Celtics draw dream ref assignments for Game 1

[paintitgreen]

Boston is 3-1 in the playoffs with Ed F. Rush and now he does a 5th Celtics game already in the playoffs?  Unheard of.

Is there a website with the breakdowns of who officiated what games? Has any referee officiated 3 Lakers games in the playoffs? 4? Keep in mind, the Celtics have played 5 more games than the Lakers have in the playoffs. I'd also love to know which games he officiated and particularly whether they were in Boston or on the road. As you can see from the board, we're not exactly thrilled either to be having such an incompetent ref officiating Game 1.

Also, 3-1 is a 75% winning percentage. We won 80% of our games in the regular season. Should the Celtics be whining that all the refs are conspiring against us because our winning percentage is lower in the playoffs than it was in the regular season? (I guess, considering the "anti-Celtic bias" conspiracy theories on this board, I should keep that comment to myself.)

I think the playoffs overall have been called fairly consistently - they're letting a lot more contact go, just like they do every postseason. Granted, the officials are ridiculous a lot of the time, but I don't see too many teams with gripes. The refs gave the Spurs some bad calls, they gave the Lakers some bad calls, they gave the Pistons some bad calls, they gave the Celtics some bad calls. It would be better if they were giving nobody bad calls, but it seems to even out on the whole. There's nothing like the LA v. Sacramento, LA v. Portland or Miami v. Dallas hatchet jobs going on this year, at least not from what I see.

Boston is 2-1 in the playoffs with Bavetta and 1-1 with Foster.

And Boston is 12-8 overall in the playoffs, a slightly lower winning % than 2-1 and better than 1-1. God, you'd think we were a 40 win team getting carried to the Finals by beneficial officiating. We won 66 games and beat every single team in the regular season with a 10-point average point differential, the best since the Bulls of the 90s.

Meanwhile, of the Lakers three playoff losses, two featured Ed F. Rush (and I can bet what the F stands for) including an infamous Game 4 in Utah that went into OT despite Utah having a 45-25 FT attempt advantage.

The other playoff loss saw Dick Bavetta on the court.

Which Lakers games did Ed F. Rush officiate, including any games he officiated in which the Lakers won? Same question for Bavetta.

And I think "infamous" is a bit much. It was a 21-19 difference until 3 minutes into the 4th when the Jazz lead ballooned to 10 and they started just pounding the ball down low to milk the clock and wear down the Lakers' weak interior defense. Then there were 8 Jazz free throws in the last 30 seconds of overtime because the Lakers had to foul. 

In that game, the Lakers got called for more fouls because they are not a very good defensive ball club. I'm not saying they're bad, but they're not very good, and that's particularly so when you have Pau Gasol trying to defend a physical post up player like Carlos Boozer.

And to remind you, the foul and free throw numbers in that series as a whole:
Game  Utah PF   LA PF      LA FT     Utah FT
 1      33        27        46         30
 2      30        20        43         16
 3      28        23        37         28
 4      27        33        25         45
 5      31        20        42         28
 6      26        24        38         25
Total  175       147       231        172
Avg.    29.2      24.5      38.5       28.7

So were the Lakers getting an unfair advantage in every other game, particularly Game 2 when the Lakers had a 43-16 free throw advantage? Take out Game 4, and the Jazz were called for almost 7 more fouls per game while the Lakers shot almost 16 more throws per game. 

These officiating assignments were no accident and the statistical trend would be clearly in the Celtics favor with this crew, obviously.

"Obviously"? Come on. You're as entitled to your opinion as anybody else. And honestly you might be right, I haven't watched those Lakers games as closely as I have the Celtics game (even though I do live in So Cal myself so I've seen a good amount of Lakers basketball this year) and maybe they have had games called unfairly in the playoffs. But it's still an opinion, not an "obvious" fact.

And to be honest, considering your team won two Western Conference titles (both of which led to championships) with some notoriously shady officiating within the past ten years, your claims are going to fall on deaf ears to anyone other than Lakers fans.

By the way, I love the fact that Lakers fans are over here posting. I liked the Cleveland posters who came over here, too, it makes it more interesting to have differing views on the boards. I hope you don't get pushed away from the board by less than welcoming comments from some posters. I think most of us like having visitors.

And to show I'm not specifically picking on you:

As long as we see as little of kenny mauer as possible I think we will be golden. THat guy does nothing but give crappy calls toward the celts.

 ... and Bennett Salvatore, and Joey Crawford, and Violet Palmer, and Eddie F. Rush, etc. I'd love for Tommy to stop by and have a chat with those who feel there's absolutely no anti-Celtic bias within the officiating ranks ...

Come on. Tommy is more biased for the Celtics than anybody can be biased against the Celtics. I love him, especially as a postgame commentator, when he is just intelligently breaking down the game, but when he calls games, he is as biased as can be.

All in all, here's to a great series. These are two outstanding teams - one of the best passing offenses I've seen in the NBA against one of the most sound team defenses I've seen in the NBA. We have All Stars galore, numerous future Hall of Famers, and most of all, two teams who are hungry to win it all. Should be a phenomenal series. Go Celtics.

[nickagneta]

As long as we see as little of kenny mauer as possible I think we will be golden. THat guy does nothing but give crappy calls toward the celts.

 ... and Bennett Salvatore, and Joey Crawford, and Violet Palmer, and Eddie F. Rush, etc. I'd love for Tommy to stop by and have a chat with those who feel there's absolutely no anti-Celtic bias within the officiating ranks ... maybe some of the C's as well ... they have a bit of a different take on it. I've been watching the Celtics for over 40 years, I've seen the changes and the progression of officiating in the NBA, and it amazes me that anyone can think that the refs are completely objective all the time ... sorry, but that's not remotely the truth.

I don't think thier objective, they give calls to stars, but i don't think there's a bias

i watch plenty of thursday night b-ball when our boys aren't on, and in every game, the officals are horrid.

the incompatance of the NBA officals is the problem, not some vast conspiracy against certain teams.

I never said there was a "vast conspiracy", I said they aren't objective all the time, they make horrendous calls, and that some of them don't like the C's and favor opposing teams ... and that's the truth. Check the amazing foul discrepencies in many of the Celtic's games this year if you think they're completely objective toward them ... it's terrible.

I'm sorry, but those who think that none of them have any agendas beyond calling a "fair" game are a bit naive' ... and to think back to some of the more egregious calls made against us this year, it's hard to think that Celtic fans would make excuses for them.

To think that they're all just "horrible" officials is a bit ridiculous ... most of these guys have been doing this job for years and years, don't you think it's a bit strange that they become bad refs all of a sudden? Doesn't it make more sense that there's something else going on here?

These guys know what they're doing, and saying they're all just "bad" now is kind of short-sighted, I feel. These veteran officials have been doing this a long time, and yet this year they all just happen to be worse than usual ... it makes no sense whatsoever. One of these guys was just recently fired because he bet on games ... do you honestly think he's the only one who's capable of leaning in favor of one team or another? I just don't buy it ... not for a second.

I think there are some very good refs, and I think some are just plain lousy, but honest. But I also think there's a few who have other motives besides objectivity and integrity, and who hate the Celtics for one reason or another, and it has affected games this year ... absolutely.

Bahku, you need to calm down. Just kidding, but a couple of these posts do read awfully loud.   Which of course is extremely uncharacteristic for you. Well, except maybe after Celtic losses.

A couple of things that may explain what you are noticing:

- Referees may be real good when they are newer and for many years be excellent officials. But at some point, as they get older, I think a couple of things happen. First, I think the game gets too fast for them as the athletes become bigger, stronger and faster. I think after a number of years, maybe a decade, of watching the game, a ref might get accustomed to seeing the game at a certain speed and as the game progresses and speeds up, it tends to pass them by. So they start making a ton of mistakes and bad calls. Then when reviewing the tape they may realize the mistake and inadvertantly call it the other way the next time for fear of making a mistake, when in actuality they were right at first. Doubt creeps in and then we see what we see.

Second, as with all jobs, when doing something new, it's always a pleasure doing it. It's not a job, it's an adventure(now where have I heard that before). But as we keep that job long term and keep doing it over and over it becomes a grind. It's tedious and things that we used to shirk off as just the not so great part of the job start to irritate us. I think this is what happens to referees as well. They get sick and tired of certain players Edited.  Profanity and masked profanity are against forum rules and may result in discipline.ing and moaning at them all the time. Coaches too. A few bad instances may occur with a certain team. These things cause prejudices that manifestate themselves in their eyes and in their actions.

Maybe there should be a ten year term limit on being an NBA official.

- Regarding some of the ridiculous free throws attempted discrencies that have occured in Celtics games, and believe us Laker fans there have been a ton more than the average team, I chaulk some of that up to the extremely tight and aggressive defense the Celtics play. Many many teams will allow a player a layup in the game during the regular season. But this Celtic team had a philosophy that if you are going to the hole, your ball will be stolen or your shot will be blocked or you are going to have to shoot free throws. No layups allowed.

I would guess that a lot of the Celtics deficiencies in not having as many free throws as their opponents stem from this.

- I also truly believe that the NBA hasn't weeded out all the referees that might be manipulating games for their own reasons. I don't think Tim Donaghy was the only one. I could be 1000% wrong but I do think there are one or two that might still be doing some shady stuff.

- Human incompetence. Basketball might just be the hardest game to be an official in. The biggest, strongest, fastest and in some cases most coordinated athletes in the world reside in the NBA. It's a tough job and maybe we as fans need to accept that referees are human to and that they are just going to get a bunch of stuff wrong. I have seen horrible officiating on every level of basketball I have ever watched. Consistently too. Maybe the job is just to difficult for a person to do to our expectations.

Of course, I could be full of crap with all these theories and every ref hates the Celtics, but maybe not.

[bandonox]

I think it's too easy to bring up tommy....
he's CLEARLY BIASED  (and that's one of the reasons we love him)..
but the officiating is at best horrible in the nba.... i think bringing up tommy lends to the idea that the bad reffing debate has no merit,. even though he's correct 90% of the time.. outside of celtic nation he's a caracature.
it's difficult for non celtic fans to take him seriously because the only time they have ever seen tommy is when he was on sportscenter going mental on refs... they think he's a joke. they have almost no clue that this man that has 8 rings as a player and 2 more as a coach is one of the sharpest basketball minds on the planet.....

[Bahku]

As long as we see as little of kenny mauer as possible I think we will be golden. THat guy does nothing but give crappy calls toward the celts.

 ... and Bennett Salvatore, and Joey Crawford, and Violet Palmer, and Eddie F. Rush, etc. I'd love for Tommy to stop by and have a chat with those who feel there's absolutely no anti-Celtic bias within the officiating ranks ... maybe some of the C's as well ... they have a bit of a different take on it. I've been watching the Celtics for over 40 years, I've seen the changes and the progression of officiating in the NBA, and it amazes me that anyone can think that the refs are completely objective all the time ... sorry, but that's not remotely the truth.

I don't think thier objective, they give calls to stars, but i don't think there's a bias

i watch plenty of thursday night b-ball when our boys aren't on, and in every game, the officals are horrid.

the incompatance of the NBA officals is the problem, not some vast conspiracy against certain teams.

I never said there was a "vast conspiracy", I said they aren't objective all the time, they make horrendous calls, and that some of them don't like the C's and favor opposing teams ... and that's the truth. Check the amazing foul discrepencies in many of the Celtic's games this year if you think they're completely objective toward them ... it's terrible.

I'm sorry, but those who think that none of them have any agendas beyond calling a "fair" game are a bit naive' ... and to think back to some of the more egregious calls made against us this year, it's hard to think that Celtic fans would make excuses for them.

To think that they're all just "horrible" officials is a bit ridiculous ... most of these guys have been doing this job for years and years, don't you think it's a bit strange that they become bad refs all of a sudden? Doesn't it make more sense that there's something else going on here?

These guys know what they're doing, and saying they're all just "bad" now is kind of short-sighted, I feel. These veteran officials have been doing this a long time, and yet this year they all just happen to be worse than usual ... it makes no sense whatsoever. One of these guys was just recently fired because he bet on games ... do you honestly think he's the only one who's capable of leaning in favor of one team or another? I just don't buy it ... not for a second.

I think there are some very good refs, and I think some are just plain lousy, but honest. But I also think there's a few who have other motives besides objectivity and integrity, and who hate the Celtics for one reason or another, and it has affected games this year ... absolutely.

Bahku, you need to calm down. Just kidding, but a couple of these posts do read awfully loud.   Which of course is extremely uncharacteristic for you. Well, except maybe after Celtic losses.

A couple of things that may explain what you are noticing:

- Referees may be real good when they are newer and for many years be excellent officials. But at some point, as they get older, I think a couple of things happen. First, I think the game gets too fast for them as the athletes become bigger, stronger and faster. I think after a number of years, maybe a decade, of watching the game, a ref might get accustomed to seeing the game at a certain speed and as the game progresses and speeds up, it tends to pass them by. So they start making a ton of mistakes and bad calls. Then when reviewing the tape they may realize the mistake and inadvertantly call it the other way the next time for fear of making a mistake, when in actuality they were right at first. Doubt creeps in and then we see what we see.

Second, as with all jobs, when doing something new, it's always a pleasure doing it. It's not a job, it's an adventure(now where have I heard that before). But as we keep that job long term and keep doing it over and over it becomes a grind. It's tedious and things that we used to shirk off as just the not so great part of the job start to irritate us. I think this is what happens to referees as well. They get sick and tired of certain players ****ing and moaning at them all the time. Coaches too. A few bad instances may occur with a certain team. These things cause prejudices that manifestate themselves in their eyes and in their actions.

Maybe there should be a ten year term limit on being an NBA official.

- Regarding some of the ridiculous free throws attempted discrencies that have occured in Celtics games, and believe us Laker fans there have been a ton more than the average team, I chaulk some of that up to the extremely tight and aggressive defense the Celtics play. Many many teams will allow a player a layup in the game during the regular season. But this Celtic team had a philosophy that if you are going to the hole, your ball will be stolen or your shot will be blocked or you are going to have to shoot free throws. No layups allowed.

I would guess that a lot of the Celtics deficiencies in not having as many free throws as their opponents stem from this.

- I also truly believe that the NBA hasn't weeded out all the referees that might be manipulating games for their own reasons. I don't think Tim Donaghy was the only one. I could be 1000% wrong but I do think there are one or two that might still be doing some shady stuff.

- Human incompetence. Basketball might just be the hardest game to be an official in. The biggest, strongest, fastest and in some cases most coordinated athletes in the world reside in the NBA. It's a tough job and maybe we as fans need to accept that referees are human to and that they are just going to get a bunch of stuff wrong. I have seen horrible officiating on every level of basketball I have ever watched. Consistently too. Maybe the job is just to difficult for a person to do to our expectations.

Of course, I could be full of crap with all these theories and every ref hates the Celtics, but maybe not.

Once again, Nick, you reign me in and help keep my sanity, (well, to a certain extent  ). I had reached a point where the day's baiting by trolls and "stick-up-for-the-refs-no-matter-what" stuff was getting to me, and I guess I had to vent a little. But seriously, to think that there's no favoritism at all by some of the NBA officials, (some, not all, not many), just seems so very naive', and if the problem isn't recognized by us, then it will just get worse. Really great points, though, Bud ... and thanks again for the very thoughtful, objective, and phlegmatic reply ... I'm OK now ... really, though I'm about as wound-up as I've ever been! TP, Friend.

[nickagneta]

As long as we see as little of kenny mauer as possible I think we will be golden. THat guy does nothing but give crappy calls toward the celts.

 ... and Bennett Salvatore, and Joey Crawford, and Violet Palmer, and Eddie F. Rush, etc. I'd love for Tommy to stop by and have a chat with those who feel there's absolutely no anti-Celtic bias within the officiating ranks ... maybe some of the C's as well ... they have a bit of a different take on it. I've been watching the Celtics for over 40 years, I've seen the changes and the progression of officiating in the NBA, and it amazes me that anyone can think that the refs are completely objective all the time ... sorry, but that's not remotely the truth.

I don't think thier objective, they give calls to stars, but i don't think there's a bias

i watch plenty of thursday night b-ball when our boys aren't on, and in every game, the officals are horrid.

the incompatance of the NBA officals is the problem, not some vast conspiracy against certain teams.

I never said there was a "vast conspiracy", I said they aren't objective all the time, they make horrendous calls, and that some of them don't like the C's and favor opposing teams ... and that's the truth. Check the amazing foul discrepencies in many of the Celtic's games this year if you think they're completely objective toward them ... it's terrible.

I'm sorry, but those who think that none of them have any agendas beyond calling a "fair" game are a bit naive' ... and to think back to some of the more egregious calls made against us this year, it's hard to think that Celtic fans would make excuses for them.

To think that they're all just "horrible" officials is a bit ridiculous ... most of these guys have been doing this job for years and years, don't you think it's a bit strange that they become bad refs all of a sudden? Doesn't it make more sense that there's something else going on here?

These guys know what they're doing, and saying they're all just "bad" now is kind of short-sighted, I feel. These veteran officials have been doing this a long time, and yet this year they all just happen to be worse than usual ... it makes no sense whatsoever. One of these guys was just recently fired because he bet on games ... do you honestly think he's the only one who's capable of leaning in favor of one team or another? I just don't buy it ... not for a second.

I think there are some very good refs, and I think some are just plain lousy, but honest. But I also think there's a few who have other motives besides objectivity and integrity, and who hate the Celtics for one reason or another, and it has affected games this year ... absolutely.

Bahku, you need to calm down. Just kidding, but a couple of these posts do read awfully loud.   Which of course is extremely uncharacteristic for you. Well, except maybe after Celtic losses.

A couple of things that may explain what you are noticing:

- Referees may be real good when they are newer and for many years be excellent officials. But at some point, as they get older, I think a couple of things happen. First, I think the game gets too fast for them as the athletes become bigger, stronger and faster. I think after a number of years, maybe a decade, of watching the game, a ref might get accustomed to seeing the game at a certain speed and as the game progresses and speeds up, it tends to pass them by. So they start making a ton of mistakes and bad calls. Then when reviewing the tape they may realize the mistake and inadvertantly call it the other way the next time for fear of making a mistake, when in actuality they were right at first. Doubt creeps in and then we see what we see.

Second, as with all jobs, when doing something new, it's always a pleasure doing it. It's not a job, it's an adventure(now where have I heard that before). But as we keep that job long term and keep doing it over and over it becomes a grind. It's tedious and things that we used to shirk off as just the not so great part of the job start to irritate us. I think this is what happens to referees as well. They get sick and tired of certain players ****ing and moaning at them all the time. Coaches too. A few bad instances may occur with a certain team. These things cause prejudices that manifestate themselves in their eyes and in their actions.

Maybe there should be a ten year term limit on being an NBA official.

- Regarding some of the ridiculous free throws attempted discrencies that have occured in Celtics games, and believe us Laker fans there have been a ton more than the average team, I chaulk some of that up to the extremely tight and aggressive defense the Celtics play. Many many teams will allow a player a layup in the game during the regular season. But this Celtic team had a philosophy that if you are going to the hole, your ball will be stolen or your shot will be blocked or you are going to have to shoot free throws. No layups allowed.

I would guess that a lot of the Celtics deficiencies in not having as many free throws as their opponents stem from this.

- I also truly believe that the NBA hasn't weeded out all the referees that might be manipulating games for their own reasons. I don't think Tim Donaghy was the only one. I could be 1000% wrong but I do think there are one or two that might still be doing some shady stuff.

- Human incompetence. Basketball might just be the hardest game to be an official in. The biggest, strongest, fastest and in some cases most coordinated athletes in the world reside in the NBA. It's a tough job and maybe we as fans need to accept that referees are human to and that they are just going to get a bunch of stuff wrong. I have seen horrible officiating on every level of basketball I have ever watched. Consistently too. Maybe the job is just to difficult for a person to do to our expectations.

Of course, I could be full of crap with all these theories and every ref hates the Celtics, but maybe not.

Once again, Nick, you reign me in and help keep my sanity, (well, to a certain extent  ). I had reached a point where the day's baiting by trolls and "stick-up-for-the-refs-no-matter-what" stuff was getting to me, and I guess I had to vent a little. But seriously, to think that there's no favoritism at all by some of the NBA officials, (some, not all, not many), just seems so very naive', and if the problem isn't recognized by us, then it will just get worse. Really great points, though, Bud ... and thanks again for the very thoughtful, objective, and phlegmatic reply ... I'm OK now ... really, though I'm about as wound-up as I've ever been! TP, Friend.

Right back atcha Buddy. But now you forced me to go look up the word "phlegmatic". I'm pretty sure the last time I saw that word was on my SATs some 25 or so years ago.

[paintitgreen]

I think it's too easy to bring up tommy....
he's CLEARLY BIASED  (and that's one of the reasons we love him)..
but the officiating is at best horrible in the nba.... i think bringing up tommy lends to the idea that the bad reffing debate has no merit,. even though he's correct 90% of the time.. outside of celtic nation he's a caracature.
it's difficult for non celtic fans to take him seriously because the only time they have ever seen tommy is when he was on sportscenter going mental on refs... they think he's a joke. they have almost no clue that this man that has 8 rings as a player and 2 more as a coach is one of the sharpest basketball minds on the planet.....

If this was directed toward me, let me make clear I was not knocking Tommy. It was somebody else who brought up Tommy, I was just responding. My only point was somebody with such an obvious and open bias toward the Celtics would be in a poor position to demonstrate a vast conspiracy against the Celtics. Kind of like how hippies can't be trusted when they claim government conspiracies, except Tommy is more credible than hippies.  

The 90% comment you make I'm not sure about. It depends on what Tommy is discussing. If it's his complaints about calls, I think that 90% estimate is a bit high. True, many of the calls he complains about are bad, but often times, he sees an opponent's foul that did not occur or refuses to see a Celtics foul that did. I would say he is right on more like 70% of his complaints about bad calls against the Celtics. (There are a lot of bad calls, and he doesn't miss any of the bad ones against the Celtics.)

However, if you factor in the amount of times he fails to complain about a bad call benefitting the Celtics, though, the number drops to about 50%. The Celtics get bad calls in their favor, too (that's what happens when officiating generally is not good), and if you're going to complain about bad calls against one team, then as an announcer, you should arguably complain about bad calls against both teams (Tommy does do that on some occasions). Officiating as a whole is somewhere between bad and mediocre but it seems to me it goes both ways.

Now, when Tommy breaks down a game after the fact, I think 90% is even a little low as an estimate of how often he is correct. I agree with you 100%, he is a tremendous student of the game and one of the most knowledgeable basketball announcers I have seen. Granted, I have only really seen Mike & Tommy, the national announcers, the Lakers crew (as I said, I live in SoCal now) and a few other hometown crews on NBA TV, but his knowledge of the game is as good as or better than anybody else's. His obvious bias drives some out of towners away, but the guy's basketball IQ should not be questioned, and if I did not make that clear, let me do so now. Tommy's knowledge of the game has increased my own and made basketball more enjoyable to me than it already is. He is one of the greatest assets the Celtics have.

Now, if the comments by you and/or Bahku with regard to defending officials were directed toward me, again, I want to make my feelings clear. NBA officiating is not good, and at times borders on insulting to the players, coaches, executives and fans who devote so much time and energy to this game. The officiating of the game should be of a caliber equivalent to the game's players and it is just nowhere close. I would be perfectly happy with a 10-year cap on officiating in the NBA and wholesale replacement of current officials.

That said, I am not entirely convinced that games are generally determined by an officiating crew's bias toward or against certain teams. I think if and when games are affected - i.e., Miami in 06 and the Lakers in 00 (Game 7 v. Portland - 37 FTs to 16) and 02 (Game 6 v. Sacramento) - it comes more from the league, which hase a vested interest in results (LA market in finals rather than Portland or Sacramento, hatred of Mark Cuban, promotion of Kobe and later Wade as the potential "next Jordan"), than the referees, who really don't have that interest. Even Donaghy wasn't attempting to affect outcomes for a specific team. He was affecting over/unders by calling more fouls generally (obviously such conduct will affect results, but the intent was to increase total points scored, not points by a particular team).

I do, however, agree, that if an official did have such a bias, it is far more likely to be an official who has been around for enough years to develop a personal bias for or against a particular team, which is why I support "term limits" and more comprehensive review of officiating.

[LakerLanny]

As predicted, Ed F. Rush was so biased it wasn't even funny.

Lakers now 0-3 in the playoffs when he "officiates" and 12-1 with anyone else.

Bavetta giving the Celtics every touch foul didn't help either.

Lakers now 1-2 with Bavetta in the playoffs and 11-2 with anyone else.

Lakers don't need a bunch of calls in their favor, just call the game evenly and let the players decide it.  Rush only blew his whistle TWICE in the entire game in favor of the Lakers, that is past ridiculous....it is clearly biased.

I won't even mention the 4 times the ball went out of bounds off Celtics but was incorrectly ruled to be off LA.  Oh wait, I just did.

So now the league has gifted your team one game with corrupt officiating, will that be the case for the whole series?  I wouldn't doubt it at this point.

[wdleehi]

As predicted, Ed F. Rush was so biased it wasn't even funny.

Lakers now 0-3 in the playoffs when he "officiates" and 12-1 with anyone else.

Bavetta giving the Celtics every touch foul didn't help either.

Lakers now 1-2 with Bavetta in the playoffs and 11-2 with anyone else.

Lakers don't need a bunch of calls in their favor, just call the game evenly and let the players decide it.  Rush only blew his whistle TWICE in the entire game in favor of the Lakers, that is past ridiculous....it is clearly biased.

I won't even mention the 4 times the ball went out of bounds off Celtics but was incorrectly ruled to be off LA.  Oh wait, I just did.

So now the league has gifted your team one game with corrupt officiating, will that be the case for the whole series?  I wouldn't doubt it at this point.

Take this type of post to ESPN.  We deal with what happens, not excuses.


Celtics defense clamped down on the Lakers in the 2nd half.


The Celtics destroyed the Lakers on the boards. 


Kobe shot under 35%.




None of these have anything to do with officials. 

[Redz]

As predicted, Ed F. Rush was so biased it wasn't even funny.

Lakers now 0-3 in the playoffs when he "officiates" and 12-1 with anyone else.

Bavetta giving the Celtics every touch foul didn't help either.

Lakers now 1-2 with Bavetta in the playoffs and 11-2 with anyone else.

Lakers don't need a bunch of calls in their favor, just call the game evenly and let the players decide it.  Rush only blew his whistle TWICE in the entire game in favor of the Lakers, that is past ridiculous....it is clearly biased.

I won't even mention the 4 times the ball went out of bounds off Celtics but was incorrectly ruled to be off LA.  Oh wait, I just did.

So now the league has gifted your team one game with corrupt officiating, will that be the case for the whole series?  I wouldn't doubt it at this point.

Way to give credit where credit is due.  Celts outplayed the Lakers last night. 

[Chris]

The refs did play a role last night, but they certainly weren't biased.  They let both teams play relatively physical, and this happens to favor the C's.  I thought in general they were relatively consistent (granted, thats relative to their normally horrendous inconsistency).

[Donoghus]

As predicted, Ed F. Rush was so biased it wasn't even funny.

Lakers now 0-3 in the playoffs when he "officiates" and 12-1 with anyone else.

Bavetta giving the Celtics every touch foul didn't help either.

Lakers now 1-2 with Bavetta in the playoffs and 11-2 with anyone else.

Lakers don't need a bunch of calls in their favor, just call the game evenly and let the players decide it.  Rush only blew his whistle TWICE in the entire game in favor of the Lakers, that is past ridiculous....it is clearly biased.

I won't even mention the 4 times the ball went out of bounds off Celtics but was incorrectly ruled to be off LA.  Oh wait, I just did.

So now the league has gifted your team one game with corrupt officiating, will that be the case for the whole series?  I wouldn't doubt it at this point.

You were making excuses before the game with the ref assignments and now you're making excuses afterwards.

Celtics outplayed the Lakers down the stretch.  Plain and simple. 

That's why the Celtics are up 1-0, not the officiating. 

[CoachCowens]

As predicted, Ed F. Rush was so biased it wasn't even funny.

Lakers now 0-3 in the playoffs when he "officiates" and 12-1 with anyone else.

Bavetta giving the Celtics every touch foul didn't help either.

Lakers now 1-2 with Bavetta in the playoffs and 11-2 with anyone else.

Lakers don't need a bunch of calls in their favor, just call the game evenly and let the players decide it.  Rush only blew his whistle TWICE in the entire game in favor of the Lakers, that is past ridiculous....it is clearly biased.

I won't even mention the 4 times the ball went out of bounds off Celtics but was incorrectly ruled to be off LA.  Oh wait, I just did.

So now the league has gifted your team one game with corrupt officiating, will that be the case for the whole series?  I wouldn't doubt it at this point.

You must not have paid attention when Odom charged into PJ. or when Garnett was called for a foul on a 3 point shot when Sasha flailed his arm after shooting. or when perk was called for a foul when he twisted his ankle and fell down touching no one.

Watch KJ's Dunk and see Gasol pushing him in the body with one hand. Suffice to say that is Gasol's go to defense.

[GroverTheClover]

As predicted, Ed F. Rush was so biased it wasn't even funny.

Lakers now 0-3 in the playoffs when he "officiates" and 12-1 with anyone else.

Bavetta giving the Celtics every touch foul didn't help either.

Lakers now 1-2 with Bavetta in the playoffs and 11-2 with anyone else.

Lakers don't need a bunch of calls in their favor, just call the game evenly and let the players decide it.  Rush only blew his whistle TWICE in the entire game in favor of the Lakers, that is past ridiculous....it is clearly biased.

I won't even mention the 4 times the ball went out of bounds off Celtics but was incorrectly ruled to be off LA.  Oh wait, I just did.

So now the league has gifted your team one game with corrupt officiating, will that be the case for the whole series?  I wouldn't doubt it at this point.

You must have missed the part where Gasol fouled KG on the putback dunk. You know, the one they repeatedly show on ABC where Gasol clearly hits KG's arm? Or what about that alley-oop dunk to Kobe, that clearly shows Fisher pushing Pierce to the ground? Please. The Celtics shot a mere 7 more free throws than the Lakers, even though the Lakers had to intentionally foul in the waning minutes. The last bunch of people that should be complaining about biased refs are Lakers' fans. Oh right, I forgot, you're the legendary LakerLanny, how dare I question you.

It's getting tiresome. If the free throw disparity were something like 46-20, maybe your posts would at least seem somewhat logical, but when the Lakers shoot 7 fewer freethrows, you're falling on deaf ears.

[Redz]

OK, show of hands then: Who thinks the officiating handed the C's the game last night?  Yes, ok, no hands up... looks about unanimous...Wait, wait...there's someone wearing purple and gold in the back raising his hand...Sir, could you not hear the question?...OK then, we'll just assume he was stretching.

Next question: Did the giant Trophy painted at center court cost the Lakers the game?

(in all seriousness, what the hell were they thinking with that thing? Was there a midcourt line visible anywhere?)

[paintitgreen]

As predicted, Ed F. Rush was so biased it wasn't even funny.

Lakers now 0-3 in the playoffs when he "officiates" and 12-1 with anyone else.

Bavetta giving the Celtics every touch foul didn't help either.

Lakers now 1-2 with Bavetta in the playoffs and 11-2 with anyone else.

Lakers don't need a bunch of calls in their favor, just call the game evenly and let the players decide it.  Rush only blew his whistle TWICE in the entire game in favor of the Lakers, that is past ridiculous....it is clearly biased.

I won't even mention the 4 times the ball went out of bounds off Celtics but was incorrectly ruled to be off LA.  Oh wait, I just did.

So now the league has gifted your team one game with corrupt officiating, will that be the case for the whole series?  I wouldn't doubt it at this point.

Wow, I didn't mind you making the post beforehand, it was just your opinion, but this is the biggest crybaby response I've ever seen. I thought some posters were being too harsh on you saying you were "making excuses" for the loss before the game was even played, but I guess they were right.

As you can see, we can point out a number of situations where bad calls went against us too (the ones mentioned, plus Perk picking up his 4th foul and twisting his ankle when Derek Fisher fell into his legs following a missed free throw - that was a preposterous call). Bad calls happen a lot in NBA games, and they benefit both teams roughly equally. The commentators noted a couple of times on each side that a bad call was made, but it wasn't like every tough call went against the Lakers. It was even, and if you can't see that your team lost the game legitimately, I don't really know what to say to you. I heard a lot of Spurs fans after Game 4 saying "yeah, it was a bad call on the Barry play, but those things happen and we didn't deserve the win anyway." When Spurs fans can be more accountable than you, it's time to man up.

I respect Phil Jackson a lot as a coach but nobody in basketball complains more about officiating before, during and after games, and he didn't make any sort of deal about officiating. This post is a joke, an absolute joke. The Celtics outplayed the Lakers, plain and simple. Kobe missed a lot of shots, as did the other Lakers down the stretch (even though they were on fire in the first half). Your team lost it, they weren't robbed. These are going to be good, closely contested battles. I truly believe the better team will prevail on each given night. Last night it was the Celtics (in a game where, honestly, both teams looked a bit rusty and uncomfortable). If you can't accept that, go whine to other Laker fans.