I don’t watch the NBA any more. The reason is that the games are so obviously subject to manipulation by bias that it is, well, not quite as dubious for legitimate sport as professional wrestling, but still too much so to be worth my time…or yours, frankly, but people spend time cheering for pro wrestlers too.
The problem is the referees, who have so much discretion in calling fouls that they can make the game turn out any way they choose. The fact that the NBA has such a huge home court advantage despite the fact that all courts are the same is also suspicious. Baseball, in contrast, with fields that vary materially in size and dimensions, has a very small home team edge. Biases, intentional or subconscious, control pro basketball, accounting for oddly frequent games decided in the last ten minutes, a propensity for allowing superstars to get away with infractions that lesser players do not, and seven game play-off series.
Sorry, I don’t like being a patsy, so I refuse to care.
There’s going to be a huge Game 7 of the NBA Finals on ABC Sunday, because the underdog Cleveland Cavaliers beat the Golden State Warriors and denied them the NBA Championship for the second straight game last Thursday night. Game Six’s exciting finish was greatly affected by the fact that Warriors uber-star Steph Curry got ejected in the closing minutes of play after receiving a technical foul. Ayesha Curry, his wife, alleged a different kind of foul, tweeting…
Lots of other fans came to the same conclusion, though Ayesha was quickly informed by the league that they knew where her mother lived, or something, and she deleted the tweet. Warriors’ head coach Steve Kerr wrote after the loss, “He gets six fouls on him; three were absolutely ridiculous.” Kerr knows that referees will usually move heaven and earth not to let a superstar foul out in regulation of a play-off game…unless, perhaps, there’s a good reason to let it happen.
Do I believe that the NBA actually rigged the game to ensure a longer, more exciting series? Nah, for the reasons listed by Bay area sports columnist Bud Garacie. Do I believe that the refs in NBA play-off games know that it will be better for their employers and their sport to have an exciting series, and allow that knowledge to bias their decisions regarding what fouls to call, when and on whom? Absolutely, just as I believe that Obama”s IRS didn’t have to be explicitly ordered by the White House to suppress the election activities of conservative organizations in 2012.
I might not believe this of the NBA if it had ever demonstrated any candor or concern about the obvious lack of consistency and integrity in the way its sport is officiated, and has been officiated for decades. It hasn’t, though, and thus has forfeited the benefit of the doubt.
Ethics Alarms 
I’m not a basketball fan at any level of the sport, but this brought forth a memory of my father, who would have been 94 this past May. He ALWAYS said “all these games are rigged – they want more money from TV and advertising,” and would grumble about the managers, the owners, etc. That was decades ago – he died in 1994. He was convinced of this idea way back then. Thanks for the memory, Jack – I love reading your stuff.
Mendy Rudolf and Richie Powers – two refs that could work the home crowd into a frenzy.
FWIW, ABC not CBS. Small potatoes in the big picture.
Oops. Fixed. Thanks.
I’ve wondered if the individual refs make more $$ for each additional playoff game they referee. If so, I could see how they want to make the series last longer for their fellow refs. Not so blatantly that significantly better basketball could overcome it. But just enough to make a difference between 2 evenly matched teams
I wonder the same thing.
And isn’t it just amazing how many play off series go to seven games? Amazing. Just amazing. I’ve only begun noticing that since about, oh say, 1967-68 when Rick Barry was leading the other good Warriors teams to success.
I do not subscribe to conspiracy theories and do not question the integrity of the officials but the competency. That is true of all major sports which is why replay is being used more often. Soon that will apply – in the case of the NBA – to certain judgement calls. The Cavs had a remarkable run in the preliminary series if – I recall – they won eight in a row. Out of all the major sports the impact of one or two players of star status appears greater in the NBA than other sports.
I think the nature of the sport defeats this, though. Everyone admits that if the refs called all traveling and all fouls, the game would grind to a halt. That means that they have to decide which to call in a split second, and in such a context, bias has too much power. The game is too fast, meanwhile, for replay to be used. It’s a structural flaw.
Too fast? No way! You could have key plays reviewed just as they do on TV. It takes less than a minute to determine if a charging foul or an illegal pick has been set – and those are the exceptionally tough judgement calls and I would certainly “pass” on foul calls and travelling violations. Review is done all the time with color commentators tossing in their opinions. Not every play should be reviewed since that would bring us back to the age of jump ball after every basket or no 24 second clock or ten second rule. , but given as with other sports both at the officials discretion or coaches allowed two or three reviews per contest. They actually do it now to a very limited extent.
How would you use instant relay to catch an uncalled, mid-play foul without slowing the game to a crawl?
The game is a crawl right now, Jack. The last five minutes are an eternity. What I am looking for is the Stanislavsky calls that Johnny Most use to go wild about. I am taking calls made such as an illegal pick that they screw up half the time and the blocking (Stanislavsky) calls. You see those on replay and you can take about five seconds to figure it out. This is not every play, but selective late game looks that can be senior ref decisions or by a coach with the same type of limitations you have in football and baseball. They can be momentum and game changers.
I’m not looking to examine every play and determine every tacky tack foul – let them play. Like we use to say “No blood, no foul.” I could care less about the “Extra step” that the stars get or the simple hand push offs that Big O was a master of.
I really hate the fact that picks are often called incorrectly and so are blocking fouls – my two peeves that apparently are getting into the area of those who make a joke out of flopping in soccer.
“Like we use to say “No blood, no foul.” I could care less about the “Extra step” that the stars get or the simple hand push offs that Big O was a master of.”
See, I hate that. It’s like the “phantom double play,” which is finally extinct. Rules that aren’t enforced consistently should not be rules. If something is a foul, it should always be a foul, regardless of the score, the venue, or who did it.
I could not agree more but the reality is the game is star driven. People are not showing up to see Joe Blow come off the bench. Players, fans, media and the league all know it. You have a different level of justice. I remember Larry Siegfried giving Oscar a hand check and immediately getting called. Siggy went nuts but even the Celtic players were laughing.
You know that one judge may treat a defendant differently than another for a variety of reasons that usually have something to do with money or status. Pisses me off! Some are more equal than others in sports and life.
Rick, I think what your position boils down to is a justification for letting the players call their own fouls as if they’re playing a pick-up game. You’re saying the officiating is totally corrupt and “everybody does it” and “it’s not the worst thing.” If the rules are as fluid as you say, I say, get rid of the officials and let the players call their own fouls.