Ex-referee Tim Donaghy blows whistle on NBA dirty secrets

Nobody questions that the NCAA Tournament is rigged nor do they whine about the terrible officiating of the tournament. Don't tell me that the only officials who are capable of calling an NBA game is from the small pool of referrees currently available NBA refs. How did they get their jobs anyways? It's nepotism to the nth degree. The whole thing stinks and needs to be cleaned up.

Don't you find it odd that the players, coaches and owners cannot say anything about the officiating or incur the wrath of Stern?

 

Because according to rules in place, Yao was getting away with something illegal, how can cleaning up something that's illegal be unfair.

 

It's unfair when you target one particular person for it, on the whim of an owner from the opposite team.

Let's say we were playing one-on-one, and you traveled every time you made a move to the basket - but I consistently reached over your back for rebounds.

If my "manager" then approached the ref and said, "watch out for pgab's traveling" and he did and you lost thanks in part to 400 traveling violations, while I still managed to go over your back all the time - we'd have an issue.

It would be more prudent and fair to simply say "hey, we are getting some complaints about a few calls and we think some of them are legitimate - make an effort to be a bit more precise."

But they didn't. And I'd argue it's because Stern knew that Cuban had some influence, and that it was a conveniant way to extend what was becoming the best 1st round series out there that season.

 

I know. It was the Justice article that made me go read a bunch of other articles to see if everyone is as r****ded as he is. As it turns out, they're not, but they still seem to obfuscate the point.

But, I did appreciate the dirt Justice brings up at the end of his article. How he can be so forgiving of the league knowing this stuff I don't understand either:

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/bk/bkn/5832413.html

The feeling it gives me is that the officiating crew has a culture of corruption. They feel like the outcomes of games are not so sacred, so they can break little rules here and there about socializing with players and coaches, etc. Then it creeps outward and they're okay with making calls for people they like/dislike. Then, it doesn't seem like such a bad thing if a higher-up tells you to favor one team so the company can have a Game 7. Plus, they figure they can swap their 1st class tickets for coach and pocket the difference without claiming the profits in their income tax filings. And then, in this culture, you have a guy who says "we're doing all this stuff, what's so bad about taking a little money to tell some gamblers about the referee crew?"

 

if les saw something to complain about he could also. cuban has no more power than him, and cuban has gotten into alot more trouble than van gundy ever did for openly complaining about the league, wasn't he fined $1MM once?

furthermore, yao and shaq are unique individuals because of their sheer size. so if I was a foot taller than most of the people I was on that playground with and 6 in tallers than than the next talles, I would understand why someone would be "watching" me.

 

How about a more objective view of the situation. Justice is tainted

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?id=3436503

Donaghy's claims serious, troubling for NBA

By Lester Munson
ESPN.com

Legal Ramifications Of Donaghy's AllegationsDisgraced former NBA referee Tim Donaghy asserted in publicly filed court papers Tuesday that six other officials had manipulated the outcomes of four NBA games, including two playoff games. Although Donaghy and his attorney, John F. Lauro, offered detail to support their claims of misconduct by referees, team executives and NBA executives, they did not offer the identities of the teams or the individuals.

Donaghy's explosive charges came in response to a demand from the NBA that Donaghy pay $1 million to the league, which claims to be a victim of the referee's admitted crimes. The league's demand for $1 million in restitution and Donaghy's response raise a number of legal questions. Here are some of the questions and their answers:

Donaghy pleaded guilty to two felony charges this past summer, admitting he was guilty of gambling violations and money laundering. Everything seemed to have settled down, with Donaghy cooperating with federal investigators and awaiting his sentence. What prompted these developments in the middle of the NBA Finals?

Donaghy's sentencing is scheduled for July 14. He faces a maximum of 25 years in prison for conspiracy to engage in wire fraud and transmitting betting information through interstate commerce. In the usual course of presentence investigations and procedures, the federal probation department asks the "victim" about the damage resulting from the crime. As a "victim" of Donaghy's crimes, the NBA claimed in a June 5 letter that it was entitled to $1 million in restitution from Donaghy. Restitution, or the reimbursement of the victim's losses, typically pays back a bank or a charity for money lost in an embezzlement or a theft. Donaghy obviously damaged the NBA and its reputation, but there is no indication he stole any money from the league. The NBA claimed that it was forced to spend the nice round sum of $1 million investigating Donaghy and the damage he caused, and the league wants its money back. Clearly enraged by the unexpected demand from the NBA for $1 million, Donaghy and Lauro retaliated with detailed accusations of manipulation by other referees. It is the worst nightmare for the NBA, which might be considering a withdrawal of its demand for restitution.


Are Donaghy's allegations of referee misconduct new? How serious are his charges?

Donaghy first began telling the FBI about other referees in July 2007. He gave federal investigators additional information in a meeting in September. His claims are serious. They include allegations that the NBA attempted to insulate star players from technical fouls to build up ticket sales and television ratings. Most seriously, he claims there was a successful effort by two referees to extend a playoff series to a seventh game, assisting in the victory for the team that trailed 3-2 in the series. The accusations are the kinds of things that fuel conspiracy theories that abound among NBA fans, but Donaghy is now adding dates, places and games. According to Donaghy and Lauro, two referees in 2002 deliberately ignored fouls that resulted in injuries and called "made-up fouls" to give addition foul shots to one team. Even worse, Donaghy asserts that the referees did all of it because they were "company men" who "always act[ed] in the interest of the NBA, and that night, it was in the NBA's interest to add another game to the series."


Is it legal for Donaghy to go public with these charges?

Most paperwork in a presentence investigation in federal court is impounded. It is filed in secret and is available only to the judge, the lawyers and the probation department. The NBA's letter demanding restitution, for example, was filed in secret. But in a clever use of federal rules and procedures, Lauro filed Donaghy's explosive assertions in a public letter. The purpose of the letter, Lauro said, was to provide "a summary of Tim's cooperation" with the FBI. But its real purpose appears to be to fire back at the NBA after its demand for $1 million in restitution. As a cooperating witness admitting guilt and showing contrition, Donaghy was well on his way to a reduced sentence. Then the NBA makes its demand for $1 million. If Donaghy cannot make restitution, his jail sentence could be extended. Donaghy's plans for a reduced sentence were suddenly in jeopardy as a result of the NBA's demand. If Donaghy were to do additional time in prison, he could get even by pulling the curtain back on multiple episodes of alleged misconduct by NBA executives, owners and referees.


Will Donaghy's charges result in other investigations and other charges against other referees or anyone else?

The charges against Donaghy were the result of his gambling and his use of his position to manipulate games for gamblers. There is no claim of any gambling by anyone in the charges Donaghy made Tuesday. If his claims are true, they clearly show misconduct that could result in NBA discipline, but they might not be federal crimes. Because the games Donaghy describes occurred in various cities around the U.S., there might be more than one set of prosecutors looking into his accusations. The first sign that any of these potential investigations is under way will come July 14. If Donaghy's sentencing is postponed, it will be a clear sign that other investigations are under way on his claims.

What is the next step in the case against Donaghy?

Donaghy's attorneys want to see all the NBA's records of its investigation into Donaghy. The NBA investigation, according to Donaghy's court papers, included interviews of 57 NBA referees. Donaghy and his attorneys have asked a federal judge in Brooklyn to give them a subpoena for all NBA records resulting from the investigative efforts. The NBA claims the investigation cost $1 million, but Donaghy wants proof. Lauro argues that the investigation also was directed at other referees and other situations that did not involve Donaghy and that Donaghy should not be required to make restitution for that portion of the investigation. U.S. District Court Judge Carol Amon will decide whether Donaghy can go through the NBA's records.

 

If it's not dirty - why was stern so incensed at the accusation?

It's irrelevant about fines or what les "could have done".

Moreover - while cuban has mouthed off - he never questioned the integrity fo league. Thus the furor over JVGs comments - which you are having difficulty understanding.

lol - and yet Shaq made a career out of charging into people while Yao has to get into a wrestling match just to get low-post position. Your argument only reinforces the perception of inconsistent or tainted refereeing.

 

Something else that bothers me about this one. A lot of folks (especially journalists) like to argue Cuban is last person Stern would want to do a favor for because of their antagonistic relationship. However, given that Cuban was always making a big stink in public, the League may have been more likely to help him out so they didn't have to suffer another round of Cuban complaining to the press. They could capitulate and have some ease, or they can leave it status quo and have Cuban imply the refs were favoring the Rockets after every game.

I'm not saying that one was rigged, necessarily. I think JVG was right that the League should have transparency about instructions to the refs. But, the Stern-would-do-no-favors-for-Cuban argument isn't good.

 

no its not because the implication is that cuban is getting away with something no one else could. that's a false claim. the reason jvg got fined is because of the way he presented his case, as if there was a conspiracy against yao.

this proves my point about shaq, shaq is no more of a bull than any other big men in history, its just there's a difference between getting bumped by hakeem and getting bumped by shaq. my point exactly

 

That's not the point. If any owner pulled this off it would be unfair.

Which appeared accurate then, and has been reinforced by these accusations now.

 

the accusation that the league looked at enforcing a rule already in place. hardly inflamatory

 

On one particular player especially critically. On the suggestion of the opposing team's manager. I think I have said this already.

And why did they not talk about enforcing ALL the rules in place? Where was the detailed memo to stop Dirk from flailing about whenever he faded away from Ryan Bowen?

 

Tell you what pgabs:

Explain why this statement

is not preferable to "watch out for player x's move y" in the interest of calling the game fairly.

Until then, I don't think we'll have an understanding.

 

Whoa ... Ralph Nader is also getting on it:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=neumann/080611

Nader still wants NBA to take long look in mirror
By Thomas Neumann
Page 2

Six years ago, consumer advocate Ralph Nader sent a letter to NBA commissioner David Stern asking him to review the officiating in the now-infamous Game 6 of the Western Conference finals between the Lakers and the Kings.

He was lampooned by some for his foray into the sports arena and skewered by Lakers fans, who questioned whether he's a Kings fan, which he's not.

The Lakers subsequently won Game 7 and their third consecutive championship, and the controversy gradually quieted.

Then came Tuesday's allegations, in a court filing by disgraced former referee Tim Donaghy, that two of the three referees who worked that Kings-Lakers game altered its outcome.

Now, Nader says he feels vindicated.

"There were some suspicions that the referees that were chosen were company men," Nader said. "[Stern] doesn't have to say anything. He doesn't even have to wink in their direction. They know an extra game means more revenue."

The Lakers shot 27 free throws in the fourth quarter to nine by the visiting Kings, and LA won by four.

"The Sacramento Kings were one win away from the NBA Finals," Nader said. "That cost them their season."

Nader currently is running for president for the fourth time, this time as an independent. He readily admits there are far more important issues in America than NBA officiating, but he sees it as a relevant consumer issue in that many fans see sports as a sanctuary and deserve to believe in its legitimacy. Nader still would like to see the NBA's officiating practices put under a microscope -- by an independent, objective entity.

"There should be a non-partisan commission and an independent review," Nader said. "David Stern has a conflict of interest."

Nader said he did speak to Stern in 2002 about reviewing the Kings-Lakers game, but he simply got lip service from the commissioner.

"He was a bit standoffish," Nader said. "He said they'd look into it, but it was really a whitewash."

Nader pointed to Sunday's Game 2 of the NBA Finals, in which the Celtics shot 38 free throws to the Lakers' 10, as another incident that raises conspiracy suspicions among fans. Further, Nader said NBA policies contribute to an environment in which an officiating cover-up could flourish -- specifically the league's practice of fining players and coaches who speak out about officiating.

"You have a corporate dictatorship," Nader said. "Players are muzzled and can be fined upwards of $100,000 [if they speak up about officiating]. It's a closed system. We need some sort of voice. … otherwise, cover-ups remain cover-ups. There's no deterrent."

Nader said the NBA could alleviate some fans' suspicions by revealing the specific criteria the NBA uses to select referees for playoff games and allowing players to speak out about officiating once the season is over. He also like the idea of the league use an independent body to oversee its officiating.

Nader advocates lifting sports antitrust exemptions and urges fans to organize and speak out if they truly want to see their concerns addressed. He founded League of Fans to try to do just that, he said. The larger and louder the voice, the better.

"It's hard to crack a corporate dictatorship," Nader said.

Thomas Neumann is an editor for Page 2. You can contact him here.

 

Actually people question the NCAA every year... the difference is the number of available refs for NCAA games and their affiliation isn't with the NCAA. They are hired as independent contractors from the different conferences. The NCAA can then pick the best of those and contract them for the NCAA tournament games.

One of the UK blogs I get on feed reader talked a bit about this just yesterday..

http://www.ukwildcatcountry.com/2008/06/tim-donaghy-and-travis-correll-do_11.html

Forgot to add: It seems like the best thing for the NBA to do would be to either separate themselves from the refs or figure out a new way to govern the performance evaluations.

 

On this point I agree. There should be a separate referree's entitity that is not tied to the NBA or even the NCAA. Some checks and balances need to be in place too to prevent rigging of games. I dunno, like holding referees accountable for their calls and to handle complaints in an open and fair manner.

 

that's on cuban

 

I meant to respond to your quote of yourself,

"It would be more prudent and fair to simply say "hey, we are getting some complaints about a few calls and we think some of them are legitimate - make an effort to be a bit more precise."

I assumed you were saying instead of singling a player out, well cuban had already singled yao ming so that's a moot point, if that's your point

 

No it's not. It's on the league then to not take Cuban's complaint and pass it on in such an obviously unjust manner. They could have just stated what I recommended.

It's absolutely ridiculous of you to assume that this is Cuban's responsibility - I mean it's flat-out stupid to assume that. Nobody should be influencing the refs about particular aspects of the game - especially the owners of particular teams!

You have not answered my question.