Author Topic: The Curse of Violet Palmer  (Read 17384 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: The Curse of Violet Palmer
« Reply #30 on: April 29, 2008, 12:23:25 PM »

Offline X Man

  • Xavier Tillman
  • Posts: 29
  • Tommy Points: 6
  • One Game At A Time
I feel just like Nick, I would never base my opinion based on gender.  i feel the refs should be invisible and it just so happens that in game 3 when the heat was on and the call were made the collective basketball conscience (I was watching with non-Celtic fans) shouted, "HHUH?" and when we looked up it was her making the call. I watched the entire season on NBALP and I must tell you a couple of the calls she made towards the end of the game were the first time they were made all season.  I think a 66-16 team deserves better than that.  Is consistency too much to ask for??
On the road to immortality

Re: The Curse of Violet Palmer
« Reply #31 on: April 30, 2008, 10:10:45 AM »

Offline Section 87

  • NCE
  • Derrick White
  • Posts: 252
  • Tommy Points: 56
2008 Regular Season - Celtics stats

With Violet Palmer officiating:
Celtics winning percentage 100%
Celtics points per game 102.3
Opponents points per game 90.3
Celtics personal fouls 20.0
Opponents personal fouls 21.7

Without Violet Palmer officiating:
Celtics winning percentage 80%
Celtics points per game 100.5
Opponents points per game 90.3
Celtics personal fouls 22.3
Opponents personal fouls 22.2

So, with Palmer on the crew, we have a better winning percentage, more points per game, and fewer personal fouls called against the Celtics; compared to games without Palmer. I think I like this curse! Palmer must be part of Stern's blatant pro-Celtics officiating plan.

edited the 2nd part to say "without" instead of "with" - they both said "with"...Hope you don't mind.  I know it was just a typo and I know this is what you intended - Redz
« Last Edit: April 30, 2008, 10:28:32 AM by Redz »

Re: The Curse of Violet Palmer
« Reply #32 on: April 30, 2008, 10:40:48 AM »

Offline NicaraguanFan

  • Derrick White
  • Posts: 264
  • Tommy Points: 28
I dont like to blame refs for losing. I mean a bad ref would be ugly against both teams.  If it wasn't the case the ref should be biased and I think it is not happening in NBA...

NF.
#18 is coming...

Re: The Curse of Violet Palmer
« Reply #33 on: April 30, 2008, 10:51:28 AM »

Offline crownsy

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8469
  • Tommy Points: 157
I dont like to blame refs for losing. I mean a bad ref would be ugly against both teams.  If it wasn't the case the ref should be biased and I think it is not happening in NBA...

NF.

I beg to differ. i mean, this is a league that had an offical fixing point spreads last year. I really don't trust its officating cause stern says "uh...yea totally only one guy who the mob got to.."

now, if he had done a fair and open investigation, and not closed by letting 10+ unnamed refs off the hook for gambling infractions
“I will hurt you for this. A day will come when you think you’re safe and happy and your joy will turn to ashes in your mouth. And you will know the debt is paid.” – Tyrion

Re: The Curse of Violet Palmer
« Reply #34 on: April 30, 2008, 10:55:02 AM »

Online Donoghus

  • Global Moderator
  • Walter Brown
  • ********************************
  • Posts: 32893
  • Tommy Points: 1738
  • What a Pub Should Be
2008 Regular Season - Celtics stats

With Violet Palmer officiating:
Celtics winning percentage 100%
Celtics points per game 102.3
Opponents points per game 90.3
Celtics personal fouls 20.0
Opponents personal fouls 21.7

Without Violet Palmer officiating:
Celtics winning percentage 80%
Celtics points per game 100.5
Opponents points per game 90.3
Celtics personal fouls 22.3
Opponents personal fouls 22.2

So, with Palmer on the crew, we have a better winning percentage, more points per game, and fewer personal fouls called against the Celtics; compared to games without Palmer. I think I like this curse! Palmer must be part of Stern's blatant pro-Celtics officiating plan.

edited the 2nd part to say "without" instead of "with" - they both said "with"...Hope you don't mind.  I know it was just a typo and I know this is what you intended - Redz

Wasn't Palmer part of the crew that did the Utah loss in the Garden?


2010 CB Historical Draft - Best Overall Team

Re: The Curse of Violet Palmer
« Reply #35 on: April 30, 2008, 11:04:12 AM »

Offline jay_jay54

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1307
  • Tommy Points: 266
2008 Regular Season - Celtics stats

With Violet Palmer officiating:
Celtics winning percentage 100%
Celtics points per game 102.3
Opponents points per game 90.3
Celtics personal fouls 20.0
Opponents personal fouls 21.7

Without Violet Palmer officiating:
Celtics winning percentage 80%
Celtics points per game 100.5
Opponents points per game 90.3
Celtics personal fouls 22.3
Opponents personal fouls 22.2

So, with Palmer on the crew, we have a better winning percentage, more points per game, and fewer personal fouls called against the Celtics; compared to games without Palmer. I think I like this curse! Palmer must be part of Stern's blatant pro-Celtics officiating plan.

edited the 2nd part to say "without" instead of "with" - they both said "with"...Hope you don't mind.  I know it was just a typo and I know this is what you intended - Redz

Wasn't Palmer part of the crew that did the Utah loss in the Garden?
Yes she was,don't know if you were really asking a question,or making a statement,but i was going to post the same idea.She was a ref.when they did a lopsided officiating job.But since that game she over and over made calls in aganist Boston,ive witness her calling a couple other games,and Utah playing in 1 of them also.She seems to favor certain players,such as D.Williams for sure.I do not want to sound like a sexist,but in her case,it might be a man thing more than a fix-job.I think she has a extra liking towards certain players, the next game i saw her officiate in,with Utah playing ,she did the same thing,gave D.Williams free passes over,and over to the charity strike.

Re: The Curse of Violet Palmer
« Reply #36 on: April 30, 2008, 11:07:50 AM »

Offline NicaraguanFan

  • Derrick White
  • Posts: 264
  • Tommy Points: 28
Yes she was...  but even in that case our record is still better when she is in...   What I dont like about this "violet" discussion is some people are blaming one single ref for our disgrace in playoff and it is totally unfair.


NF.
#18 is coming...

Re: The Curse of Violet Palmer
« Reply #37 on: April 30, 2008, 11:11:35 AM »

Offline jay_jay54

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1307
  • Tommy Points: 266
Yes she was...  but even in that case our record is still better when she is in...   What I dont like about this "violet" discussion is some people are blaming one single ref for our disgrace in playoff and it is totally unfair.


NF.
I don't think you are accusing me personally,but for the record,thats not how i see it.The refs were bad,but had little to do with our losts in ATL.

Re: The Curse of Violet Palmer
« Reply #38 on: April 30, 2008, 11:22:36 AM »

Offline NicaraguanFan

  • Derrick White
  • Posts: 264
  • Tommy Points: 28
Sure jay_jay54 I am not acussing anyone in particular.  What I am trying to point out is that there is not anything like "Violet Curse".  Focusing in officiating and in one ref is not fair. We lost game 3 in the 3 rd quarter because we werent hustling enough and MAYBE because the horn thing... And in game 4 we had the same lack of hustling in the 4th quarter.

If we have the named a curse it should be "Ourselves curse".

NF.

#18 is coming...

Re: The Curse of Violet Palmer
« Reply #39 on: April 30, 2008, 11:27:07 AM »

Offline Section 87

  • NCE
  • Derrick White
  • Posts: 252
  • Tommy Points: 56
Oopps ... I should never crunch numbers before coffee. Yes, Palmer was on the officiating crew for the Utah game. My mistake. I guess that makes the winning percentage 67% with Palmer and 81% without. I thought I was on to something here, but now I've got egg on my face. Goes well with the coffee.

 :-[

Still, with Palmer, Celtics PF = 20.5, without, Celtics PF = 22.2. But I guess maybe she isn't a big part of Stern's pro-Celtics conspiracy.

Re: The Curse of Violet Palmer
« Reply #40 on: April 30, 2008, 11:46:05 AM »

Offline TAllen

  • Joe Mazzulla
  • Posts: 148
  • Tommy Points: 16
WPOC: "Worst Possible Officiating Crew"

Ken Mauer
Violet Palmer
Bennett Salvatore

Ken Mauer
Violet Palmer
Bennie Adams

Re: The Curse of Violet Palmer
« Reply #41 on: April 30, 2008, 12:01:02 PM »

Offline Schupac

  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 958
  • Tommy Points: 235
Keep in mind when tryin to crunch numbers with an officiating crew, what's far more important than the number of fouls called is when and how they are called.

A ref might only call one foul on a team, but if it is a terrible call, or if it is a momentum changer, that's way more important than some cheesy fouls in the opening minutes.

But anyways, I think everyone can agree Violet and Mauer are... dubious in their calls.  They'll make a bad call, then compound it by getting mad and making more.

Re: The Curse of Violet Palmer
« Reply #42 on: April 30, 2008, 12:12:47 PM »

Offline Section 87

  • NCE
  • Derrick White
  • Posts: 252
  • Tommy Points: 56
"I think everyone can agree ..."

I see statements like this a lot here on CelticsBlog, especially when discussing perceived ref bias or imagined Stern conspiracies. I don't believe if for a minute. I think everyone agrees with me.


 ;)


Re: The Curse of Violet Palmer
« Reply #43 on: April 30, 2008, 02:22:32 PM »

Offline Schupac

  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 958
  • Tommy Points: 235
"I think everyone can agree ..."

I see statements like this a lot here on CelticsBlog, especially when discussing perceived ref bias or imagined Stern conspiracies. I don't believe if for a minute. I think everyone agrees with me.


 ;)



I hear you... but in my defense, I wear glasses, and sometimes dress-shirts.  I'm pretty sure I know what I'm talking about.



More seriously, I'm not even saying Violet or Mauer are in on a conspiracy.  They are just bad at their job.