Will the refs be better, worse, or the same?

I think it will get better, David Stern will clean it up.

 

instant replay plz. You can challenge a call, but it uses up one of your timeouts.

 

How can they possibly be "better?"

Some people really have no idea how hard it is to call an NBA game.

 

Are you joking? Just because it's hard doesn't make they are doing their best.

I'm sick of the homer calls, the superstar calls, and the "refs should not decide the game so let's allow players get mauled in the last 2 minutes" non-calls.

 

Very true; not that it's remotely comparable, but I was coaching and refereeing youth basketball games this summer for the first time. Granted these NBA refs are trained professionals, but I can clearly see how All-Star players and intimidating coaches can easily affect one's judgment.

Definitely one of the toughest jobs in sports, but it didn't always be this poor.

 

I understand it is hard, but it's ridiculous...the notion of the superstar call and the hold-the-whistle during the last minute are things that need to be fixed. They shouldn't EXIST!

Get rid of these and create a flopping review board to issue fines, and we'll be good to go.

 

I think the refs will feel more pressure than ever before to appear fair and balanced. What that will result in, we'll see. I agree with Kelly that the incredible difficulty of calling the game well is greatly underestimated.

There are countless articles and editorials on this. I found this one interesting:
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/basketball/nba/2007-07-25-Referee-fixing_N.htm
because it quoted some NBA refs (who requested anonymity because they are forbidden to speak on the subject).

I hope Stern takes advantage of this moment to do an overhaul of how officials are recruited, selected, trained, monitored, and reviewed. I hope current refs can give some input on how best to revamp the system.

Even if only one ref did this crime, it's ramifications will fall on every ref in the league. The scrutiny will be terribly intense. Everyone will be harder on them than ever before, and will feel justified in doing so. Stern no longer gets to just shrug and smirk away accusations of biased calls. As the case progresses, it will remain in the spotlight all year long. He makes a guilty plea. Rumors surface of which mobsters he's tied to. First day in court, etc, etc.

I hope adjustments can be made to make calling a game as easy as possible for them. Everyone wants more accountability from the refs but I think that just means that they want the opportunity to blast him/her out for a blown call/non-call. I don't see that improving the quality of the calls. I could be wrong.

 

Yeah, it sucks that the NBA has decided to do away with hand-checking, bumping cutters, forcing players out of the post, while still allowing players to decide what happens and using a bit of discretion in the last two minutes of the game.

I'd really like it if they went back to the way the game was in 2000-01. That was an awesome brand of basketball to watch. And here comes the smiley:

 

Perhaps you can explain to me what no one has ever successfully explained to me which is why 'swallowing' a whistle at the end of the game is 'letting the players play'? To me it is only allowing 1/2 the players to play. (OK, bearhugs as pics are the O, but still...)

I hate the scrum which marks and mars the last play(s) of a game. If a contest is 48 minutes long then referee consistently for 48 FULL minutes.

 

That's what I hate.

 

Me, too - but - can you, or anyone, give its genesis as 'logic'?

 

There are charges that are let go, moving screens, push-offs, hooks and the like. I think it's pretty even. The offense gets away with just as much, as far I as I can see.

As far as your second point, well taken. I guess it's just personal preference. That's the game I've grown up with, and I kinda like it. Here comes another smiley:

 

Need get better, not the same. Refs in NFL are getting better each year.

 

Instant Replay baby! That's the reason why NFL refs tries to get every call right. NBA refs are responsible to no one. They call home teams differently for the most part, give star treatment to certain players while call fouls on other players every chance they get. It is ok to be wrong on certain calls, the problem is they don't call the game without bias.

 

Everyone is a homer for their favorite team. But honestly the refs do a pretty decent job. They could add a fourth just to make sure all four major angles are covered but the game is so fast; and just like in the trenches in football you could probably call a foul (or traveling / palming....personal pet peeve) on every play down the court.

 

Yes, I also hate the call and non-call cases. Just look at Yao Ming, he gets no respect from refs because he is a Chinese (not 100% cases), then get many non-calls.

 

well they probably weren't trying to make the right call before so now that they're trying, i'm sure it'll get better.

same here. even as i've always thought it was contradictory to say "let the players decide" and then to not call a foul when a player decides to foul, i still like it. i think it's just that so many things can be called on any given play, that on the last play, we'd just like to see what happens between the players. two things about that.

i think the biggest reason is that we just don't want a ref screwing up such a huge call. kind of like we'll let some guilty people free to make sure we don't lock up any innocent people, we'll let a few correct calls not be made to make sure an incorrect one isn't made. as you can see from the past few days, people like few things more than b****ing about refs. so the fewer whistles to b**** about at the end of a game, the better, as far as i'm concerned.


however, to me, reaching violates the whole "let the players decide" principle. being physical, whether it's the offensive player bowling through the defender (see rip hamilton on tony parker in the finals 2 years ago) or the defensive guy bodying up the offensive player (see lots of plays), is fine with me, and the strongest survives. but when you reach and slap a guy on the arm for either a steal or knock away, then you've essentially taken away the offensive players right to decide the game. you can be strong and physical on contact, but if someone slaps your arm while trying to knock the ball away, no amount of strength can really overcome that and thus the defender has decided he wants a foul called on him.

this happened when illinois got knocked out of the first round of the tourney this year. the guy basically got his arms pinned down and couldn't even put up a shot. you can't let stuff like that go. you have to at least give guys a chance. but once they've got a chance, then i kind of like seeing who can fight through the contact and get it done or is good enough to avoid the contact or superstar enough to avoid the contact (b/c the D is too scared to do anything).

 

Instant replay would be harder to implement in the NBA.

In football, each play is followed by 30 seconds of non-play (huddle, move the chains, spot the ball, etc.) where a break in the action for a replay review could be easily called. If another play is begun, then the window for a reply is gone.

Basketball is more of a continuous flow. If there is a questionable non-call and 2 seconds later a team grabs a rebound and scores on a fast break, how would they "break" the action?

I think it would only be feasible to review called fouls, out-of-bounds, shot-clock violations, last second shots (as they do now) -where a definite break in play has occurred. Ideally - it can be very effective to give refs a second look at flops.

 

I'll give you that both sides get away with a whole lotta 'stuff'. And I, too, and even much older than you, have grown 'up' with it - and still do not understand the logic, or like the reality.

The game is what it is because of a balance of the rules and the suspension thereof is 'scrummy' IMHO/to my taste.