lobosloboslobos wrote:Boris, it would be so much more satisfying having these discussions if you would present your (inevitably) contrarian position with an acknowledgement that it adds valuable context to a discussion in which other people have legitimate opposing opinions about complex questions that do not have black and white answers. instead, your posts always come down to "I am right, you are all wrong, and I know better" which is either a) right or, more likely b) horsepoop. Whereas a more nuanced, appreciative and less haughty attitude might actually move some of us from b) to a) over time. Though I realize you may not care about that at all.
I don't know what to tell you. It sounds like you're frustrated because I'm not agreeing with you more than I am. Personally, I'm frustrated that ignorant sportscasters are whipping up a fanbase into a frenzy based on...well, horsepoop (to use your category). As a (former) official, I will admit that I'm far more sensitive to unjust criticism in this regard than most, and more dismissive of bad unjust criticism than almost anybody. When you live as an official and hear every manner of criticism possible - to the extent that you're throwing people out of games when it gets out of hand because there's no other alternative - you eventually want to lash back. This is my day to do so, seemingly.
When Devlin, Leo and Jack assert that the Raptors have been hard done-by in specific instances, and in those instances are wrong well over 50% of the time, it's hard to take complaints very seriously. Honestly, it is.
Your conveniently omitting to address the very significant story of Tim Donaghy in the context of this discussion about the possibility of there being bias among NBA referees just makes you look silly.
So, because Tim Donaghy took bribes, therefore all officials are on the take. Gotcha.
Bias does happen, refs do care who wins and loses sometimes (is Tim Duncan a whiner? google Tim Duncan vs. Joey Crawford), and if you were to make your points about whether or not referee bias is happening against the raps without all the sermonizing about how terrible we are and how great a ref you are and instead acknowledged that people are right to question if it is happening now, then you might find your analysis making a lot more impact on the consensus around here, instead of coming off as a polarizing snob.
"Polarizing snob" vs. "butthurt ignoramus". That might be one presentation of this disagreement.
Now, I don't actually think you're a butthurt ignoramus. I'm pretty sure I'm not a polarizing snob, your presentation notwithstanding. What I
am doing is counteracting an
extremely unbalanced presentation of NBA officials and how they impact the Toronto Raptors (which is, honestly, not very much). I'm aware of Donaghy; he's an outlier. I'm aware of the Duncan and Crawford exchange from a half-decade ago; also, an outlier. I'm aware of the time I once waved off a dunk in an All-Star game because the ball on a lob pass was in the cylinder; my ass still has an imprint from my own foot for that one! (By rule, it was basket interference; by common sense, it was an All-Star game.) But even that was an outlier, and one I certainly learned from. (After having everything from my intelligence to integrity to parentage questioned by the colour commentator that game, when I watched the replay.)
General rational behaviour would force us to discuss the regular course of events, not shocking outliers. And neither one of those events took place in the Indiana game. What happened in the Indiana game was that one team plays differently than another and it showed. Were there bad calls in that game? Sure. Were there as many as people here would insist? Not even close. Did it impact the Raptors net negatively? Yeah, maybe. Was it to some huge extent? No. Was it deliberate? Hell, no.
