rand wrote:Those who think officiating is rigged by the league but that the league either doesn't do it all the time or sometimes fail to obtain the outcome they want in a particular match have devised a hypothesis which is almost unfalsifiable. Whenever an outcome occurs that seems to go against the claim that the league fixes (or tries) results which are commercially favorable, the conspiracy theorists could just claim that wasn't one the league wanted to fix or they tried to fix it and failed.
These theorists have no answer for why the league evidently decided to not even try to fix many results which would have been beneficial to them. For instance the Lakers lost Game 2 in Denver by two points while being -4 in FTAs. Lakers shot no FTAs in the final 3:55 while Denver got three FTAs in that span on foul calls which while correct could easily have been no calls if officiating was rigged.
Crooked refs should have been able to easily gift wrap that game for LAL if the league wanted it. And why wouldn't the league have wanted it? Why would the league possibly not want their most popular franchise with their most famous player to win this pivotal game? Results from the past 25 seasons which contradict the conspiracy theory like Game 2 did are so plentiful that I could list dozens of prominent instances without breaking a sweat. What do the theorists say in return? Nothing.
They just pretend like it's somehow not relevant that there's this huge collection of results which contradict their theory. The NBA must have somehow wanted the LeBron-led Lakers to lose that series because reasons.
so on one side we've got literal referees that were involved in the previous rigging scandal still officiating in the league and on your side we've got "wellll..the Lakers don't win EVERY game so how can you say its rigged??"
yeah that aint passing my smell test lmao