Jaynes vs. Refs

by Dave on Jul 4, 2008 4:49 PM PDT Comment 16 comments

Dwight Jaynes has an interesting piece here about the prevailing wisdom that the oversight of referees should be divorced from the league. He doesn't like it, and he has some interesting perspective why. Worth a read.

--Dave (blazersub@yahoo.com)

0 recs | Comment 16 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

It all depends on how they do it

I really disagreed with Dwight on this one. It’s really quite simple:

- Create a separate organization
- Make the leader be someone who has no reason to be biased (sadly that rules out Mark Cuban, which would be a ball). No former referee, owner, etc.
- Inform the organization that the primary goal is to get calls correct, mitigated by maintaining a reasonable game time. Let them adjust the rules for referees (like end of quarter, replay, etc)
- Make transparency part of the mission statement.
- Find some way to have them answer to the fans (this is a toughie. Scientific polling may be necessary)
- Have an oversight committee unrelated to the head of the group to make sure their mission statement is enforced.

Make it happen tomorrow. Oh wait, that takes control away from David Stern.

Nevermind.

by Timmay! on Jul 4, 2008 6:08 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs

i agree

Check Out My Blog

by Zaron5551 on Jul 4, 2008 7:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hmm...

Dwight might have a point about how it was in the past. But he’s assuming granting autonomy to a new entity would lead to the same outcome.

"Accountability is what’s needed. But what isn’t needed is autonomy."-Dwight Jaynes

Why are they mutually exclusive? Why not set up a situation with real accountability to a real unbiased governing body while keeping it autonomous from the N.B.A.? I think what is needed is a system that offers both accountability and autonomy. Dwight might have a very valid point about the flaw in the system before but I think the concept of an autonomous body that is kept transparent and accountable is still the N.B.A.’s best direction.

"Mother Nature started this fight, I think it's about time we ended it!"

by Krang on Jul 4, 2008 8:09 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I like it

Make the refs answer postgame questions like “What the _ were you thinking on that play, Darrell?” Provide a live postgame feed with video replays from every camera angle imaginable. Let the ref tell his side of the story, maybe we’ll all learn something about how they call a game? (But don’t leave it up to a spin doctor spokesman, make the actual ref who “blew” the call face the media lights and the beat writers!)

Post game ratings would skyrocket, I tell ya! More TV revenue for Mr. Pompous Stern, how can he say “no” to that?

by two4larue on Jul 5, 2008 12:56 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

And...

...levy heavy fines. Sadly, targeting the pocketbook seems to be one of the very few ways of getting one’s attention. Then direct the confiscated monies to the Rookie Referee Development League.

Also, to counter the predictable hesitancy such a system would foster, develop a program to reward particularly good (gutsy) calls those post-game videos would capture.

by Dr Dave on Jul 5, 2008 8:13 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Some valid points in the article, but I can't say I agree.

I strongly disagree with the idea that refs should be held up to the same kind of public scrutiny as players and coaches who make 7 figures to play basketball. Yes, they should be held accountable. No, they should not be interviewed post game about calls they made, and be subjected to the demonization that follows from there.

In addition, this column is an example of why I usually avoid Jaynes’ little editorial pieces. He blasted several referees and former referees pretty hard, and never included any facts to show they actually deserved it.

lickety-brindle

by Billy Ray Bates on Jul 5, 2008 8:26 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I agree with your thoughts on post game

I don’t think that would actually help. It would only make the whole situation more volatile. I can only imagine hacked off beat writers trying to get the guy to admit he cost the team they are covering the “right” to go to the finals.

PTB Liberation Day - 2/10/04

by tssbro on Jul 5, 2008 12:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Not the same as a union, but still potential problem

Anytime you outsource responsibility for something, it becomes harder to deal with individuals you have problems with at the other org. The only leverage the league would have left would be to threaten to fire the entire group and bring in new one.

I’m not entirely sure what he problem that needs solving is. If it is that people feel Stern has ordered the refs to influence the outcome of games, then the only real solution would be to make the refs accountable to someone other than the league. As long as it is the leauge, it doesn’t really matter whether the accountability is individually, or through a single “independent” manager.

If the problem is the quality of calls, then all these calls for more openness may make a little more sense. However, most calls are so subjective, and must be made as such split second decisions, that I don’t think they can get much better. Most of the problems I see are with the league/owner directives to call silly touch fouls.

by hoopla-pdx on Jul 5, 2008 10:41 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

See my post below that was meant to be a reply here.

PTB Liberation Day - 2/10/04

by tssbro on Jul 5, 2008 12:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

+1

The NBA will always be involved somehow with the officiating, even if it is an “outside body.” The NBA will still be signing everybody’s paychecks so it will never be truly autonomous.

The best part of the Jaynes’ article is his description of how hard the game is to officiate. Basketball officiating will always be subjective and no amount of tweaking to organizations will change this fact. They will always be failing in somebody’s mind. They seem to be taking steps to be more open and to have some oversight that will at least clear up some of the questions about the NBA influencing outcomes of games via the refs.

PTB Liberation Day - 2/10/04

by tssbro on Jul 5, 2008 12:13 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Anyone interested in this idea?

I had the idea before last season to make a website that would let you comment on the refs for each game, link to youtube clips of calls, etc. I didn’t have the time to make it happen before last season, but I plan on getting it up before next season. Do you guys think that would be a good start to having public voice on the refs?

The url will be savethenba.com… which I already have but nothing is there yet. Keep an eye on it after the schedule is released.

by danielfarrell on Jul 5, 2008 12:43 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Your idea for a website sounds interesting

but I would like to see how it is implemented before I give it a thumbs up or down.

I am quite sure that if it is well done, it would become a useful forum for those of us that really get cranked up about this topic.

One of my concerns is that the quality of most youtube clips is lame.

LMA's reign as "LaMonster of the Low Post" has just begun!

by LaMarvelous on Jul 6, 2008 6:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

thanks

Thanks for replying. I agree that most youtube clips are lame quality wise. I’m not sure how else I could let people post videos and still have a legal buffer. I’ll investigate that a little.

Any other thoughts on what would make that type of site more useful?

by danielfarrell on Jul 6, 2008 7:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Absolutely

And I think this would be great. I wish there were a way to incorporate it into this site.

—I don’t think you’d need to solicit clips very hard. Any fan that was jacked up about a blown call against their team could submit it for consideration. In fact your hardest task might be to avoid duplicate posts and split discussion.

—In addition to comments there should be a quick vote “right call, wrong call, undecided” with every clip. This is where you pull your data from.

—Another obstacle to overcome would be the old “We only got one camera angle on that” argument. Everything could look like a foul from the other side. It would have to be understood that any conclusion on a specific play would pale in comparison to the overall data.

—Speaking of individual plays…there will be a tendency of people who were screwed by the call to vote earlier and far more often than people who benefitted from it. Blazer fans will forever remember the one play where they got a bad whistle while guarding Kobe and L*ker fans won’t even regsiter it as an issue. Again the overall trends will be far more telling than an individual judgment. That said, having a way to limit people to a single account and vote would be pretty important. A way to track how often a voter votes for or against a particular team would also be great. A way to weigh partisan vs. non-partisan voters on a given call would take the cake.

—The most important thing would be the end-of-year statistics. Who is actually blowing the whistle on these plays? How often does a certain ref’s call end up being overturned or at least seriously questioned by the popular vote? Are there refs who get vindicated at a higher percentage than others? (Again it might not be a straight “right or wrong” percentage, but percentage against the average. For instance ref calls get voted wrong an average of 70% of the time, but this ref’s calls are more like 85%. That’s bad. Another ref is only voted wrong 55% of the time. That’s good.)

How’s that for starters?

—Dave

by Dave on Jul 6, 2008 9:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs