Referees Tonight (Good) EDIT: They Absolutely Ruined The Game (4th Quarter)

[BBS]

I have gone to two stores today, wearing my Sheed jersey and while paying one clerk said How'd you like that robbery last night, and how about Gasol throwing Rondo to the ground on that rebound No call my a** they said.  The other one said, It was like a whistle factory in the 4th and they had never seen a game called so differently between 2 quarters. My neighbor said it was stolen. All I know is the Lakers don't win without 21 freethrows in the 4th.

[Simulacra]

Like I stated.

Based on the details (which I believe are deceptive in this analysis) or the given parameters present for the game and during the course of the game, I whole heatedly agree and accept the Celtics lost game 7 and the series as a whole. This is true in the case for Armando's "imperfect game" and for my other example of this mornings world cup match US v. Slovenia, it was a draw.

What I am out after, in trying to prove a point and raise awareness for, is how these parameters are increasingly changing shape and are becoming ever increasingly vague, manipulated and hypocritical. This is unacceptable as a fan who buys merchandise, tickets, and watches commercials that put large amounts of coin in other peoples piggy banks.

I also agree, with those who make the following argument, that this is not an exact science, its based on judgment with margin for error. Human error by a ref. However, this margin for error exceeds what I would term "normal" human error for how I am used to watching and partaking in sport. This is cause to call in to question motive, in one form or another. It is also occurring on a grander scale beyond the boundaries of one single sport.

For an intellectual who deals with synchronicity in academics, societal issues, politics and pop culture I see trends. Dangerous ones that have repercussions beyond men or women throwing a rubber ball throw a metal rim. I have no qualms with the WWF staging its matches, I stopped watching it when I was 10 and they dont claim to be unscripted really. I also understand when I walk into a casino the odds are not in my favor beyond the poker table and sometimes not even there since cheating can be involved. I can take into account these variables and decided were to place my belief, capital or bet. A slot machine, like the WWF, is scripted entertainment, and is fine when treated as such.

However, I do not accept that when I invest my money in the stock market that things go on behind the scenes that disallow me to make a fair bet and serve to stack the deck against me when it is presented as being fair, just and upfront. As well as when I invest capital (time, money or social) into a sporting invent I believe to be fair, with the best man or team standing at the end, that I end up with a manipulated outcome. This calls into question trust.

At the very least it is an insult to ones intelligence, at the worst its straight up robbery. How much money did a guy like Griffey Jr. loose to the steroid freaks? One could have nearly mourned the day of his retirement for how far on the back burner he has been placed for the last decade or so. Costas should have slapped Mcgwire for feeding us his propaganda about only wanting to stay healthy by using PEDs. He flat out stole millions from a lot of players by stealing the spotlight. If i wanted manipulated outcomes I would stick to the movies or a play not a sporting event that I am lead to believe is unscripted and fair.

My most important point in all of this is that for good or bad, sport is a refuge from what occurs in so many other manipulated areas of society. It is unlike other "arts" in the fact it is supposed to be unscripted creativity, that is why it has its own definition termed sport and not theater. To see it as well fall into the gutter is disgusting. To see people defend, in an idealistic manner, these trends worries me in regards to their ability to perceive fraud elsewhere when the ability to do so is becoming more and more vital.

Telling people, as I have read elsewhere in threads here that they can take it or leave it, with a sarcastic goodbye pat on the back, is flat out ignorant and un-cathartic. These posts are attempts to attain catharsis that the match in question failed to justly provide. Again here human error in perception and emotional reactions are to be expected but there are far too many of these floating around. Also the game can be flat out destroyed and cease to exist as it once did if too many jump ship. This is the problem now in the stock market and our economy since people are afraid to invest and trust one another.

So what my favored team lost, but the manner in which it happened and the overall state of affairs in the sporting universe and its extension into other important matters is cause for debate and reform.   

[wiley]

Like I stated.

Based on the details (which I believe are deceptive in this analysis) or the given parameters present for the game and during the course of the game, I whole heatedly agree and accept the Celtics lost game 7 and the series as a whole. This is true in the case for Armando's "imperfect game" and for my other example of this mornings world cup match US v. Slovenia, it was a draw.

What I am out after, in trying to prove a point and raise awareness for, is how these parameters are increasingly changing shape and are becoming ever increasingly vague, manipulated and hypocritical. This is unacceptable as a fan who buys merchandise, tickets, and watches commercials that put large amounts of coin in other peoples piggy banks.

I also agree, with those who make the following argument, that this is not an exact science, its based on judgment with margin for error. Human error by a ref. However, this margin for error exceeds what I would term "normal" human error for how I am used to watching and partaking in sport. This is cause to call in to question motive, in one form or another. It is also occurring on a grander scale beyond the boundaries of one single sport.

For an intellectual who deals with synchronicity in academics, societal issues, politics and pop culture I see trends. Dangerous ones that have repercussions beyond men or women throwing a rubber ball throw a metal rim. I have no qualms with the WWF staging its matches, I stopped watching it when I was 10 and they dont claim to be unscripted really. I also understand when I walk into a casino the odds are not in my favor beyond the poker table and sometimes not even there since cheating can be involved. I can take into account these variables and decided were to place my belief, capital or bet. A slot machine, like the WWF, is scripted entertainment, and is fine when treated as such.

However, I do not accept that when I invest my money in the stock market that things go on behind the scenes that disallow me to make a fair bet and serve to stack the deck against me when it is presented as being fair, just and upfront. As well as when I invest capital (time, money or social) into a sporting invent I believe to be fair, with the best man or team standing at the end, that I end up with a manipulated outcome. This calls into question trust.

At the very least it is an insult to ones intelligence, at the worst its straight up robbery. How much money did a guy like Griffey Jr. loose to the steroid freaks? One could have nearly mourned the day of his retirement for how far on the back burner he has been placed for the last decade or so. Costas should have slapped Mcgwire for feeding us his propaganda about only wanting to stay healthy by using PEDs. He flat out stole millions from a lot of players by stealing the spotlight. If i wanted manipulated outcomes I would stick to the movies or a play not a sporting event that I am lead to believe is unscripted and fair.

My most important point in all of this is that for good or bad, sport is a refuge from what occurs in so many other manipulated areas of society. It is unlike other "arts" in the fact it is supposed to be unscripted creativity, that is why it has its own definition termed sport and not theater. To see it as well fall into the gutter is disgusting. To see people defend, in an idealistic manner, these trends worries me in regards to their ability to perceive fraud elsewhere when the ability to do so is becoming more and more vital.

Telling people, as I have read elsewhere in threads here that they can take it or leave it, with a sarcastic goodbye pat on the back, is flat out ignorant and un-cathartic. These posts are attempts to attain catharsis that the match in question failed to justly provide. Again here human error in perception and emotional reactions are to be expected but there are far too many of these floating around. Also the game can be flat out destroyed and cease to exist as it once did if too many jump ship. This is the problem now in the stock market and our economy since people are afraid to invest and trust one another.

So what my favored team lost, but the manner in which it happened and the overall state of affairs in the sporting universe and its extension into other important matters is cause for debate and reform.   

Best yet of your excellent posts....

[outofthenba]

I have been watching the games.  Let me tell you how it works.  I don't think all the games are rigged, but some definitely are.  Crawford is involved in many that are.  So is DeRosa. 

What makes it interesting is the way in which they do it.  It is extremely subtle.  Like an art almost.  So it makes criticizing it difficult.  People will think you are a conspiracy theorist.  I am not.

One method I have seen often is to throw the games when momentum is going one way.  Basketball is a game of momentum.  These people know basketball extremely well.  They will often call fouls against the team they want to lose when they are building a lead or making a comeback.  Then, when the momentum has shifted the way they want it, they will call equally bad calls against the other team.  They do this to even the call count and to make it difficult for the coach/team/owner to complain that they didn't get calls.  Outside of the context of the momentum of the game, things can look pretty equal.

One variation on this method is sometimes to call the bad calls on the team that is going to win early in the game.  Like this, they have leeway to give that team the benefit of bad calls going the other way when they have to.  Keep in mind.  These people really do know the game of basketball.  They are on the court with the players.  And they do this every single day.

What happened last night with the Celtics is a different method.  I also saw this used in an Orlando game.  They simply didn't make calls.  This allowed the physically stronger team - so obviously LA - to beat the hell out of the Celtics.  Both sides were getting away with hacks, but Boston took it in the teeth.  When this wasn't enough, they then called the game in the fourth quarter.  The calls they made were for the most part inarguable NBA fouls.  But they were whistled for hacks that had not been called before, and then they were whistled nearly 100% in LA's favor, not called for Boston.  How could Boston argue with this?  These were NBA fouls.  They just weren't being handed out fairly.  But they were handed out by masters at the craft.

I have lost all faith in the NBA.  I was never a great Celtics fan.  I used to like the Lakers, in fact - before Fisher turned himself into a goliath Bruce Bowen and Gasol began pumping his fists.  Doc Rivers is an incredible coach.  The absolute best.  I learned to love these games this last year.  But I can't stomach the BS that goes on. 

Either Stern is in on it, protecting his franchise.  ---If this is the case, he is stupid, because we are not blind, and the game would be just as exciting without the supposed drama he is orchestrating.  Or, the refs are turning their 7 figure salaries into a lot more in the Caymans.  Or both.

Open your eyes if you don't already see it.

[connerhenry43]

The Celtics stopped moving their feet in the fourth quarter.  They earned their fouls. 

Not to mention, the refs handed the first 3 quarters to them on a silver platter, but they did not take advantage.

Can't have it both ways. Suggesting that the refs handed the first 3 quarters to them on a silver platter implies that they pulled the platter away in the fourth, proving that they were inconsistent. If you're saying the Celtics didn't foul in the first three quarters than the refs weren't handing them anything.

how did the refs hand the celts the first 3 quarters on a silver platter? with the 11 ft's they had through three?

i will concede that the celts had chances to build a better cushion and did not, but the refs did a great job for three quarters and then did their evil in the fourth, stealing the title from us and handing it to LA. end of story.

[Thruthelookingglass]

I have lost all faith in the NBA.  I was never a great Celtics fan.  I used to like the Lakers, in fact - before Fisher turned himself into a goliath Bruce Bowen and Gasol began pumping his fists.  Doc Rivers is an incredible coach.  The absolute best.  I learned to love these games this last year.  But I can't stomach the BS that goes on. 

Fortunately for me I love the way Doc has these Celtics playing the game.  But yeah, I have to balance my love for the C's with my fear that they are getting jobbed.  It is in the end hard to point to a ref shifting momentum, but I wonder if there is a way to graph calls to show trends in games?  Over time and enough games the patterns ought to emerge. 

[outofthenba]

I agree that it is very difficult to pinpoint the moments.  You have to sit and watch the entire game.  At times, watching, it becomes very apparent.  Graphing it would be great - but it would take a long time to do.  Someone should do it!  I am sure that the patterns would show themselves.

Remember back to the Chicago-Cavaliers game?  The one where Brad Miller got called for two fouls on Shaq in the space of 15 or 20 seconds?  That would be a good game to analyze.  Likewise, a couple of the Lakers-Thunder games.

There is no other professional sport where the refs play such a pivotal role in the game.  Yes - baseball has the home plate umpire.  But those calls are extremely easy to review.

In basketball's situation, the burden should be on the NBA to call the games in a way that is much more transparent.  If they aren't willing to do this, then we can pretty much assume that they have something to hide.