

Many articles go to debunking those things and can't really address the elephant in the room: that the refs in that 2002 game were doing so bad a job it is impossible to believe it wasn't on purpose. (Justice from the chron said these were good veteran refs so it's hard to believe they'd fix the game, they'd probably had a bad night at the office. If they're good veteran refs, how can you believe they'd do such a bad job unless they were trying to? How can you assume they are of good moral character just because they generally seem to be good at their jobs? That makes no sense at all.)

 

How are the journalists missing the point so much? Justice's article today deserves a huge, "objection: nonresponsive." Because it's not even discussing the allegations...it's what he seems to be assuming the allegations are.

 

? No, when JVG called out the refs following game 3 of the rox-mavs series stern went ballistic. Because it was spot on.

They targeted a specific player. That's plainly unfair and has a direct result on the outcome. It's an unfair advantage and is tantamount to cheating, or rigging, or whatever you want to call it.

I think the NBA just got greedy. They were used to sending refs tapes/comments etc to improve the game, and then started making more personal influence - such as "don't give techs to this guy unless you really have to" and "watch player x's screens - the owner is pissed". This is bad enough, but "extend this series" makes me feel the league owes fans their money back and they deserve some form of fraud charge. Cause that's what it is - you advertise a fair game and then provide the opposite.