Re: Mark Cuban Says That The Perception That The NBA Is Fixed Is Damaging To Business

by **Sam** Mon Feb 03, 2014 2:00 pm

Interesting article, Beat. I found it enlightening to realize that there were many fewer rules of interpretation for refs in the old days. I do think they let more stuff go in general back in the day, benefiting not only Wilt but also everyone else—including Russ— who played very tight defense. Maybe that's an important reason why scores were higher and the game (in my opinion) was so vastly more entertaining.

But I also know for a fact that Wilt, with five fouls on him, backed off defending some scoring plays that put his team in Jeopardy. He may have been smart, but there were times when his ego overcame his intellect and compromised his team.

Sam

by **k_j_88** Mon Feb 03, 2014 2:32 pm

Outside wrote:KJ,

Thanks for the clarification. I took the statement that I quoted in combination with the thread title to mean one thing, but you did indeed say previously that you didn't think games were rigged.

If I understand correctly, you think stars get favored treatment from referees that is harmful to the integrity of the game, but you don't think that rises to the level of fixing games. Is that a better assessment of your position?

I agree that stars tend to get the benefit of the doubt on calls, as do veterans over rookies. You may not say that rises to the level of the game being rigged, but some fans do, especially when combined with the perception that refs (or the league) are against their team.

I'm not sure what you meant to accomplish by including those videos of players. Do referees call perfect games? No. Do they give stars special treatment? Yes, but not every time, or else you wouldn't see guys like Kobe, LeBron, and Carmelo argue as much as they do. But the bigger problem for me is the selective nature of how many fans perceive this situation -- that a) the star player on the other team gets all the calls; b) calls always go against my team unfairly more than they do the other team; and c) a and b are proof that the refs are horrible. For some fans, it's a short leap from that to league-sanctioned conspiracy, and short leap from there to fixing games.

But all of this is based on selective use of facts. Yes, someone can point to uncalled traveling by LeBron or Carmelo, but that fan doesn't consider the times during that same game when a call (or non-call) went in his team's favor. I believe that basketball is the most difficult sport to referee, by a wide margin, and while you can point to individual incidents where something wasn't called correctly, refs do their best to call the game accurately, many incidents of what fans consider "wrong" calls are in fact right or could be called either way, and the breaks even out over time.

There's a story that comes to mind for me. The mother of my son's friend (I'll call her Becky) is the worst spectator I've ever seen. Whenever Becky watches a game, she unleashes a non-stop stream of verbal abuse against the refs, and she's so obnoxious that no one wants to sit by her. In Becky's view, call after call goes against her son's team, and literally 95% of her focus during the game is on the refs. In one church league game, my son's team was ahead for much of the game, but they had a stretch at the start of the fourth quarter when they got tired, quit moving the ball, and settled for outside shots, and their 10-point lead turned into a deficit. They came back at the end but fell short, and they lost. After the game, the first thing out of Becky's mouth was that the refs had stolen the game, and her son just rolled his eyes and said, "Mom" in the most exasperated way.

What it illustrates for me is that, for those people who choose to see games as all about the refs, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy -- for them, the games are all about the refs because that's what they choose to see.

Would the game be fairer if calls were made regardless of who the player was (or whether a game is regular season or playoffs, or whether it happens to be a close game in crunch time)? Ostensibly, yes, but there are arguments to make for making calls differently based on those differing situations.

I think your argument is that refs giving stars preferential treatment is why some fans call the league's integrity into question. But from my perspective, the main reason those fans call the league's integrity into question is that their view of the game is skewed by their own bias. Like Becky, the fact that some plays aren't called correctly leads them down a path where everything is skewed by their view of the refs, and any perceived damage to the integrity of the game is due far more to their own bias than to star players receiving some preferential treatment.

Outside,

I'd have to say that, yes, I do feel that stars typically get the benefit of the doubt more often than anyone else. It's not the biggest deal in the world, but in a way it bothers me. Its in a sense cultivating a message of of "only the stars matter, and if you're not one of them the referees will have less respect and leniency for you." It just does not seem fair to have that going on when the game is supposed to be in a fair, controlled environment where both teams should be on a level playing field when it comes to rules.

Consider the fact that the NBA has had to institute anti-flopping rules recently, of which are sporadically enforced. Why is this all happening? Because defenses are being backed into a corner because of how soft the league has made the game to facilitate offense. Defenders can barely do much to stop offensive players unless they are just that good at it (few and far between), so many resorted to flopping to counteract the obvious advantage offensive players have during possessions.

I pointed out the stars making violations that typically go unnoticed (Carmelo and Wade's seemed the most egregious) because we all know very well if Olynyk or Sullinger or whomever did the same thing the referees would have caught it without a second thought. That irritates me. In the age of replays, there's should not be any excuse for how many bad calls I've seen.

I would have to agree with your point that many fans attribute officiating according to their own bias. To be honest, I think its unfortunate any fan would do that. I watch a lot of football as well, and if the Patriots get away with a pass interference or holding, I will either say to myself or whoever I'm watching the game with that they got away with a missed call. The same goes for basketball. I just want to see cleanly officiated games where the players decide the outcome within the regulations of the game. I don't want to think that either side has the "refs on their side."

I'm not going to say that all referees are bad, because there are some good ones, but there's plenty of bad ones, too.

KJ