This reffing is unbelievable.

[roundhead0]

Hey, the refs have a confirmed bias for the home team, for teams trailing and trailing in playoff series according to a study that's gained some credibility. If the game moves so fast that they can only help but call games as they see it, why the bias? They're human.

I think most of us can accept certain kinds of bias on relatively close calls since that is what we normally see anyway. However, that doesn't explain some rather obvious multiple calls/non-calls, nor the Raptors appearing to get hosed while AT HOME against a mediocre team like Utah.

[Shaazzam]

OT: I love Tommy. I know he's a completely one-eyed muppet, but I give him a pass. He's been a Celtic for something insane like 55 years. His number is retired there, and he won them championships as both a player and as a coach. Yes he is 1000000 percent biased. But when that dude says "we", he really means it.

[BorisDK1]

I've reffed games but not at as high a level as Boris. Anyone who ever has knows just how difficult the job is and how different what you can see on the floor from one perspective (especially when they are up to 10 6 foot 8 200 lb plus bodies in a confined space compared to what you see on instant replay. How fast things move and how quickly you need to decide to blow the whistle or not. If you had ever been through this you'd realize the absurdness the idea is that refs can process if the Raptors are in Canada or if they got some mysterious coded message in a back alley telling them that Stern wants the Thunder to get a better draft pick.

That's certainly true. People are also seemingly unaware of how the human mind works when faced with something like a fast break or a quick ball reversal. Believe me, you don't have time on a quick ball reversal to say to yourself, "hmmm, who's driving (individually)? who's defending (individually)? Is this a player I need to make sure gets to the line? or not be called for a block?" Not at all, really. All you're doing is scrambling to see the defender's feet so you can determine block/charge and enough of the offensive player's feet that you can determine a travel or not and then go on to see the rest of the play as it develops. It happens lightning-quick, even at the high school level. You don't have time to figure out who gets how much of what when that happens.

[Too Late Crew]

Hey, the refs have a confirmed bias for the home team, for teams trailing and trailing in playoff series according to a study that's gained some credibility. If the game moves so fast that they can only help but call games as they see it, why the bias? They're human.

Hey I never said the refs are perfect. they are after all human. I fully believe that there is bias although I do feel much of it is unconscious.

A ref sees Ray Allen rise up for a jumper the defender swings his arm, now the raf can't truly see if his hand connects with Ray's elbow because of the angle. The shot is an airball. Ray Allen is one of the greatest shooters in NBA history the ref has watched and refed his game 1000 times. His brain fills in the gap he can't see. Foul.

Reggie Evans shoots that same shot? No foul.

Is it bias? Yup darn right it is. It exists. Same with a player who has legitimately drawn charges over many games.They are calling the game as they "see it" but they are humans not computers what they see is not simply what the light hitting their retina shows. Its interpreted and filled in by the human brain.

I'm not disputing that. What is being proposed is CONCIOUS bias.Calls being made not because of reaction or human nature but due to following the instructions to purposely put the Raptors at a disadvantage. Something that apparently can be changed simply by Stern or someone else telling them to cease and desist.

[Fairview4Life]

Tyler Hansbrough gets away with fouls for 20 straight minutes, Amir and JV do not. Be consistent both ways, not just against the Raps.

"Officiating is hard!" doesn't address that at all.

[Volcano]

OT: I love Tommy. I know he's a completely one-eyed muppet, but I give him a pass. He's been a Celtic for something insane like 55 years. His number is retired there, and he won them championships as both a player and as a coach. Yes he is 1000000 percent biased. But when that dude says "we", he really means it.

So he should get the job as the Boston mascot..not ruin the minds of basketball fans everywhere. Boston shouldn't be showcasing someone who makes people dumber.

Really? you're using Jack and Matt as part of your argument? Why don't you note next game how often they question a call that goes in the Raptors favour...I've seen dozens of bad calls go unquestioned by them this year because the Raptors were the ones benefitting...particularyl late in games, which wouldn't be an issue except when they question the refs after every singly 50/50 call against the raps (or even some that are clearly the correct cal)

Like I said in another similar thread, reading through this is a lot like talking to a poker poker who claims they have horrible luck. They tell you about all the times their pocket Aces got cracked, while not mentioning all the times they give a bad beat to someone else. I

TBH, I haven't watched many games and when I do..it's laggy and tough to pay attention to things. But this kind of thing has never happened in Raptors history. Winning or losing, Raptor fans have never complained to this extent. Then you have the Raptors organization calling it and the stats backing it up. When there's smoke, there's fire and usually when observation and stats match, it's not a coincidence.

It's true that fans are biased, but a lot of fans aren't either. In this case it seems like people who don't normally have a problem with the refs are speaking out too. I think you've gotta be pretty stupid not to acknowledge that something's up. If the game was called evenly, it would most likely balance out in the stats, which it didn't.

[Too Late Crew]

Tyler Hansbrough gets away with fouls for 20 straight minutes, Amir and JV do not. Be consistent both ways, not just against the Raps.

"Officiating is hard!" doesn't address that at all.

Yes but Tyler Hansbrough gets away with those same calls against every team in the NBA.

As pointed out Amir has been fouling people since he got to the NBA.

If the discussion is going to become "refs need to be more consistent from player to player I'm all for that. That's not what's proposed. The theory is that the Raptors are being screwed and by extension Hansbrough for example is allowed to foul the Raptors but if he were to be playing the TWolves or Nuggets of Spurs he would not be allowed and that is simply not true.

[Thelonious]

Oh it will balance out, eventually. Refs may be evil, but they're not stupid.

[BorisDK1]

Tyler Hansbrough gets away with fouls for 20 straight minutes, Amir and JV do not. Be consistent both ways, not just against the Raps.

"Officiating is hard!" doesn't address that at all.

Tyler Hansbrough got away with one (admittedly obvious) foul. Let's not exaggerate, here.

[Superchunk]

I've reffed games but not at as high a level as Boris. Anyone who ever has knows just how difficult the job is and how different what you can see on the floor from one perspective (especially when they are up to 10 6 foot 8 200 lb plus bodies in a confined space compared to what you see on instant replay. How fast things move and how quickly you need to decide to blow the whistle or not. If you had ever been through this you'd realize the absurdness the idea is that refs can process if the Raptors are in Canada or if they got some mysterious coded message in a back alley telling them that Stern wants the Thunder to get a better draft pick.

That's certainly true. People are also seemingly unaware of how the human mind works when faced with something like a fast break or a quick ball reversal. Believe me, you don't have time on a quick ball reversal to say to yourself, "hmmm, who's driving (individually)? who's defending (individually)? Is this a player I need to make sure gets to the line? or not be called for a block?" Not at all, really. All you're doing is scrambling to see the defender's feet so you can determine block/charge and enough of the offensive player's feet that you can determine a travel or not and then go on to see the rest of the play as it develops. It happens lightning-quick, even at the high school level. You don't have time to figure out who gets how much of what when that happens.

Boris, if you see a guy playing a little over physical in the paint, throwing elbows around, do you not mentally catalogue it and call it when it gets too far, when he throws one to many elbows? Anything like that ever happen when you were officiating?

[Fairview4Life]

Tyler Hansbrough gets away with fouls for 20 straight minutes, Amir and JV do not. Be consistent both ways, not just against the Raps.

"Officiating is hard!" doesn't address that at all.

Tyler Hansbrough got away with one (admittedly obvious) foul. Let's not exaggerate, here.

Tyler Hansbrough 'got away' with a hell of a lot more than one foul. Especially in the context of the game, which is my point. Hansbrough gets to body up and be physical, and slap guys arms as they drive, etc. (along with other Pacers) on D. The Raptors, like Amir and JV, do not. It is the consistent inconsistency that has people riled up. Just hand waving it away doesn't change what the rest of us have actually been watching.

[Shaazzam]

OT: I love Tommy. I know he's a completely one-eyed muppet, but I give him a pass. He's been a Celtic for something insane like 55 years. His number is retired there, and he won them championships as both a player and as a coach. Yes he is 1000000 percent biased. But when that dude says "we", he really means it.

So he should get the job as the Boston mascot..not ruin the minds of basketball fans everywhere. Boston shouldn't be showcasing someone who makes people dumber.

Meh, unless I'm wrong, he's the Celtics announcer, not a national one. He's not there for "objective" fans or NBA fans, he's there for Celtics fans.

[EG73]

Is NBA studying the quality of the job of the referees ?
Like many other jobs, there must be quality control. They should review games, calculate the datas about referees accuracy. And also PUBLISH them ! And fire the bad refs.

'superstar call', 'earning respect of the refs' and 'make-up call' (after a recognized mistake) are the things I hate the most in the NBA. And for the first time this year I also feel there is a bias against the entire Raptors team.

[Superchunk]

Is NBA studying the quality of the job of the referees ?
Like many other jobs, there must be quality control. They should review games, calculate the datas about referees accuracy. And also PUBLISH them ! And fire the bad refs.

'superstar call', 'earning respect of the refs' and 'make-up call' (after a recognized mistake) are the things I hate the most in the NBA. And for the first time this year I also feel there is a bias against the entire Raptors team.

I'm pretty sure post game evaluation is a part of every game and includes the refs and some sort of league representitive. I could be totally wrong on that, but I got that impression somewhere.

[BorisDK1]

Boris, if you see a guy playing a little over physical in the paint, throwing elbows around, do you not mentally catalogue it and call it when it gets too far, when he throws one to many elbows? Anything like that ever happen when you were officiating?

Depends upon what you mean by "throwing elbows around". An "excessive swing" of the elbow is, by rule, a technical foul (in NCAA/NF rules, anyway) - and that's usually understood to be a situation where the elbow is moving at a rate or distance further than it would move during a normal pivot. If a guy's elbowing other players, that's almost assured to gain an "advantage" (which is the line between which illegal contact is a foul or a no-call) so there's no "cataloguing" involved - just a foul call.

There are some things you can just "talk off" as an official; three-second violations on the weak side of the lane, for instance. "Get out of the paint, 33" - or whatever. But we were always told to talk guys off once, and only once. (At the younger levels that might be a bit different, but when you're playing senior ball in high school the time for warnings has really come and gone.) Same thing with weak handchecks that really aren't affecting anything; you talk it off once, and if the guy persists - oh, well. He wanted to be called for a foul, I guess. Or subtle warnings to irate coaches. "Coach, that's enough." I would only ever say that once in a game to a coach; you push me beyond that and I'm inviting you to a T party.

[ATLTimekeeper]

Reggie Evans shoots that same shot? No foul.

Is it bias? Yup darn right it is. It exists. Same with a player who has legitimately drawn charges over many games.They are calling the game as they "see it" but they are humans not computers what they see is not simply what the light hitting their retina shows. Its interpreted and filled in by the human brain.

I'm not disputing that. What is being proposed is CONCIOUS bias.Calls being made not because of reaction or human nature but due to following the instructions to purposely put the Raptors at a disadvantage. Something that apparently can be changed simply by Stern or someone else telling them to cease and desist.

Sure, but to clarify, the study found that the refs showed a bias to a team trailing in a series. That's not exactly something easily computed on a bang-bang play, according to you. So, if they can recognize that kind of existing bias, could they not be corrected by their superiors? After Donaghy, I can understand why people will question the authenticity of the NBA refs, and it's a fruitless argument that you may as well leave behind.

[BorisDK1]

I'm pretty sure post game evaluation is a part of every game and includes the refs and some sort of league representitive. I could be totally wrong on that, but I got that impression somewhere.

That's entirely correct. And there's a lot of peer pressure amongst officials to score really well in those evaluations: you need to not only convince the evaluator you did a good job, but earn the confidence in your peers that they believe you will do a good job when you're working with them. Because as much as there is individual responsibility in officiating, there's a team dynamic there as much as there is for the teams playing. If you have a weak partner in a 3-man crew (and you're not him), you spend an inordinate amount of time watching that sector he/she is responsible for because when a call is missed or wrong, it really reflects upon all three of you poorly.

[BorisDK1]

Tyler Hansbrough 'got away' with a hell of a lot more than one foul. Especially in the context of the game, which is my point. Hansbrough gets to body up and be physical, and slap guys arms as they drive, etc. (along with other Pacers) on D. The Raptors, like Amir and JV, do not. It is the consistent inconsistency that has people riled up. Just hand waving it away doesn't change what the rest of us have actually been watching.

The whole Indiana team was playing physically, but within the rules (they're very good at rotating early defensively, for instance, and then are allowed by rule to use the principle of verticality to their advantage); Toronto was not. Jonas got called for fouls because he - like most players - has no clue as to when his hands are straight up and down and when they're bent over a player. Amir had to pick up fouls desperately chasing down out-of-control dribble drives because our perimeter defense (ahem) left something to be desired. They didn't play anything like Indiana, so it may seem on a cursory examination that Indiana was getting away with stuff Toronto wasn't. In fact, the few times Toronto did contest shots physically like Indiana, the whistles didn't blow.

That's not to say that there weren't bad calls against Toronto that game: there were. One of Amir's fouls was IMO poor. That Hansbrough no-call on the obvious hack across the arm was blatantly terrible. But beyond that, all the screaming and whining the commentators did about Hansbrough was unfounded. And I was watching closely, because I'm appalled at just how wrong Leo and even Jack have been in their complaints so far.

[lobosloboslobos]

I'm pretty sure post game evaluation is a part of every game and includes the refs and some sort of league representitive. I could be totally wrong on that, but I got that impression somewhere.

That's entirely correct. And there's a lot of peer pressure amongst officials to score really well in those evaluations: you need to not only convince the evaluator you did a good job, but earn the confidence in your peers that they believe you will do a good job when you're working with them. Because as much as there is individual responsibility in officiating, there's a team dynamic there as much as there is for the teams playing. If you have a weak partner in a 3-man crew (and you're not him), you spend an inordinate amount of time watching that sector he/she is responsible for because when a call is missed or wrong, it really reflects upon all three of you poorly.

So Boris if I read your argument correctly it is:

- the raps suck because they sucked in the past and so they deserve to lose this year, which means BC succeeded because - in your words - this is a team 'designed to lose'
- the refs are universally without bias
- the discrepancy game in and game out between fouls given to raps and our opponents indicate only that we are really bad at fouling
- all of the posters and players and raps representatives and journalists who have noticed what appears to be highly inconsistent refereeing that favors the Raps' opponents are wrong. there has been no inconsistent refereeing favoring other teams.
- tim donaghy never existed

[BorisDK1]

So Boris if I read your argument correctly it is:

- the raps suck because they sucked in the past and so they deserve to lose this year, which means BC succeeded because - in your words - this is a team 'designed to lose'

That's not even debatable at this point. This team was not designed to be competitive at a high level. Losing might not be the intention, but it's going to be the outcome regardless.

- the refs are universally without bias

Depends upon what you mean by "bias". Do the referees care whether Toronto wins or loses? No.

- the discrepancy game in and game out between fouls given to raps and our opponents indicate only that we are really bad at fouling

This explains far more than Raptors fans and Matt Devlin and company are comfortable with admitting. The Raptors have been putting people on the line at epic rates for years.

2009-10: 23rd in opp FT/FGA
2010-11: 27th in opp FT/FGA
2011-12: 30th in opp FT/FGA

That's not all bias; that's because the Raptors are a slow team defensively who don't get to where they need to be in time, enough of the time.

- all of the posters and players and raps representatives and journalists who have noticed what appears to be highly inconsistent refereeing that favors the Raps' opponents are wrong. there has been no inconsistent refereeing favoring other teams.

When Jack Armstrong spends 2 minutes screaming about how no free throws were awarded because "the ball was in the air" when a foul occured on a lob pass (on the passer), he immediately flushes all credibility down the drain. And I like Jack. But he whiffed so embarrassingly badly there he lost the right to speak to this issue.

As for fans? I don't think many of them understand the rules of the game particularly well - and certainly not the interpretations to the rules.