Officiating - what's the threshold for blame?

[Kiorrik]

There has been a lot of mention of how bad officiating in the league is at this moment. We all have our opinions on how good/how bad the refs are and some of us voice their opinions every now and then.

Now don't get me wrong, because I do agree with everyone saying "we didn't lose this game because of the refs". You never lose a game because of the refs, because, honestly, we *should* have just executed better. We *should* have not made as many mistakes as we did. We *should* have blabla etc.

But when do you start blaming the refs? When can you blame them for screwing up the game?

In my opinion, the best you can do is to not let the officiating get to you. If you play on, the way you did before, there shouldn't be any mental difference. If you *do* let the crappy officiating get to you, you're just not as good as the opposing team, if that's why you lose.

But really, when both teams show just as much desire to win, and play just as hard, you can honestly just count the number of points that would/would not have been scored.

In that latter case, did we lose many games by bad officiating? Or none at all?


.edit: note, there's two questions here. 1) what's the threshold; 2) did we lose many by (any) threshold?

[angryguy77]

there is an extent they can play a roll in the a loss. A team does need to execute and play through bad officiating, but with that being said, there have been a few games this year that they did cost us games. Also, no team should have to play a perfect game either to win, its next to impossible. The argument that a team that lost should have not thrown it away on that play or made a better pass on this play is a bit unfair. 

Bad calls affecting a game are  not determined by the quantity of bad calls but when they are called. When we played la this year is a perfect example of them cositng us a game. Portland with six men on the court. How do you miss that.

I think the refs come under fire in the nba not because they blow calls every game, but they seem to blow them a lot in the wide open under suspicious circumstances. Calls like the Scal blocking foul on Rose makes me scratch my head. I could go on and on but I dont want to turn this into more of a rant than it already is.

[jdpapa3]

The worst part is that threads blaming the refs always turn into "well, we should've played better so it didn't get to that point" arguments. Well, both teams generally make a ton of mistakes each game. The refs are a major, major part of each game and it is important to have competent refs in basketball. In my opinion, these refs are competent at following through with the fixing because their job is to prolong any series. More games=more money. Plain and simple.

There are times when the refs can't help though. For instance, Detroit was cooked from the beginning.

[Kiorrik]

The worst part is that threads blaming the refs always turn into "well, we should've played better so it didn't get to that point" arguments. Well, both teams generally make a ton of mistakes each game. The refs are a major, major part of each game and it is important to have competent refs in basketball.

Aye, that's why I thought I'd open this topic. To discuss when we can blame the refs, instead of if we should.

More games=more money. Plain and simple.

And that's a point that keeps escaping my mind.

[Rida]

here is one to ponder. Is the Celtics sans KG in the next round going to garner more or less ratings than the NBA's new love child Rose taking his hometown Chicago Bulls as the next heir apparent

If kg's back then the NBA wants that Cavs Celtics rematch. If hes not would they prefer to see the team in the the 3rd largest media market in the next round?