Fire the Refs! (Or, well...not.)
by Dave on Sep 17, 2009 12:50 AM PDT
Email
PrintYesterday the incomparable TrueHoop found this article at Forbes.com on the impending lockout of NBA officials. It's an interesting read, one that's highly critical of the refs. The thread throughout echoes whispers floating across NBA Nation: Could David Stern play Ronald Reagan to the referees' air traffic controllers and just axe the whole lot, starting from scratch? The author hints this might not be a bad thing.
As anyone who's read here for more than two minutes knows, I tend to leave the refs alone. It's nearly impossible to discuss them meaningfully when every fan base in existence claims they're at fault for any half-significant loss. It robs you of the evaluative words you need to employ. Yes, there are situations in which officiating makes a difference but those don't happen as often as advertised.
On the other hand you won't find me apologizing for the refs much either. They're far from perfect. The game is so fluid and quick that it's hard to define infractions, let alone react to them. Most often it comes down to a judgment call. Judgment calls invariably fall prey to any number of human weaknesses ranging from misapprehension to corruption. The league has witnessed plenty of incidents on both ends of that scale and everywhere in between. It's to the point now that the only criteria by which the layman has a fair chance to judge are the tendencies of the refs themselves. We can't argue convincingly what's a foul and what's not in most situations. All we can do is point out when that wasn't a foul a minute, night, or week ago but it's being whistled now. That's an unfortunate situation as there's little or no hope of evaluating the system by objective, commonly-held standards. You can only evaluate the system by its own implied values which are mostly unclear and undoubtedly self-serving.
Despite that I have several problems with the article in question and with the idea of recycling the entire cadre of referees.
One of the main arguments for viewing the current crop of refs with suspicion is the Tim Donaghy scandal. There hasn't been a more foundation-shaking development in the league since the recreational drug epidemic a couple of decades ago. You can't blame people for making free with the tar brush given that kind of stimulus. But the question here isn't how to exact revenge for corruption past. The question is how to solve the problem if one still exists. Would hiring an entirely new crop of officials lessen the chances of corruption occurring?
I suppose if you could prove that every single ref in the system now is connected with the gambling underworld you could make a case. But if that were verifiable the axe would already be falling. In reality it doesn't make sense that these problems would venture beyond a select few. The logistical problems of controlling the entire referee corps would be a nightmare. Besides, murder will out, as they say. At some point the accusations would have spread further if Donaghy's sin were common to the whole. Somebody would be blowing the whistle in the other direction and they'd have a ton of evidence to back it up.
Falling short of being able to show the whole system is corrupt, we're forced to use common sense as our measuring stick. Whose corruption would be easier to engineer, that of experienced officials who have been vetted, traced, and evaluated on a consistent basis or that of a large group of untested newcomers on whom you have little or no data? Were I trying to get my hooks into NBA officials I'd pray for the whole system to be flushed. I know the 60 or so referees they're going to have to turn to next. All I need are a couple of pliable candidates and I've got Donaghy all over again, probably multiplied. How are they going to figure it out? They don't know these officials or their patterns. These officials don't know the NBA game. If they ever get raked over the coals they can either say, "That's just the way I call games" or "Hey, I'm new at this!" It's going to take years for them to build enough evidence to attribute shady calls to anything but those two reasons. And it's not like they can draw on a huge pool of replacements even should they suspect. Having already relegated themselves to using the B Team the league isn't going to be eager to see what the C Squad looks like.
The article also bemoans the infamous star system, laying it at the feet of the refs. Are we ready to believe that the officials instituted those practices without the implicit or complicit cooperation of the league? They all had a meeting one day and randomly decided to start protecting stars and the NBA just hasn't gotten around to noticing yet? If the league has a beef with the star system it need look no further than the nearest mirror. It evaluates its officials after every game. If the league started cracking down on Jordan calls and Bird calls and Howard and James calls they'd be taken care of. Heck, all it would take is David Stern standing at a podium demanding that the refs call a foul as a foul no matter who it is on. "We don't like this. It's ruining the game and our credibility. We're going to demand that our officials be accountable in this area and we will make sure our superstars have to conform to the same rules as everybody else." You're never going to hear those words because the league sees the star system as beneficial to fan enjoyment, TV ratings, and jersey sales. You can recycle as many refs as you want. Until you address the problem at the source it won't matter one bit.
Besides, if LeBron James publicly pitches a fit with Steve Javie and Javie tosses him the league has little choice but to support the ref. They can put pressure on him, but Javie's not going anywhere. If LeBron James gets tossed by Shecky Gruberman straight off the boat from the Outer Mongolian B-League, who is everyone going to side with up to and including the league office? They don't have a leg to stand on. At that point everybody and their uncle will be crying to have the old refs back.
And that's the final point. The calls are the calls. They're quite difficult. Some are made, some are missed. Those same calls are going to have to be adjudicated no matter what batch of referees you put on the floor. Does anybody think that a herd of rookie refs are going to be able to handle those calls better on a nightly basis than the refs we already have, even with the imperfections in the latter group? It would be a nightmare...a nightly circus of the absurd. ESPN could make an entire SportsCenter out of botched calls. The refs would become the story more than the play. And who is going to teach these neophytes, helping them to overcome their pratfalls? With every experienced ref gone they're left to learn on their own. Again you're looking at a process of years before they can evolve into seasoned hands and with no map in front of them it's pretty much guaranteed they'll hit every roadblock and dead end along the way. You'd sentence a generation of fans and players to absurdity without any guarantee that you'd come out in a better place at the end of it all. Since we've brought up gambling, anybody want to set the odds on fans ever ceasing to complain about the officials no matter who wears the uniforms?
The article in question ends with this little gem of reasoning:
Of course, there's no way to be sure that a new crop of game officials will perform any better than the current one. But they wouldn't be worse.
As many flaws as the current system and those who inhabit it have, I think we all could envision it being worse. I've just spelled out a few means by which that could happen. The question at hand isn't how to avoid getting worse. The refs we have can manage that. The question is how to get better. And this solution doesn't do it. It's a disaster waiting to happen and no amount of emotion, angst, or dreamed retribution can disguise that.
--Dave (blazersub@yahoo.com)
77 comments
|
4 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Agreed: fix is not to fire all refs
But many of the necessary fixes to ensure long-term officating quality would be unconditionally opposed by most of the referees’ union, especially the senior members. Basketball is a young man’s game, and it makes little sense to have such elderly refs (Salvatore especially) making split-second judgments. Hard to find a middle ground when the most influential members of the referees’ union will be the ones most staunchly against changes that could emphasize quality of officiating over job security of officials
Do you feel that way when you get into an airplane?
Personally I want the most experienced professionals behind the cockpit, not some snot nosed kid right out of flight training. Umpires in baseball certainly don’t have to be young, but you could make a case that baseball is a young mans game. Ask any person who has been at his job for years how it feels to be treated like he’s obsolete by some young greenhorn who thinks he has all the answers. If the man can still run up and down the court and his eyes haven’t betrayed him, I’ll take experience over youth every time.
I don't want someone flying a plane who's eyesight is suspect
I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich
I agree with your final statement
And disagree that that describes some of the most experienced NBA refs
It sounds like age is one of the issues on the table
According to the latest ESPN article:
McMorris [the refs union negotiator] alleged the NBA was trying to purge older referees by asking for systemic contract language concessions that would shield the league from age discrimination laws
.
i just dont understand why this contract issue is even becoming a question about bad calls in games...
this is a question about labor power and the refs have a right to bargain for whatever they want… regardless of how fans feel about “bad” calls.
talking about human beings with jobs here. anyone who has been out of a job for any amount of time knows what im talking about.
But if the Refs don't have power...
To me, this piece was about one potential fall-out from these negotiations; ending up with new refs. We don’t really know how much power the refs have because we don’t know how much the league values the current group and their experience.
I don’t like the idea of new refs, for a short lock-out period, or permanently. They aren’t perfect, but they mostly do what the league asks of them.
I really just want the game to be the story.
All that glitters isn't chrome
i see what ur saying about the post. but to me, judging on the comments from here...
people are trying to figure out what they think about this solely on what will give them the perception of better refereeing. to me, that shouldn’t be the only consideration; that is, we should think about job security for fellow workers.
When you're considering whether to re-up someone's contract
isn’t it a good idea to consider how well they performed. Not questioning their performance would be negligence.
I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich
no i disagree. my point is that as observers we shouldn't be judging this mainly on what will give us better officiating...
in so far as we perceive that its better officiating. People are saying things like “i support bringing in new refs because it will give us better officiating… or i dont support brining in new refs because it will make officiating worse.”
thats the wrong attitude as a human being in my opinion. job security of fellow man should also be apart of our collective opinion on this.
Are you a union rep?
"BEER IS LIVING PROOF THAT GOD LOVES US"
- Benjamin Franklin-
by We-B-Dunkin on Sep 17, 2009 11:07 AM PDT up reply actions
Double standard
Players and coaches deal with trigger happy fans, owners, and GMS all the time and i don’t see many people standing up for the “job security of fellow man.” It’s only fair the officials be held to the same standard
i think those people should not have to deal with it either. it should be one of many things considered when forming an opinion about that.
why oppose this? what is at stake? are you afraid its being to nice?
Job security in any job should relate directly to performance
If you do a good job you are secure if you suck bye-bye.
"BEER IS LIVING PROOF THAT GOD LOVES US"
- Benjamin Franklin-
by We-B-Dunkin on Sep 17, 2009 11:44 AM PDT up reply actions
sure... but this is a contract negotiation about a group of employees, with unilateral firing for all employees no matter their individual competency being used as a tactic in those negations...
it isn’t a case of whether one individual should be fired or not, or promoted or not. And even in that case… If you think that when managers fire employees and leave them out of work the ramifications for that person and his/her family never cross that managers mind, not even once, then your naive about human character. I think it should be our job to tease that little thought, even if its just an inkling split-second thought, out a little bit to make it a bigger part of the debate. not the only part. but at least have it in the discussion.
anyone who has watched college basketball, particularly at the mid-major level and below
… knows the reffing could get a lot worse, which is not to say that it couldn’t get a whole lot better.
Nice piece, Dave.
I was about to say that as well
If ya don’t like NBA refs, watch ANY OTHER LEVEL IN THE ENTIRE UNIVERSE.
The Olympics were awful, Euroball is awful, college is awful.
The NBA is not perfect by a long shot, but star calls exist on every level, as do reputation calls. As do missed calls, revenge calls, make up calls, etc.
NBA refs get more of them right by a long shot. Not even close.
And if ya talk to any old timer, it used to be worse, with NBA refs openly holding grudges against active players and everyone knowing about it but no one doing anything to rectify it. In today’s 24 hour internet sports media, if any ref was known to actively dislike any player they’d stand to lose their job over not being objective enough (not that a current ref can’t hold a negative opinion like that in mostly-secret right now).
Refs are human, and humans make mistakes. Basketball is insanely tough to referee, as so much happens on every play. You can almost call a foul on any play, and what we love about it (the pace, the fluidity, the complexity) is exactly what makes it so tough to referee.
I think the system can be improved. More open critiques and explanations. I don’t want to make the refs the story of the game more than they are now, but having them able to explain calls more openly, and not have the league make any criticism (no matter how valid) against the refs a taboo subject, and making the feedback they get more transparent… so those of us who want to know the WHY of how they made this or that call, and when big mistakes happen what sort of process is implemented to TRY to prevent it from happening again (because after all, all they can do is try. They are human).
It’ll never ever ever ever be perfect. It CAN be better, and we should strive for that, but thinking NBA refs are so bad that it couldn’t get any worse is downright dumb. It can get a helluva lot worse. It’s why I can’t watch any level aside from the NBA.
Well, I can watch the Olympics… but it’s really damn annoying.
Mortimer
I disagree about Euro-referees being worse
Subjectively (at the top level of course, not in some Belgian second league) they are as or more experienced and have the players better under control by talking to them or even outright shutting them up. They are taking as much pride in their job as NBA refs, FIBA rewards and acknowledges good refs, and there are whole generations of good refs like the Belosevic family. The refs in the Euroleague final four are insanely experienced, at least just as experienced as NBA playoff refs, with the good ones being invited again and again to lead ref teams and younger refs being brought in as assistants to keep things fresh. It’s also a question of supply and demand: The supply from all the national leagues is larger than in the US, and there aren’t that many top tournaments.
FIBA Europe Referee Co-ordinator Miguel Betancor last year:
“Currently we have a very good level of officiating in Europe, you only have to look at the global competitions to see that Europe supplies the majority of referees for those tournaments. However, we must work now to ensure that the next generation of referees are better, because the next generation of players and coaches will also be at a higher level. As officials, we must keep pace with changes in the game.”
Can’t say I remember a quote like that from an NBA refereeing supervisor.
I agree that a labor fight isn’t the best moment to call for major change and the current refs are mostly the best the NBA can get. It wouldn’t help to reach an agreement fast if Stern or one of his deputies stood on a podium and said “not only do the current referees demand too much money, they are also bad.” It also wouldn’t help to build trust between fans and refs/the league if a number of rookie refs now literally blow calls every night until Christmas or the All-Star break. But the issue needs to be addressed. The first step in any successful change process is definitely there: A great sense of urgency that things are not going well after the last playoffs with all those technical fouls and retracted call, and the betting scandal. At least among fans and the media. Probably among players who admit that they don’t understand a number of rules. One can only hope the NBA and some leading figures among the refs share that view and commit to more actions for transparency, clearer rules and better education. However their very cookie cutter replies to complaints (“our employees are the most metricized group in the world bla bla everything is sunshine bla bla”) don’t give me that much hope.
There's Gotta Be More To Life
by Norsktroll on Sep 17, 2009 2:00 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
They´re not very bad but they also make a lot of mistakes:
Spain against Slovenia (Euro 2009). Spain lost the game by 1 point. The game went to extra time when Lorbek steped three or four steps back without bouncing the ball and made a shot to tie the game with 0,2 on the clock. It was a very obvious travelling. This is the last play, in the last second of extra time, no foul called:
Marc Gasol said the refs have not respect for the new kid and don´t call this kind of fouls in the last play of a game if you don´t play through your star.
Those crews don't get a chance to know each other and work together
It’s a mish-mash, of course they are inconsistent. I think you are comparing apples and oranges.
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Sep 17, 2009 7:08 AM PDT up reply actions
So what you are saying
is that it’s a total nightmare and there are no easy answers no matter what happens…
"No disrespect to Jeff Blake"
by Eat Politicians on Sep 17, 2009 1:38 AM PDT reply actions
You make a lot of good points
to counter the kneejerk “throw the bums out” which no doubt will be the first impulse of many fans. Last season I briefly looked around at some other teams’ fan websites and it seemed every single one was complaining about the refs. It was absurd.
That said, the refs can be infuriating. I know that in the days of Shaquille vs Sabonis there was bad call after bad call, all favoring the star. I did then and still tend to blame David Stern.
His rejoinder might be that the hardcore basketball junkie (few in number) may want to see the sport in its purest form, but the more casual fans (who are legion) want to view stars whom they are familiar with have big games featuring plenty of fodder for instant-replayable highlights.
The NBA (Stern) no doubt believes it does its best to satisfy both.
ignacio
I think this is one case where the internet makes it seem worse than it is
I’ve grown to like watching classic games on NBA TV, and I’d say today’s refs are quite a bit better. If we had the internet in the 70’s, it’d be the same complaining and moaning about the refs as today.
They’re an easy target, and since no one can deny that they DON’T make mistakes, they’ll always be a target.
Personally, I do not like star calls, but I am okay with reputation calls. If Joel blocked a shot that may have got some hand but it’s close, you can let it go, for example. They reward past work, and while still biased like star calls they are at least more earned— and more likely to be right.
When Wade gets a call every time he drives the lane and no one touches him, it is annoying. When Yao was fouling every time down court and the refs wouldn’t call it on him because they know the Rockets need him, it is annoying. Those sort of things should improve and I hope they do.
But we can’t remove innate biase from the refs, and they will reward players that they know are good, and are used to seeing them do the things they do.
I think some will say reputation calls are just as bad at star calls, but I see it more like a reputation call breaks a tie whereas a star call can be imaginary. If ya know what I mean.
Morty
At least in the "old days" you wouldn't have all those absurd technical fouls and ejections
I might be wrong, but I think nobody was ejected for McHale vs. Rambis when people were flying into the photographers and first row. It’s not that I want hockey goons and fights every week, but I also don’t want ticky tacky touch fouls against players fighting for position called every few seconds, and players who can’t look at each other or the refs with an angry stare. 75+ free throws in a playoff game as it happened repeatedly last season is way too much.
There's Gotta Be More To Life
I definitely agree about that
The fear of being called a league of thugs has made the NBA so scared of allowing any fight happen on the court, no matter if it is deserved, and they punish WAY too harshly any sort of scuffle these days.
It’s silly. Fights happen, especially in heated physical moments. And KG wouldn’t be so damn annoying if he had to worry someone would break his nose. It is a great deterrent.
Even though football and baseball players get in trouble as much, if not a lot more, because the NBA is a “black” league it gets the label of being full of thugs. So, it has made the NBA incredibly trigger happy with giving out technicals and suspensions for things that used to not even be news.
Morty
The replacement refs in the 1995 dispute were the most absurd thing
I’ve seen in my 40+ years of watching the NBA. The calls were inconsistent from one ref to another, from one quarter to another. The refs were intimidated by the star players, and it was simply chaos and a parade of foul shooting.
I hated going to those games because it was utter frustration watching the refs guess at calls and being unfamiliar with the talent of the players. A big difference between our veteran referees and a new rookie referee when they come into the league is that the veterans know the abilities of the players and so they don’t blow their whistles anticipating fouls that never occur. The replacement refs didn’t have that experience and consequently the games just deteriorated into absurdity.
I’m quite serious when I say they should have just shut the season down until they settled the labor dispute in 1995. You will never appreciate how good the NBA refs really are until you see what happens without them. When the real refs returned we gave them standing ovations when they were introduced at the start of games for several weeks.
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Sep 17, 2009 1:51 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Memories are short
I hope that people inside the league office remember how bad it was and aren’t seriously thinking of this getting to a lock-out.
Of course, it really comes down to how serious a statement they feel they need to make to the players union. They don’t really care about a million bucks or so in hotel and flight upgrade costs.
All that glitters isn't chrome
The best solution is....
Fire Violet Palmer. Now. Do it.
We all know she’s not competent. Several ‘casual’ fans at the Denver finale this year commented that she was actually making correct calls for a change (which she was).
When people who go to games just to go can comment accurately about the officiating record of one particular referee, it’s scary and needs fixing.
That being said, seriously though. Refs should be invisible for the most part as the game is played, not the ones making decisions on how it’s played (i.e. regular season vs. playoffs) or on a call that will cause a huge momentum shift. Refs should be unbiased to player status and also not pre-judge a situation before it’s even occured (calling fouls before they actually happen).
Blazers win!
You hit the nail on the head
I think the biggest problem with officiating is the difference between regular season v. playoffs. I understand that each ref is going to call a game different than the next guy and that stars get all the love, but why is it just a given that “playoff basketball” is a completely different set of rules than regular season? Sports writers, commentators, and everyone else just justifies terrible officiating as “it being the playoffs”. I think if they are going to call the playoffs a certain way, then agree to call the regular season that way. Its the same game and thus should be the same rules, and like xman here says the refs should be invisible.
by oregonsportsaddict on Sep 17, 2009 8:05 AM PDT up reply actions
I have made this case many times, but I will make it again
Violet Palmer is not the worst ref in the NBA. Not even close. People notice her bad calls more because of her gender, but she’s nowhere near as bad as the likes of Jack Nies, Ron Garretson, Joey Crawford, etc.
by jksnake99 on Sep 17, 2009 10:29 AM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
I think she actually calls close to the rules, which is good in some situations but disrupts the flow of the game when you call every touch foul and makes people notice her more. And of course her gender figures into the equation.
There's Gotta Be More To Life
by Norsktroll on Sep 17, 2009 10:31 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I agree that the refs will never be perfect and the NBA has the best referees. But..
Three things drive me nuts:
The difference in calls between the playoffs and the regular season.
Star calls.
The fact that the rule book is written in such a way that it’s meaningless. Seriously, try reading it. The NFL, MLB, MLS, etc have very clear cut rules; anyone can see the right call on a slo-mo replay. The NBA, there’s always a debate, one announcer thinks one thing, the other thinks something else. This drives me crazy and it fuels star calls / play off calls.
At the very least, the league should strive to be consistent. They don’t, and it seriously detracts from the sport. I don’t like basketball turning into some pro-wrestling esque entertainment hybrid.
Well done Dave.
As much grief as I give the refs, I find all your arguements sound and (as usual) level headed. THE WORST thing that could happen to the NBA would be another gambling/game-fixing scandle. I don’t think my crazed fandom would withstand it.
Rudyculize: The act of Rudy making others look slow, dim and generally oafish.
http://www.myspace.com/y5k
by Y5k on Sep 17, 2009 6:25 AM PDT via mobile reply actions
suppress star calls
and referees will look much better. Lebron and Kobe just have to drive to get a basket or free-throws. Instead of calling a charge. that,s so infuriating.
Agreed. We all hate it.
But the NBA in its lust for money thinks it’s a great game plan. May backfire.
Rudyculize: The act of Rudy making others look slow, dim and generally oafish.
http://www.myspace.com/y5k
by Y5k on Sep 17, 2009 4:23 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
I'd be perfectly willing to recruit and train a whole new cadre of refs
Sure the first few years would be rough but in the long run you would have a much better product.
If you believe the refs should be replaced or not is simply a reflection of how bad you think they are. I think they are really really bad. Awful.
Blazer Fan
I find it interesting that some refs stick around for so long.
Everyone from NBA Players to NBA dancers have to “try out” every year….but it seems like we have a little ref club that generally stays the same. The same guys are reffing now as when I was a kid.
The league is a multi-billion dollar monster—why can’t it throw a few million into a referee scouting program? Have them look at the college and NBDL leagues and see what refs are good and which ones aren’t? Then offer extensive training to the ones that look fit to make the cut, based on head knowledge, physical fitness, and any other possible factors that might relate to reffing.
Ha for big man coach!
That is the same thing that I have been saying about Oregon driving licence.
Oregon lets drivers keep their licence for years after they are no longer fit to drive, as long as the pay the renewal licence.
That is somewhat the same with Refs. they let them keep refing regardless of circumstances. They have a job to do and they should take re-training or be subject to the same fines as NBA players.
hg
Why am I not shocked
that an article in Forbes would have an anti-union slant?
"It all depends on where his growth will come and we think his growth will come within us" -- Kevin Pritchard on Jerryd Bayless
by Jumbo on Sep 17, 2009 7:28 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Unions are great
I mean, who wouldn’t want labor lockouts, protecting horrible employees, suppressing real talent, biting the hand the feeds you, etc? It’s the American way!
"HA HA HA HA HA
I'm not laughing, I'm just listing the five ugliest Blazers ever."
- rockingharder
Change the system of Refs...
I think that if I were an official I might feel like there’s no room for promotion, it’s a little bit of a dead end. Why not promote 15 or 20 refs to a new position like ref coach or what ever you want to call it. They’d be responsible for directing the actual game referees and maybe act as an alternate during games. This would allow 20 or so new refs who can blend in more easily with the experienced.
My counter to the idea that new refs could be bought more easily and you couldn’t detect it for some time until you analyzed their patterns is that an experienced ref can hide it much better (not to mention that there’s always a few new refs even now). But I don’t think this problem points to a solution where all the refs are fired. But, if there was a promotional structure with experienced refs reviewing and guiding then there would be more incentive to get things right so that one day you could be in charge.
I agree w/ Forbes: Start Over
I don’t necessarily believe that the league is corrupt.
I do believe that all institutions suffer from their own inertia and resistance to change—and in this, the NBA is no different.
Like pruning trees, turning over management, workforce, players on a team… all of this is necessary to continue an evolutionary process towards improvement. This is not always a gentle process or even a mistake-free process.
But the alternative is outright stagnation, which in the long run I feel is more harmful.
I need look no further than one simple symptom from the Donoghy scandal that tarnished the entire league’s officiating for me:
Did anyone else notice that a whole bunch of the NATIONAL Basketball Association’s referees were from some little dumpy high school from Pennsylvania?
I don’t need corruption to know that a system has achieved stagnation and resistance to change—all I need to see is a “club-like” atmosphere and an “untouchable” attitude. I think we have that in spades in the NBA referee process.
Dave oftentimes stresses the need for reason and prudence in these sorts of issues and I respect that. However, look at what we’ve been trained to live with. Look at what we’ve been trained to accept as part of the regular course of the NBA: no fouls called in final minutes, star treatment calls, only casual and selective enforcement of ball-handling issues, make-up calls, lack of transparency in evaluation… when you sum up what we, as fans, have grown to tolerate one can only be reminded of the frog tolerating boiling water so long as the temperature is increased only incrementally.
Resetting the system is not just about resetting the referees. It allows the NBA to re-examine the entire officiating process. Need another referee? Maybe a booth referee to monitor time? Retroactive penalties for ball-handling infractions? (Wouldn’t that be funny: a fine for every travel—PGs would revolt.) I’m making some absurd examples only to highlight that even discussing these issues is completely out-of-bounds within the existing structure.
Were I David Stern (who himself will need to be cycled out at some point), I would relish the opportunity to hit the reset button. Yes, evolution always hurts. But it’s these major extinction level events that allow new species to evolve. Within the crater that would be left from firing all of the referees, I see the chance for a greatly improved NBA and that’s something of a worthwhile gamble in my opinion.
Buck Williams for the hall of fame
Referring is like politics.
It has been said that if we fired all the political personal, within one year the new crop would be just like the old crop.
I think the general fan will let imperfection go in referring, but when Jordan announced publicly that he was guarding Clyde because the refs wouldn’t call fouls on him is a disgrace. When a coach can go public to the media and campaign for the refs to start calling the game to favor their team and get positive results is a disgrace. To let a call go at the end of a game that they have been calling the whole game to let a preferred team win is a disgrace. A foul is a foul no matter when it is made. The media and announcers created this problem by campaigning that the refs should be the deciding factor of who wins and who loses. Don’t the media realize that the players have figured this out and decide to foul because they know they won’t be called? Therefore the let the media or announcers decide the outcome of the game.
It was said that the NBA is at fault more then the refs, by not publicly policing the refs as they do the players. As Dave said, make Stein stand up and announce that referring will be policed and fines and suspension will be handed down for repeated bad calling against certain teams and players, or something like that.
It has often been said that the NBA or the refs took the finals away from Dallas against Miami. I would say LAL against everybody was awarded the contest before it happened but most of them were against Portland, so I would be tagged as being biased.
Anyway, most people will let the bad calls go as long as it isn’t continuously on one side of the court. I even hate home court advantage calls even if Portland also gets the benefit of calls. The reason teams have bad road records is because they can’t do their jobs efficiently because of the lack of calls against the home court. For instance, if a player drives the lane and get pounded on with no calls and it prevents a basket, sooner or later the said player will quit driving to the basket if they are guaranteed no rewards. Then they get accused for settling for jump shots.
Oops getting carried away. This is just the way I see it, not the way it probably is.
hg
I agree with the NBA on one thing
They need to get rid of the requirement to keep officials that are clearly past their prime. It should not be that officials that were old when I was growing up should still be doing games.
"Good evening Blazer fans, wherever you may be!"-Bill Schonely
Referring is like Politics
It has been said that if we fired all the political personal, within one year the new crop would be just like the old crop.
I think the general fan will let imperfection go in referring, but when Jordan announced publicly that he was guarding Clyde because the refs wouldn’t call fouls on him is a disgrace. When a coach can go public to the media and campaign for the refs to start calling the game to favor their team and get positive results is a disgrace. To let a call go at the end of a game that they have been calling the whole game to let a preferred team win is a disgrace. A foul is a foul no matter when it is made. The media and announcers created this problem by campaigning that the refs should be the deciding factor of who wins and who loss the game. Don’t the media realize that the players have figured this out and decide to foul because they know they won’t be called? Therefore the let the media or announcers decide the outcome of the game.
It was said that the NBA is at fault more then the refs, by publicly policing the refs as they do the players. As Dave said, make Stein stand up and announce that referring will be policed and fines and suspension will be handed down for repeated bad calling against certain teams and players, or something like that.
It has often been said that the NBA or the refs took the finals away from Dallas against Miami. I would say LAL against everybody was awarded the contest before it happened but most of them were against Portland, so I would be tagged as being biased.
Anyway, most people will let the bad calls go as long as it isn’t continuously on one side of the court. I even hate home court advantage calls even if Portland also gets the benefit of calls. The reason teams have bad road records is because they can’t do their jobs efficiently because of the lack of calls against the home court. For instance, if a player drives the lane and get pounded on with no calls and it prevents a basket, sooner or later the said player will quit driving to the basket if they are guaranteed no rewards. Then they get accused for settling for jump shots.
Oops getting carried away. This is just the way I see it, not the way it probably is.
hg
The enterainment factor alone makes me want there to be a lockout or whatever it is called
Even if the coaches called the game, I don’t think they could screw it up enough to alter the outcome. Bad calls would go on both side and the fans would be ever so angry. If they brought in a bunch of scrub refs, their bad calls would be worth a fanpost or two a day. I think it would be fun, not good for the NBA, but fun none the less.
Great
Just as Oden was on the verge of earning the respect of the officials… now he may have to start all over at square one…
I wish I spent more time playing catch with you and less time training my body and mind to kill you...
If some of them are soooo bad that we know their names...
that indicates a problem (as stated by an earlier poster).
Bavetta – please hang ‘em up. I don’t want you driving a car, never mind influencing the outcome of an NBA game.
Palmer – enough already.
Javie – if you take everything personally, you shouldn’t be in there.
Garretson – when you figure out the difference between a charge and a block, we’ll let you back in.
Add anybody that was a close friend of Donaghy (or was the first to get a call after a game from his cell) – here’s there door. Guilt by association, choose your friends better.
by Knobby on Sep 17, 2009 8:43 AM PDT reply actions 2 recs
Stars and stripes forever
The men in the striped shirts will always protect the stars in the league. They are like politicians. You could change out every single one of them and the system would be corrupt again in a few months. Take out one bad-ass terrorist and there’s someone even worse waiting to make a name for himself. Some may remember Jake O’Donnel, who for years carried a grudge against Clyde Drexler. These people might as well all be women because they can all tell you what you did wrong 15 years ago in detail. Change has to come from the top down, and there lies the problem.
by Phi Slamma on Sep 17, 2009 8:49 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
It's less about the refs & more about the league.
I think they should fire the commissioner & hire a commission of 5 or 6 people to oversee league operations. The league as it is right now is like a dictatorship, to much power in the hands of 1 man. I will stop my rant here or it may go on all day, if you couldn’t tell already I am NOT a big fan of King Stern the 1st
"BEER IS LIVING PROOF THAT GOD LOVES US"
- Benjamin Franklin-
While we're on the subject...
Does anyone remember when the NBA hired Army Maj. Gen. Ronald L. Johnson as “SVP of Referee Operations?” Apparently a lip-service move where they created a position to “help strengthen the league’s officiating programs following the Tim Donaghy scandal.”
I was psyched. I thought, “here’s a guy that can move in and shake things up.”
I saw a few interviews with him and wanted to jump through the screen. I have never in my life seen a more jaded, star-struck, brainwashed, unqualified, limp, sliver of a Yes Man tool in my life. What a complete joke. No offense to any American service personnel intended.
NBA officiating is notoriously bad
It is the worst of the three major professional sports. That said, I personally think there are some fairly easy fixes. Keep in mind, I do not believe the officials are all corrupt, and I don’t think games are decided by officials or teams are favored by officials.
1. I agree with the individual who suggested officials should have to routinely “try out” for their jobs. When you see some guy in his 50’s huffing and puffing up and down the court, it is hard to believe that he (or she) is going to consistently be able to get to the right spot on the court to call their portion of the game in a timely fashion. Make them earn their jobs.
2. I would like to see the league add 1 or 2 more officials. These guys sole job would be to stay on the baseline. If the league doesn’t like suggestion (1), they could take the older officials and just plant them on the baseline. Then the 3 roaming officials could call the rest of the court. By putting them on the baseline, you aren’t clogging up the court with more people, and you ensure having someone at that end on a fast break to see possible goaltends, out-of-bounds calls, etc., without having to race to get in position.
3. Attempts to publicly “lobby” the officials to call the game a certain way, a la Phil Jackson, should result in automatic suspensions as well as fines. So if the Zen Master wants to whine about how Kobe is getting beat up in the lane, then he misses the next game. If he does it again the same season, another suspension for him AND a player of the LEAGUE’s choosing. Fines obviously aren’t stopping the Jackson. If an owner does it, then the coach is suspended. These suspensions should take place the very next game, regardless of whether it is a playoff game.
4. I know the league evaluates its officials routinely. Perhaps these evaluations should be made either public, or available to the teams. So if there is a corrupt official, or one that routinely favors certain players or teams, that will become evident.
Yeah, yeah, I know, it’ll never happen.
Not more whistles on the court!
Re: 2. The LAST thing the NBA needs is more officials. Hey, these guys are human, and know that they get paid to… well, blow the whistle! If you add 2 officials, (or 1), the fouls per game would skyrocket, because there are now 5 whistles on te court instead of 3… The other 3 aren’t going to blow them less…
More refs, not more whistles
I’m not sure I agree with your assertion that more refs = more fouls. The amount of action doesn’t change, just the number of eyes on the game. And keep in mind that my proposal limits the space that each ref needs to watch. Just as in football and baseball, each official has a very specific duty. Thus, the homeplate umpire doesn’t make calls at second base, the line judge isn’t calling pass interference 20 yards downfield.
Furthermore, if it is combined with #4, there shouldn’t be more fouls called unless there are more fouls being committed that are not currently called.
Now, it could be that at first there might be more whistles blown because perhaps a lot of fouls do go uncalled (sort of like there is offensive holding on nearly every play in the NFL), but I would argue that it is up to the players to make that adjustment. This could open the game up a bit.
I also wouldn’t be opposed to widening the court slightly, to open the game up and make it perhaps slightly less physical.
Oh wow
(3) is one of the best ideas i hae heard in a LONG time. Too bad fun stuff like this won’t make it past the drawing board
I'm satisfied that NBA officiating is fine and about as good as it will ever get.
It’s an extremely tough job:
- Three officials have to keep an eye on ten players, each of whom could be committing an infraction at any time.
- The players are fast and strong, but not uniformly so. A foul to a player built like Rudy might knock him sideways but appear to have no effect on a player like Shaq.
- The players are almost constantly in motion but seldom at the same rate of speed.
- The players are constantly changing direction and jumping.
- Few refs are as tall as all but the shortest players, so the refs are always having to look around the players.
- The refs must keep an eye on the ball at all times.
- The refs must memorize a complex set of rules and be adept at applying them in real-time game situations.
- The refs must deal with game clocks, coaches, players, each other, fans yelling at them.
- Some calls, such as charging/blocking situations, are extremely tough to decide sometimes.
I think the real problem is that everyone wants perfection and that’s never going to happen. I’d rather see everyone accept that the best-trained, most highly paid officials are working NBA games and get off their backs.
extremely tough job, no question
the idea is to get the personnel best-suited for such challenges and complexities – not have a old boy’s* network/club/whatever they have which is markedly far from said “perfection.”
*okay, there is Violet
Your position, Mr. Animal, is uninspiring and simply not dramatic enough.
And I agree with you.
The cowards never started
The weak died along the way
Only the strong survived
They were the Trailblazers
Which supports my position above
of adding 2 more refs. I agree that it is a very difficult job. I disagree that the official do it uniformly well. I don’t think they are corrupt or biased, generally, but believe they are at a disadvantage, as you eloquently point out.
Needed: (1) RULES! (2) Enforcement!
My problem isn’t with the refs as much as the league. The game is extremely difficult to referee. But I think it’s the system to blame. Fixes I’d like to see:
- get rid of the old guys (obvious)
- get rid of Violet (she’s just pitiful, apologies to all Bedge ladies, but she’s just horrible)
- ENFORCE the rules consistently. No star calls. No makeup calls. No fan inspired calls. No different calls in the playoffs…
- change infractions so that more do NOT result in foul shots (the most boring part of the NBA, by FAR) BTW, they need to reduce the amount of time allowed to shoot fouls, and not allow any substitutions during a foul shot.. and no team huddles… just line up and shoot the dang ball…. .I think I would’ve gone insane watching the NBA because of foul shots by now if it weren’t for the best investion ever, the DVR… I haven’t suffered through a foul shot in years, except live… There should be very little stoppage of play for a foul shot.
- draft a clear, simple consistent set of rules, and publish them on the net.
The key is to start over with the rulebook:
This is the age of the internet. The rulebook ought to be on a website, with a set of video clips identifying acceptable and non-acceptable (foul) behavior.
And take a hard stance on the tough, more subjective calls. The charging semi circle was a great start. There should be even more absolutes, though…
My $.02, and yeah, it’ll never happen, and I’ll still yell at refs when I go to games…
(Sorry zebras, but you knew what you were getting into when you signed up…)
Good article
on a tough subject. Refs – love to hate ‘em. There are ALWAYS going to be a number of “bad” refs and refs that needed to retire 10/15 years ago (just how old is Garretson anyway??). It seems to me we seldom see “new” refs, unless the league makes a big deal of it (eg: Violet), but they have to be rotating some new ones in. The hardest part about “new” refs is they have no real place to train. MLB has it’s minor league (which is another thing the NBA needs) that you can evalute umps, the NFL has 4000 refs on the field so who can tell which one is new, and hockey doesn’t have refs as much as fight managers. The NBA does need to stop the “star” calls and to rewrite the rule book. Define exactly what is travel and what is a crab dribble, or palming, or charge. Maybe we should allow the international rim block to offset the Kobe and lebron dipsy-doodle drives.
Sorry – didn’t mean to go on such a rant. I will say, having been a ref for some HS games, it isn’t easy to catch all the calls and not effect the flow of the game. Maybe we should just let the players ref and have a playground atmosphere. ( no I’m not serious)
Again – Good article Dave
Timberwolves - NBA champs 2013!
(used with permission - Wolf in MO)
Interesting point
“The hardest part about "new" refs is they have no real place to train. "
There is the D-League. Interestingly, one of the points the refs and league disagree on is the officials rejected the leagues proposal for a referee development program!
Hmmm.
The "Star System" proves the league is corrupt for a fact.
Is there anyone here who doesn’t acknowledge that the “star system” exists? No? Okay, good, now if a sports league can give preferential treatment outside the actual written rules of the game, or interpret those rules more favorably for one player over another, with the objective of improving ratings and sales of merchandise, why in the world would we think they wouldn’t influence the outcome of games for the same reasons. Some teams are more popular than others, and increase ratings and sell more gear. We all admit they make or turn a blind eye to what some players do, and there has to be a motive for doing that. That same motive would obviously carry over to the team level, and when the outcomes of games are engineered, the motive of gambling also become a possible factor, oh yeah, and we know for a fact that it has been a factor in the past at least with Donaghy. The NBA is corrupt without a doubt, we just don’t know how far it goes. If it goes far enough, we may be watching “WWE basketball”, and if that is the case, I would find something else to occupy my time.
I’d rather have bad officiating for a while if it was honest, because at least it would be bad for all teams, thus equal. Keeping it honest would require oversight and review, maybe some replay challenges as well. If the league wanted to, they could clean up the officiating, but David Stern is a wise guy, who has no intention of cleaning up anything. I agree with those that have called for abolishing the “star system” and the “playoff officiating”, but am not holding my breath. Not because it would be so hard to implement as Dave has asserted, but because Stern is corrupt, and is trying to turn the NBA into the NBE. If there were any intent to improve officiating, it wouldn’t be happening right before the start of the season, when it is too late to train new officials adequately. Unfortunately these theatrics are about contract negotiations, rather than the quality and truthfulness of the NBA game.
Unbelievable
There are a lot of people on this site lobbying for a union lawyer job? The union rep should come here for support and arguments to support their pathetic case. Rarely has there been an issue which seems so cut and dry yet BE waffles up, down, and around the issue blindly spewing both sides of the issue and coming to the conclusion that it’s a tough job and what can you do?
Notwithstanding the ridiculous demands of their union (G_d forbid that they don’t get a pay/benefit raise in this economy) these pre-madonna refs deserve neither our respect or their jobs. Everyone agrees that their performance has been sub-par. Everyone agrees about the “star calls.” Everyone agrees that major changes are needed. Yet, there seems to be a consensus that this is the best the NBA can do barring David Stern demanding wholesale changes. Really? The referees aren’t responsible for doing their jobs with integrity without their boss demanding it? The referees can’t make their own moral check on their actions? Are referees incapable of making changes within their own group to better the game. Let’s stop blaming these problems on the system and let the blame fall where it clearly has landed….on the referees feet. David Stern isn’t running up and down the court with a whistle. Whatever happened to personal responsibility for our own labor; regardless if there is pressure to perform the job in a unethical or tainted way.
If NBA fans decide that poor officiating, poor judgement, blatant bias, and a dogmatic culture of protectionism for their jobs is the best we can do, we might as well welcome them back warts and all and crawl back under our rocks of denial. I’d rather have a less talented referees who may have a tad bit of integrity than the current crop of buffoons.
It would be nice if a BE article would pick a side on an issue rather than point out the obvious points and counterpoints. Granted, there are always many sides to an issue but rarely are all sides correct. It’s okay to step up and state an opinion…really. It would also be nice if NBA fans wouldn’t just succumb to mediocrity for the sake of ease. Grow a set already people and demand just a bit more from the NBA.
by ColoradoBlazerFan on Sep 18, 2009 6:35 AM PDT reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Days of NBA Lives: Wherein Roy Hibbert tap-dances to Maine
- Grizzlies Valentine’s Day cards are the key to love
- Kevin Love would like the NBA to take the MLB’s approach on All-Star games
- Kobe Bryant fires a few hilarious salvos at Jeremy Lin
- Brandon Jennings states the obvious regarding his 2014 free agency, everyone goes nuts
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
