This reffing is unbelievable.

[BorisDK1]

That was clearly a brain fart on Jack's part, I think you should let it go. Also, it was the other team, so Jack wasn't ranting that the Raptors were getting screwed.

That's not something you just kind of forget; either you understand the rules for the act of shooting and what governs it, or you don't. Jack doesn't.

And yes, it was in regards to the other team, which only goes to prove my point: Armstrong went tearing in on the officials without really having much of a rational basis for doing so. He decided the referees were terrible, and made an ass out of himself trying to prove that. (I'm trying to save people here doing the same to themselves.)

I'm a notorious official-hater myself from long ago, but when you actually review rulings without the heat of the moment bearing down on you, you see things really aren't that disparate from one team to another in the vast majority of games. Or portions of games. Is there some disparity? Sure. Is it enough to tilt a game from one team completely to another? No, it isn't.

[Mr Dynasty]

I don't remember the call but maybe we were in the penalty.

[Superchunk]

I don't remember the call but maybe we were in the penalty.

No, there was no doubt that Jack was embarassing himself, I got really confused thinking maybe I was missing some obscure rule...but no.

[Thelonious]

I don't remember the call but maybe we were in the penalty.

I think the referee still has to decide whether the foul was in the act of shooting regardless, and even if the shot misses.

And yes, Jack was likely trying to prove a point with unscrupulous arguments. It's just, people don't need to be told by the commentating crew that the Raps aren't getting a fair treatment. It's been obvious for some games now, and they only really made a concerted effort of not holding in their opinions since that last game in Indiana.

[Superchunk]

My issue with what you seem to be saying, Boris, is that officiating is influenced by a multitude of things other than the exact call, but it's impossible that in the NBA that this "analysis" blurs into team/player reputation calls.

If you are thinking about the calls beyond a clear-cut reaction to the play, how can you say difinitevely that things like reputation don't come into play for NBA refs?

[Superchunk]

Oh, and regarding that play Jack was ranting about, why did the refs have to go to the tape? It seemed to me that they were confused on the same thing that Jack was confused on, which is why I questioned my own sanity for a minute.

Anyone?

[lobosloboslobos]

All right, Boris, I think we'll have to agree to disagree. I don't think you actually understood what I was trying to get at at all unfortunately.

And if that's ad hominem (just looked it up) so be it. It's also true.

Well, argumentum ad hominem is logically fallacious and not all cogent; so it's not at all helpful in this conversation. It's just not something thoughtful people should utilize, and yes, I do consider you to be a normally thoughtful person (from what I've read). But you make personal attacks instead of dealing with things people are saying, and it's not becoming of thoughtful dialogue.

If I misunderstood you, I do apologize. Can you please clarify what I failed to address?

Sorry, Boris, no can do. You're not a child and if you haven't figured this stuff out by now you're certainly not going to learn it from me.

[BorisDK1]

Sorry, Boris, no can do. You're not a child and if you haven't figured this stuff out by now you're certainly not going to learn it from me.

You know, that is "horsepoop" (to quote you). You don't get to assail my character and call me all the synonyms of arrogant arrogant and unresponsive you can think of, when in fact I've gone through and answered line-by-line everything you've said. Not when you are 100% unwilling to deal with any substance of what I've said - and then, naturally, accuse me of misunderstanding you (condescendingly, of course ) and then refuse to clarify when I ask what there possibly is to mischaracterize.

I have been more than gracious with you despite the fact that the only thing you want to do is throw out ad hominem rhetoric. It appears to be the only thing you're willing to do, now, if not able. So, no, I'm not a child. But even if I were, I could see the consistent behaviour in this thread.

[lobosloboslobos]

Its hard to tell sometimes with people spouting theories like Stern hates Canada or one of the Raptor players slept with a ref's wife.

Occam's Razor -"other things being equal, a simpler explanation is better than a more complex one"

I prefer this to wild conspiracy theories but that's just me.

Hey for a guy who is claiming to be all about the facts how about sticking to them? You are blatantly twisting my words and you know it. I never claimed anything of the sort but you insisted there was no imaginable reason why the refs could be biased against the Raps and I provided a bunch of hypotheticals, including that one. But neither I nor anyone else has in any way suggested it as the actual reason so please don't pretend it has been.

[lobosloboslobos]

Sorry, Boris, no can do. You're not a child and if you haven't figured this stuff out by now you're certainly not going to learn it from me.

You know, that is "horsepoop" (to quote you). You don't get to assail my character and call me all the synonyms of arrogant arrogant and unresponsive you can think of, when in fact I've gone through and answered line-by-line everything you've said. Not when you are 100% unwilling to deal with any substance of what I've said - and then, naturally, accuse me of misunderstanding you (condescendingly, of course ) and then refuse to clarify when I ask what there possibly is to mischaracterize.

I have been more than gracious with you despite the fact that the only thing you want to do is throw out ad hominem rhetoric. It appears to be the only thing you're willing to do, now, if not able. So, no, I'm not a child. But even if I were, I could see the consistent behaviour in this thread.

I'm condescending? Lol. This from the guy who explicitly and repeatedly says he knows more about this reffing question than a) anyone else on this board b) the announcers and journalists c) the Raps management. I don't know what to say to that Boris. You feel so very attacked but if you review my posts you'll find precious little in the way of vicious insults and instead a few light-hearted jibes (silly, horsepoop), and throughout an honest attempt (rooted in genuine respect initially, though not now) to get you to behave with a little less arch civility and a little more acceptance that other people may have legitimate differing opinions, and to understand that acknowledging them will make others respect you and your opinions more. THAT is what you failed to grasp and that is what other posters see as well. Sorry to break it to you but if you act like a know-it-all in public then eventually you'll be called one. My knowledge of the game is limited and I know it, and I'd like to be able to learn from all posters, including you, but if you act like nobody else has a clue except you it just makes it difficult to take your comments seriously, and eventually someone like me comes along and decides to knock you off your high horse. Now you may not think I've succeeded, but the point is what are you doing on a high horse anyway?

[lobosloboslobos]

Hey Boris I'm sorry it came to this. You're a smart guy and probably a nice guy and I regret having been drawn into this unpleasantness and getting on my own high horse about telling anyone else what to do. So I apologize. It's friday night and we probably both have better stuff to do. I'm going to go watch a movie with my daughter. And I'll try not to be an assh*le tomorrow.

[Superchunk]

hey guys, at least it's an honest attempt at arguing a point instead of lol clegono is gay for brags lol for the 10 000 time.

[AcesFull]

I agree that the refs have been terrible in most of our games this year and that we've been the victim of many bad calls/non-calls. Several of our losses have been by small margins, so even a couple of bad calls can affect the outcome of games. It's no stretch to say that we could have won a few more games had the reffing been neutral. A Raptor fouled during a scoring opportunity that results in a turnover and a basket by the opposing team is essentially a 4 point swing directly caused by a non-call by the refs. A couple of those in a tight game can have a major impact on the result. It's extremely frustrating as a fan to watch this happen again and again to us, so I would definitely support any movement to bring light to this injustice.

[Crazy-Canuck]

There most definitely are referee biases in the NBA, there are also refs who have biases against specific teams/players. Now, that doesnt mean that 100% of calls go a certain way, it may mean certain teams may or may not get the benefit of the doubt or those 50/50 calls.

There is a reason why people make plays and win money just by knowing who is officating the game, no other refs impact the game like the ones in the NBA.

I myself, do make bets strictly based on who or who isnt officiating games. Ask any long time NBA gamblers and they will are aware of a few specific referee trends in the NBA (one is actually quite famous and has a ridiculous hit rate).

[ilikecb4]

Seriously guys,


I gamble a lot on basketball and I feel like refs are playing point spread too...


I feel like they call a lot of tick tack fouls at the end of games....



It feels really weird..Some games there is really fishy officiating

[ilikecb4]

Point spread is like impossible to win unless you consider who is officiating...



it's kinda sad that i have to look up who is officiating to bet on a basketball game

[ilikecb4]

Refs who call most fouls

from http://www.docsports.com/2010/handicapp ... s-471.html

irst, let’s take a look at the referees who tend to call the most fouls per game. For this study, I have looked at data from every game they officiated last year and the games they have officiated through March 2 of this season as well. Keep in mind; the fouls per game statistics are how many fouls were called total in a game, not just by that single official.

Scott Foster- Foster has called 44.3 fouls per game this season. He whistled 44.0 fouls per game last season. This year the points per game are at 201.3 and last year it was 201.7. The ‘over’ is 24-24 this season and was 48-30 last season in his games. In the last two years combined, the away team is 69-55 against the spread.


Leon Wood- Wood has whistled 44.3 fouls per game this season. He called 43.9 fouls per game last season. The points per game are at an astounding 206.9 this year, and they were 204.3 last year. The ‘over’ is 32-15 this year, and it was 35-32 last year. The away team is 62-48 ATS in the last two seasons combined.




Eric Lewis- Lewis has had 43.5 fouls per game this year and also had 43.1 last year. The points per game are at 199.2 this year, and they were 200.6 last season. The ‘under’ is 29-23 this year in his games, but the ‘over’ was 34-25 last year. The away team is 65-48 ATS in the last two seasons.
Joe Crawford- Crawford is at 42.3 fouls called per game this season. He called 44.2 fouls per game last year. The points per game are at 201.0 this year, and they were 203.1 last year. The ‘under’ is 24-19 in his games this season, but last year the ‘over’ was a very strong 45-25. The away team has a slight edge at 56-54 ATS.


Sean Corbin- Corbin has called 44.4 fouls per game this season. He whistled 41.9 per game last year. The points per game are at 203.6 this year, and they were 201.0 last season. The ‘over’ is 25-19 this year so far, and it was 38-30 last year as well. The away team is 59-52 ATS over the last couple seasons.


In general, what we find is probably what most people would expect. Referees who call more fouls tend to have more points per game scored, and the ‘over’ is the better side to be on. Leon Wood has been one of the strongest ‘over’ referees in the business last year and this one, while Eric Lewis has stayed fairly neutral despite calling a large amount of fouls. Obviously, this could definitely be dependent on the games they are calling. In some cases, it might actually hurt the scoring if too many fouls are called when the teams are looking to run and gun every single time down the court. As a general rule, the more free throws a game has the better the chances are of the ‘over’ being the winning side.

[theycallmeZZ]

The Indy game was so weird when things seemed fair at the beginning of the game, all of a sudden (late 3rd and 4th quarters) a switch seemed to turn on and muggings from Psycho T seemed to be no calls while ticky tack fouls were sent our way.

[ilikecb4]

The Indy game was so weird when things seemed fair at the beginning of the game, all of a sudden (late 3rd and 4th quarters) a switch seemed to turn on and muggings from Psycho T seemed to be no calls while ticky tack fouls were sent our way.

point spread, wanted game to be close

[Superchunk]

I don't know anything about gambling - can you explain the point spread thing to me a bit? I find it hard to believe gambling is coming into play with the reffing, but the one thing I seem to see a lot of is strange calls near the end (not just raptors games).

Last night in the Rockets/Blazers game there was a clear path foul that would have put the Blazers up 4 (if ft hit) with the ball with 1:00 left. They didn't call it clear path even though I can't imagine any interpretation of the rule - A blazer had the ball at half with two blazers ahead of him and was fouled from behind with no defenders even close. They didn't even review it and to me, it's not a bang/bang play by any stretch, it was an obvious and simple call.

Confusing.