# Tim Donaghy sings like a canary



## ucatchtrout (Feb 11, 2004)

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/b...exreferee_tim_donaghy_blows_whistle_on_n.html



> Tim Donaghy, who pleaded guilty to charges of betting on games he officiated, is now airing NBA's dirty laundry. Murphy/Getty
> 
> Tim Donaghy, who pleaded guilty to charges of betting on games he officiated, is now airing NBA's dirty laundry.


*Please don't quote entire articles. Just link a small portion and provide a link. Thanks!*


----------



## ucatchtrout (Feb 11, 2004)

He threw the league under the bus.

Did anyone think he wouldn't?

David Stern has a lot of explaining to do.


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

ucatchtrout said:


> He threw the league under the bus.


Right where it belongs.

Still breathlessly awaiting the "outcome" of the playoffs?

It has been clear for nearly a decade that "the fix is in" in the NBA.

The NBA is now the least credible sport in America, and David Stern is most likely to be the subject of a Rico investigation before this goes away.


----------



## Paxil (Jan 1, 2003)

He just reinforced what a lot of people felt already. There have been many times where I watch a team get totally outplayed and still win. That should be really hard to happen in the NBA. Football... soccer... sure... but the NBA is filled with points that only extremely lopsided officiating can make up that difference.

Personally... if I were an owner I'd throw the whole lot out... Stern... all refs... start again from scratch with a whole new environment. You can't change any other way. What is sad is that we have become so accustomed to the current system... we expect it. It will look crazy when they change it... and you can bet the is a lot of money... a lot of influence that was previously bought that will be VERY resistent to any change. 

Now... the NBA most likely will just say... 'disgruntled employee'. 'We steadfastly deny Mr. Donaghy's allegations and will thoroughly investigate them all... but at the end of the day we believe they will all prove to be the angry remarks of a disgruntled employee.' 

Honestly... I don't expect an outcry. People know professional wrestling isn't really a sport but they still love it.


----------



## AudieNorris (Jun 29, 2006)

ucatchtrout said:


> He threw the league under the bus.
> 
> Did anyone think he wouldn't?
> 
> David Stern has a lot of explaining to do.


Someone needs to back that bus over the league a few times. Totally unacceptable. The NBA is now worse than the WWF.


----------



## alext42083 (Nov 7, 2003)

Kind of a shame if true, especially the Lakers/Kings Game 6 in 2002 or whatever.
Just think... all these players devote their lives to the sport and fans pay all this money to watch, and the NBA then has 'a hand' in what they want done.

With that said, I don't think it's going to have an effect on the popularity of the league.


----------



## hoojacks (Aug 12, 2004)

This is nothing surprising.


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

What makes this worse than pro wrestling is at least pro wrestling doesn't pretend to be anything other than entertainment and the "athletes" are in on the gag. Oddly enough Sheed's assertion that players are like slaves is starting to ring a little more true -- pawns in David Stern's quest to manufacture "ideal" outcomes.


----------



## yuyuza1 (May 24, 2006)

And LA fans are still in denial about any preferential treatment... :lol: 

The only way to get better is to get worse first. I think him blabbing all this will eventually be good for the league, as it needs a complete overhaul instead of just a cover-up.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

Lakers OFFICIALLY have an * by their 2002 title
If I wasn't such a huge Blazers fan, I'd give up on the BA right here and now.
It is more scripted than wrestling or a play..wow
i am pretty sure I want a whole new front office in the NBA..this is rediculous
The irony is that is the NBA was called fairly, they'd have a lot more ratings than if they just conspired to keep their precious "star" players in the games.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

nikolokolus said:


> What makes this worse than pro wrestling is at least pro wrestling doesn't pretend to be anything other than entertainment and the "athletes" are in on the gag. Oddly enough Sheed's assertion that players are like slaves is starting to ring a little more true -- pawns in David Stern's quest to manufacture "ideal" outcomes.


Sheed may be an ***, but he keeps it real. can't deny him that


----------



## blazermaniaisback (Jun 7, 2007)

maybe sheed knew this and confronted him about it?

from 2003...

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B00E2D61430F93AA25752C0A9659C8B63&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

which ref called the most techs on him during those few seasons?


----------



## BlazerFanFoLife (Jul 17, 2003)

Maybe a new regime? Sterns been around for awhile


----------



## Entity (Feb 21, 2005)

BlazerFanFoLife said:


> Maybe a new regime? Sterns been around for awhile


Yeah, I was going to say that if this is true, then Stern can't continue being the commish (which wouldn't make me sad, personally).


----------



## ehizzy3 (Jun 12, 2006)

its time for new everything...

i cant wait to see the officiating tonight


----------



## Xericx (Oct 29, 2004)

LA Lakers, 2002 NBA Champions*


----------



## Stepping Razor (Apr 24, 2004)

2000 WCF, anyone?


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

Here are the "bombshell" quotes:



> Donaghy claims he was told that two refs who were “company men” acting in the interest of the NBA conspired to extend a playoff series in 2002 to a seventh game.


This is hearsay. Unless he has direct knowledge, Donaghy's being "told" by a supposed witness is worthless. If the feds want to investigate by interviewing the alleged "company men" that is their choice. Good luck with that.



> Donaghy also claimed a supervising referee told refs that an unidentified NBA executive did not want them to call technical fouls on star players or boot them from the game.


This is something, but less than the article made it out to be. Unless there are other witnesses to corroborate or documentation of this alleged NBA policy, Donaghy's statement alone won't go anywhere.

And if I were the NBA I would defuse this "issue" by embracing it. Stern has done this several times in the past. It is a classic lawyer technique. "No way do I eat babies. I do let them play in the street, but I have never eaten babies." This makes your small crime seem like nothing at all.

NBA official: "No one ever told Donaghy any such thing. I would like to say that we do as part of our training discuss the care that must be taken when officials assess technical fouls and ejections, especially with star players. That is what our fans come to see. We don't deny that we talk about that. We want them to be careful. We do deny that we tell them not to eject stars. And as proof I would like to supply this list of NBA All-Stars who have been ejected from games." Produces very large list.


----------



## Stevenson (Aug 23, 2003)

Masbee said:


> And if I were the NBA I would defuse this "issue" by embracing it.


The problem for the league is that it is too late for that. They are on the Feds' radar now, and I bet, a full investigation is already well underway.

Donaghy got a lighter sentence for cooperating, as I recall.

Prosecutors prosecute. Investigators investigate. Doesn't matter if Donaghy's statements are hearsy - they are a lead for investigators.

I think this will be very serious before all is said and done.


----------



## bayarea_blazer (Jan 14, 2003)

I have long thought the 2000 WCF game 7 was fixed, or at least something was suspicious about it because of the crazy calls and free throw disparity. These are comments from people about the espn article. I would say others think so as well.

****************************************
I am not sure the year, I think it was 2000 or 2001, when the blazers played the lakers in a game 7. The Blazers were dominating and then in the 4th quarter the lakers got every, and I mean every call and came back and won the game. This was the first time I ever thought the NBA was fixed in big games. The Kings-Lakers series was definitely fixed in my mind, if you watch these games again you can see it clearly in game 6 and again in game 7
________________________________________
With other sports, fans whining about officiating is just...well, whining. In the NBA, it's legitimate. 
Some have mentioned the 2002 Kings-Lakers Western Final...I'll go back two years prior with the Lakers and Blazers Western Final: The Blazers had double-digit lead in the 4th of game 7. earlier the Pacers had aleady clinched the east. I remember being at a bar with my friend and telling him, "There's no way the NBA will allow a Pacers-Blazers Final. Ain't gonna happen." Suddenly, remarkably, the Lakers came from behind, aided by questionable calls and no-calls, and pulled the game out. Surprise, surprise. 
________________________________________
I was just looking at old box scores, and the 2000 Game 7 featured a 37-16 free throw disparity in favor of the Lakers over the Blazers. Wow.
________________________________________
That 2000 Western Conference Finals I originally thought showed the difficulty in guarding Shaq. When Sabonis guarded him one-on-one, which was new for him, Shaq just threw his elbow into Sabonis face to create space, then dunked. This was determined to either be a no foul, or a foul on Sabonis. Now I'm wondering if there wasn't something else going on.
________________________________________

2000 Western Conference Finals, game 7... Dick Bavetta was on the floor, and the Lakers had an absurd advantage in free throws. 
Of course, the difference between then and now (game 2 of these Finals) is that, no matter what, when you put your elbows into a defender's face, that's an OFFENSIVE foul. Unless, of course, you are Shaq or Kobe. 
I can deal with ticky-tack calls, but when certain players get absurd calls game after game (Shaq's entire time with the Lakers, actually) it gets to be a problem.
******************************************


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

Where this gets interesting is if the government subpoenas refs and they are asked under oath if the league has provided such guidance. Given all the athletes that are in jail or on their way there for lying to a grand jury, I bet some refs will forget about being company men if they are looking at spending a few years in the pokey.


----------



## Stevenson (Aug 23, 2003)

Reep said:


> Where this gets interesting is if the government subpoenas refs and they are asked under oath if the league has provided such guidance. Given all the athletes that are in jail or on their way there for lying to a grand jury, I bet some refs will forget about being company men if they are looking at spending a few years in the pokey.


That's for sure.

Remember, Martha Stewart went to jail, not for insider trading, but for lying to the investigators. Barry Bonds was indicted for that too.

When the Feds knock, witnesses talk.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Stevenson said:


> The problem for the league is that it is too late for that. They are on the Feds' radar now, and I bet, a full investigation is already well underway.


Investigation of what? What crimes are allegedly being violated?

For RICO investigations there has to be an underlying crime... 

I find Donaghy's allegations to be a bit less than trustworthy at this point. Maybe he has more info and more specificity that he has provided to investigators, but I would still be fascinated to know what crime was allegedly perpetrated by the NBA even IF the series was (as alleged) strung out to seven games.

Ed O.


----------



## Zybot (Jul 22, 2004)

Ed O said:


> Investigation of what? What crimes are allegedly being violated?
> 
> For RICO investigations there has to be an underlying crime...
> 
> ...


Congress could make some inquiries and subpoena them under the guise of investigation for antitrust exemption.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Zybot said:


> Congress could make some inquiries and subpoena them under the guise of investigation for antitrust exemption.


Congress can do anything they want, but the NBA doesn't have an antitrust exemption. Only Major League Baseball does.

And so it's clear: I'm not saying that the feds CAN'T investigate. I'm just wondering what laws would be broken even if the allegations are true. I'm not saying there definitely were none... just what are they?

Was the NBA defrauding ticketholders? Defrauding the networks? Maybe, but I don't know if it's criminal fraud or not. I'm not an expert.

Ed O.


----------



## Zybot (Jul 22, 2004)

Ed O said:


> Congress can do anything they want, but the NBA doesn't have an antitrust exemption. Only Major League Baseball does.
> 
> And so it's clear: I'm not saying that the feds CAN'T investigate. I'm just wondering what laws would be broken even if the allegations are true. I'm not saying there definitely were none... just what are they?
> 
> ...


I guess your right about the antitrust thing. I still think that Congress will come up with some crazy basis to subpoena witnesses on this issue and if they testify, and what Donaghy says is true, they may decide to spill the beans.


----------



## Paxil (Jan 1, 2003)

In basketball, because the margin between winning and losing is so miniscule compared to any other sport, I think it lends itself to manipulation much better than most sports. Donaghy himself mentioned earlier how refs were manipulating the score (not the outcome per se) by calling more or less fouls. I think anything you bet on creates pressure to manipulate. Because of all the ways you can bet (who wins the 2nd quarter... how many total points in the 3rd quarter etc...) it makes it pretty easy for officials to be a huge factor in those outcomes. If the refs are involved in manipulating outcomes... I personally believe this would probably be at the leagues behest. The refs are probably smart enough to manipulate in much less notable ways.

As per the star treatment... a friend of mine who was in the sports journalism profession mentioned that he was told by someone who went to an NBA ref training camp that (who had a sister with an uncle that overheard a dentist while under medication that... just kidding) Anyway… he was told what we all know… the NBA wants the stars in the games. People pay to see them (was the reasoning) so they should get what they pay for. Well… maybe with a Hollywood movie with a Hollywood ending… but DAMNIT… what intrigues me the most about sports, is that you DON’T know how it will end. So here is the NBA and Stern trying to spoon feed us what they think is best. Honestly… it may make them more money… the Hollywood ending movies do… there is no doubt about that… but don’t call it a sport then. Sheed may be right… it is just entertainment.


----------



## Entity (Feb 21, 2005)

I wonder how far a team could take it if say the Sacramento Kings decided that there was a financial impact by them losing the conference finals due to a fix. Like anticipating ticket sales for the following season at home and on the road and for merchandise and such for being a potential NBA champion. I don't know how you'd put a dollar figure on that anyway, but that's probably a relatively trivial thing compared to an actual criminal case (which probably isn't possible).


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

Stevenson said:


> That's for sure.
> 
> Remember, Martha Stewart went to jail, not for insider trading, but for lying to the investigators. Barry Bonds was indicted for that too.
> 
> When the Feds knock, witnesses talk.


and Marion Jones

Link

I'm not sure people really understand how serious these lies can be. It's like they are willing to take a chance.


----------



## AudieNorris (Jun 29, 2006)

Ed O said:


> Congress can do anything they want, but the NBA doesn't have an antitrust exemption. Only Major League Baseball does.
> 
> And so it's clear: I'm not saying that the feds CAN'T investigate. I'm just wondering what laws would be broken even if the allegations are true. I'm not saying there definitely were none... just what are they?
> 
> ...


The Federal Government does investigate situations purely to determine if Federal laws have been violated. It seems to me that the old-looser-of-a-ref's comments warrant investigation considering the magnitude of this situation. Plus, I am certain what he is saying is the tip of the iceberg even if its only 10% true.


----------



## deanwoof (Mar 10, 2003)

If you think about these two games (Kings/Lakers, Blazers/Lakers), I think not only were the referees involved, but certain players. In the Kings/Lakers series, I would not be surprised if someone like Chris Webber was in the take. I mean look at how he plays during big games. Media and fans alike blame it on him not being "clutch" but is it really? Then our own Blazers/Lakers series, I would not put it past the fact that Scottie Pippen was part of the problem. I remember on one particular play, The ball was dumped down to Shaq from the wing. Pippen's man was posted in the corner. Sabonis I think had been playing Shaq one-on-one fairly well and consistently. There was no reason for Pippen, or any other player, to cheat off their man to double Shaq, but yet Pippen did and made a half assed attempt to "get back" to his guy, who of course drained a three. Small tidbit? Yes. But there were many iffy things that Pippen did while he played, such as his oddly-timed three-pointers on a fastbreak.


----------



## Ukrainefan (Aug 1, 2003)

What's amazing to me is that this might not have even come out if the NBA had not been so stupid as to ask for $1,000,000 restitution from Donaghy as part of his sentence. Since he might have to serve extra time if he didn't make this restitution, he must have felt he needed to strike back; or at least show how he fully cooperated to keep his sentence down.

I see that Phil Jackson said that he and other coaches have wanted a referee organization that is completely separate and independent from the rest of the league. That's a good idea.

I would also like to see the referees act more independent on the court with the players. I don't like to see the chummy little talks on court between certain players and the referees. I guess some would say that the players are pointing out things to watch for. And I don't think that is necessary. There are three highly trained and experienced referees out there and they shouldn't really need any help. It doesn't look good.


----------



## Mr. Chuck Taylor (Aug 2, 2004)

While I've always been a nba conspiracy theorist to a certain degree, I am surprised that so many on this board are assuming these allegations are true. According to Stern, the FBI has been investigating them for a year and hasn't found any merit to them. I don't know which side of the story is true, as there's no way to tell right now. It's just surprising that everyone here seems to believe Donaghy.


----------



## craigehlo (Feb 24, 2005)

Mr. Chuck Taylor said:


> According to Stern, the FBI has been investigating them for a year and hasn't found any merit to them.


According to Stern? That's a shock.

Donaghy's allegations seem like they have some merit. After seeing Joey Crawford's act the days, it's pretty difficult to dismiss the idea that officials have no agenda or bias.


----------



## BlazerFan22 (Jul 4, 2006)

Ya know I don't like what Tim Donaghy did and I don't doubt there are others involved. However I think that David Sturn is the most guilty of all of them. I know this could be vary bad for the NBA but I hope Donaghy throws Sturn under the bus. It's going to get vary interesting.eace:


----------



## Mr. Chuck Taylor (Aug 2, 2004)

craigehlo said:


> According to Stern? That's a shock.
> 
> Donaghy's allegations seem like they have some merit. After seeing Joey Crawford's act the days, it's pretty difficult to dismiss the idea that officials have no agenda or bias.


Why wouldn't Stern mention the investigation? I think it's a really valid point that the FBI has looked into a felon's allegations and found no validity. 

Or are you suggesting Stern is making this up? If he is, then the FBI hasn't investigated these allegations previously, and you would think Stern would be worried that they will start doing so. Yet his first move once this information has been made public is to lie about a fake FBI investigation? I highly, highly doubt it.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

stern sure wasn't very poise at all during his interview with espn today..he seemed guilty as sh!t


----------



## e_blazer1 (Feb 3, 2004)

Shouldn't the title of this thread be changed to "Tim Donaghy whines like a weasel"? I can't believe how many of you seem to be willing to accept at face value the word of this confessed liar and cheater. While we can all think of games where it certainly looked like the fix was in, to think that it's some sort of conspiracy directed by the league offices is, IMO, stupid beyond belief. David Stern holds his job at the whim of the owners of the teams in the league. That means that he would risk his job if he were caught doing something as dumb as directing officials to impact the outcome of games. If anybody has any real proof that Stern did this, we won't have to wait for an outside investigation of the league because Stern and everybody working for him will be canned at the next owners meeting. Do you think guys like Paul Allen, the Maloof brothers, and Mark Cuban are going to put up with a commissioner who would orchestrate things in a way that cost them the money and the prestige associated with a chance at winning the title? One other question, if you think the league favors big-market teams, how the heck do you explain the New York Knicks?

Dumb.


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

Ukrainefan said:


> What's amazing to me is that this might not have even come out if the NBA had not been so stupid as to ask for $1,000,000 restitution from Donaghy as part of his sentence. Since he might have to serve extra time if he didn't make this restitution, he must have felt he needed to strike back; or at least show how he fully cooperated to keep his sentence down.
> 
> I see that Phil Jackson said that he and other coaches have wanted a referee organization that is completely separate and independent from the rest of the league. That's a good idea.
> 
> I would also like to see the referees act more independent on the court with the players. I don't like to see the chummy little talks on court between certain players and the referees. I guess some would say that the players are pointing out things to watch for. And I don't think that is necessary. There are three highly trained and experienced referees out there and they shouldn't really need any help. It doesn't look good.


Funny wish coming from Jackson, who has won multiple rings due to favortism from the refs. Would an independant referee organization be any less suseptible to various forms of bribery?

How ironic would it be of Congress brings action against the NBA for corruption while our own government is wallowing in corruption.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

e_blazer1 said:


> Shouldn't the title of this thread be changed to "Tim Donaghy whines like a weasel"? I can't believe how many of you seem to be willing to accept at face value the word of this confessed liar and cheater. While we can all think of games where it certainly looked like the fix was in, to think that it's some sort of conspiracy directed by the league offices is, IMO, stupid beyond belief. David Stern holds his job at the whim of the owners of the teams in the league. That means that he would risk his job if he were caught doing something as dumb as directing officials to impact the outcome of games. If anybody has any real proof that Stern did this, we won't have to wait for an outside investigation of the league because Stern and everybody working for him will be canned at the next owners meeting. Do you think guys like Paul Allen, the Maloof brothers, and Mark Cuban are going to put up with a commissioner who would orchestrate things in a way that *cost them the money* and the prestige associated with a chance at winning the title?


the point is that manipulating the outcomes of games/series is done to improve the TV ratings. Higher ratings increases the advertising rates which improves the bottom line for everyone (owners & players). 

It's funny that you'd say stupid beyond belief/dumb and not see this obvious connection.


> One other question, if you think the league favors big-market teams, how the heck do you explain the New York Knicks?


didn't you notice the way officiating turned back with Riley's mauling Knicks to allow them to compete? A couple years later as those guys aged and were replaced by more finesse players like Camby & Spree, they reversed course and hand checking became illegal. 

Since then the Knicks have made such horrendous personnel decisions, nothing could save them. But I'm sure as soon as they get any semblance of a team, with a little help from their friends in Stern's NBA they'll get the benefit of the doubt once again.

STOMP


----------



## e_blazer1 (Feb 3, 2004)

STOMP said:


> the point is that manipulating the outcomes of games/series is done to improve the TV ratings. Higher ratings increases the advertising rates which improves the bottom line for everyone (owners & players).


Your argument might possibly hold water if the NBA had a TV revenue sharing plan like baseball does. Although there has been discussion, primarily from small market teams, about this, there presently isn't any such plan in affect. If the Lakers make more money because the series gets extended, it doesn't generate any more income for 28 other teams.



> It's funny that you'd say stupid beyond belief/dumb and not see this obvious connection.


Perhaps it's because the "obvious connnection" exists only in your mind.



> didn't you notice the way officiating turned back with Riley's mauling Knicks to allow them to compete? A couple years later as those guys aged and were replaced by more finesse players like Camby & Spree, they reversed course and hand checking became illegal.
> 
> Since then the Knicks have made such horrendous personnel decisions, nothing could save them. But I'm sure as soon as they get any semblance of a team, with a little help from their friends in Stern's NBA they'll get the benefit of the doubt once again.
> 
> STOMP


So the league changed officiating policies to benefit the "mauling" Knicks (without any apparent success) while those same changes would have negatively
impacted running teams in other major markets? Brilliant plan.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

e_blazer1 said:


> Your argument might possibly hold water if the NBA had a TV revenue sharing plan like baseball does. Although there has been discussion, primarily from small market teams, about this, there presently isn't any such plan in affect. If the Lakers make more money because the series gets extended, it doesn't generate any more income for 28 other teams.
> 
> Perhaps it's because the "obvious connnection" exists only in your mind.


yeah, increased attention sure doesn't trickle down... keep telling yourself this genius


> So the league changed officiating policies to benefit the "mauling" Knicks (without any apparent success) while those same changes would have negatively impacted running teams in other major markets? Brilliant plan.


how is getting the league's biggest market to the biggest stage twice in a decade (and keeping them competitive) no apparent success? To completely discount this obvious possible motivation while insulting those who do as stupid speaks volumes.

STOMP


----------



## e_blazer1 (Feb 3, 2004)

STOMP said:


> yeah, increased attention sure doesn't trickle down... keep telling yourself this genius


Look, I'm not interested in getting into an exercise in trading insults. If you want to talk about this in a reasonable manner, great. Otherwise, I have better things to do with my time.

IMO, when a lot of small market teams are losing money, their owners are not real likely to be supportive of a fixing plan that would make big money for major market teams while the small market guys wait around for trickle down crumbs. 



> how is getting the league's biggest market to the biggest stage twice in a decade (and keeping them competitive) no apparent success? To completely discount this obvious possible motivation while insulting those who do as stupid speaks volumes.
> 
> STOMP


Obviously, I was referring to the last decade or so when the Knicks have gotten progressively worse. Sure, there's been horrendous mistakes on the part of the Knicks (mis)management team, but couldn't Stern have engineered a favorable trade or fixed a few more games to keep the Knicks competetive if there was this big conspiracy to keep the big market teams on top? And how do you explain the continued success of the small market Spurs? Seems like the league would have wanted those guys eliminated from the playoffs to boost ratings.


----------



## World B. Free (Mar 28, 2008)

MAS RipCity said:


> Sheed may be an ***, but he keeps it real. can't deny him that


Yup. Very true.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

e_blazer1 said:


> Look, I'm not interested in getting into an exercise in trading insults. If you want to talk about this in a reasonable manner, great. Otherwise, I have better things to do with my time.


so you lead with insults and then act like you're the bigger guy when it comes back at you. nice

follow the money! Hey and it looks like it's time for a new contract. Good thing they just happen to have the ratings up about 40% over last year. Who would have predicted that the league would be so lucky to be able to get their marquee matchup in a contract year?

STOMP


----------



## e_blazer1 (Feb 3, 2004)

STOMP said:


> so you lead with insults and then act like you're the bigger guy when it comes back at you. nice


Looking back at my original post in this thread, I'll give you that point. It wasn't my intent to insult those with differing opinions and I should have used other words and I apologise that I didn't. 

What I meant to say is that it bothers me that people are jumping on this as if Donaghy has credibility. IMO, he has none after what he did. I think a lot of people are simply of the mind that they believe the fix is in and they're jumping on Donaghy's statements to support their long-held beliefs. I think it doesn't make sense to believe that the owners of teams outside of big markets...which is the majority of teams in the league...are going to put up with these kinds of shenanigans. 



> follow the money! Hey and it looks like it's time for a new contract. Good thing they just happen to have the ratings up about 40% over last year. Who would have predicted that the league would be so lucky to be able to get their marquee matchup in a contract year?
> 
> STOMP


Boston and LA have had the best records all season long. The Lakers have the best player in the league (even though I despise him). The Celtics have three future Hall-of-Famers on their roster. It's hardly a surprise that they're in the finals.


----------



## noknobs (Sep 14, 2007)

He's a desperate man trying to bring others down with him and reduce his own sentence. I don't believe a single word.


----------



## BlazerFan22 (Jul 4, 2006)

Tim Donaghy needs to name names and tell everything.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

e_blazer1 said:


> Looking back at my original post in this thread, I'll give you that point. It wasn't my intent to insult those with differing opinions and I should have used other words and I apologise that I didn't.


I understand that things can just be tossed quickly as one is posting but I truly appreciate you saying this as I much prefer the high road too.


> What I meant to say is that it bothers me that people are jumping on this as if Donaghy has credibility. IMO, he has none after what he did. I think a lot of people are simply of the mind that they believe the fix is in and they're jumping on Donaghy's statements to support their long-held beliefs. I think it doesn't make sense to believe that the owners of teams outside of big markets...which is the majority of teams in the league...are going to put up with these kinds of shenanigans.


fair enough... I am a long time conspiracy guy and the Donaghy claims fit perfectly with what I've always contended... it's hardly stuff that would make me rethink my position. I think the money that teams make off TV revenue when the league's ratings are high gives owners f lessor teams good reason to go along with things... heck it seems to me that some of these teams aren't even really trying to win and are just happy to take their cash. 


> Boston and LA have had the best records all season long. The Lakers have the best player in the league (even though I despise him). The Celtics have three future Hall-of-Famers on their roster. It's hardly a surprise that they're in the finals.


that would be one way of looking at it... but when was the last time the two #1 seeds made it to the finals? I don't think it was recently. I also can't recall a playoffs where the home court advantage held so strong. There is a lot of stuff to fuel suspicion IMO.

OK, hate to type and run, but I'm going fishing eace:

STOMP


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

BlazerFan22 said:


> Tim Donaghy needs to name names and tell everything.


supposedly he has to the Feds, the full details haven't been released to the public.

STOMP


----------



## Paxil (Jan 1, 2003)

I believe everything he said personally. Yep... he is saying it *because* of his charges... but he is under oath to tell the truth now. Not really likely he is just making things up. Stern however... can say whatever he wants in public. Also... Stern's comments that the Feds have been investigating for years and found nothing... is interesting in its own right. Do you really think they'd investigate... NOTHING... for two years? Certainly they have better things to do. If they were not finding anything... I doubt they'd be bothering. Nothing he said even seems out of line from what most people already felt.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

stern has been losing it for a while and i would say since 2000 when rating and the "network" guys started calling the shots its been fixed.


----------



## deanwoof (Mar 10, 2003)

how do you explain new york? easily. isiah thomas. 

Thomas has never been a favorite of Stern. He may not have had a direct hand in selecting the Dream Team, but for damn sure Thomas deserved to be on that team over Christian Laettner. 

In Toronto, Thomas was screwed over during his time. In Indiana, he was screwed. And now in New York, well he was screwed. The first two teams became better right after Thomas left, and undoubtedly New York will have a significant turnaround soon. While the media blames Thomas' incompetence, there could be a bigger ploy in the background.


----------



## wizmentor (Nov 10, 2005)

Instead of saying something like "I don't believe Donaghy because..."
look at the freakin' game he's talking about. I'm not a conspiracy
theorist, but the game was so obviously fixed it's ridiculous.

http://us.lrd.yahoo.com/_ylt=ArDlIM...orts/index.php?rn=207187&cl=8267911&ch=207399

Forget Donaghy, LOOK AT THE GAME.


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

Paxil said:


> I believe everything he said personally. Yep... he is saying it *because* of his charges... but he is under oath to tell the truth now. Not really likely he is just making things up. Stern however... can say whatever he wants in public. Also... Stern's comments that the Feds have been investigating for years and found nothing... is interesting in its own right. Do you really think they'd investigate... NOTHING... for two years? Certainly they have better things to do. If they were not finding anything... I doubt they'd be bothering. Nothing he said even seems out of line from what most people already felt.


Interesting footnote: one of the refs at the center of the 2002 controversy is Bob Delaney (who happens to be an excop). Stern says there has been a full investigation of the claims? Delaney told ESPN he has never been contacted by either the league or the feds. He has never heard of this 2 year investigation!

Donaghy is scum, but Delaney has the rep as a straight arrow. Why would *he* lie? :whoknows:


----------



## Paxil (Jan 1, 2003)

Well... I suppose all Stern has to do is *say* there was an investigation... but seriously... if the league was doing it... what they heck would it turn up? Nothing. Ask around my work if anything improper is going on... no one is going to say yes... especially if they are involved in it. Now... if you lose your employement (so you don't have to worry about that) and are sworn to tell the truth... it probably gets a little easier. I don't doubt Delany wasn't contacted, and I'd like to hear Stern's response to Nader on why he said it was yet never bothered even talking to the officials.


----------



## BlazerFan22 (Jul 4, 2006)

wizmentor said:


> Instead of saying something like "I don't believe Donaghy because..."
> look at the freakin' game he's talking about. I'm not a conspiracy
> theorist, but the game was so obviously fixed it's ridiculous.
> 
> ...


It's just hard for me to believe that one refree can change a game or games that much. There has to be others involved in this. I really hope Donaghy will name the others.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

So a guy who had been deceiving the NBA and his fellow officials for years, is fighting to not have to go prison for 25+ years...and so he floats innuendo (and we will see if names are dropped)...and suddenly now b\c it was to federal officials and he could be charged with a felony if he further lied,...well then there is no way he would lie, right?

Sorry I just don't buy this scenario...He has EVERY reason to lie his *** off...He doesn't want to go to jail for 25 years! Let's see what names come out, b\c if none come out, well then he is just playing games isn't he?...and even if he does name some names, then what? Unless those people under oath admit to what Donaghy alleges they said...and of course have some proof...then all this is a he said\she said....which means nothing...

Donaghy insists he was telling the truth...those accused insist that he is lying and unless there is some SERIOUS proof against them...this ends up being nothing but media fodder...

Just like Clemens and the clubhouse guy (I forget his name)...." He is lying"..."No, he is lying"...I mean it is laughable...the difference is the clubhouse guy at least had some incriminating EVIDENCE (ie more than hearsay) against Roger...That and other incriminating evidence is why he finds himself in trouble...or is he?

So basically if this plays out, we are going to see a ridiculous parade of refs and officials admit to no knowledge of Donaghy's vague allegations...b\c you know they value thier jobs and free livelyhood...and we get months full of unsubstantiated opinion and overblown coverage...for nothing....

I doubt anyone even gets called to testify...This is yet another big farce...

I don't doubt that favoritism towards star players or home teams occurs...it absolutely does...but the laughable part to me is the fact that somehow it must be blatantly ordered by the nefarious officials of the NBA to the refs...as if that wasn't plain enough to see w\o ANYONE having to say a word about it....

You\fans don't come to watch Josh McRoberts play basketball and Brandon Roy sit on the bench do you? 

I think refs are more than aware of this fact, and they have ears\can read and can see comments of coaches and crybabies like Phil Jackson about foul discrepency....we are talking about the human component here....and that means conscious or unconscious reactions to such events\atmospheres...not some nefarious force behind the scenes giving them thier marching orders...

Seriously, ater Phil Jackson whined about the discrepency of fouls, did anyone really think that LA wouldn't get more favorable calls in LA? OF course it doesn't help that Kobe was much more aggressive in game 3, does it?

Come on now...


----------



## wizmentor (Nov 10, 2005)

BlazerFan22 said:


> It's just hard for me to believe that one refree can change a game or games that much. There has to be others involved in this. I really hope Donaghy will name the others.


Do the math:
6 extra foul calls + 2 noncalls = (up to) 12 extra FT + 4 FT (other team should have gotten = 16 FT x 75% FT% = 12 points

Best in League vs. Worst in League, maybe 12 pts can be overcome.
Playoff team vs. Playoff team --> Ref. decided game.

Refs CAN decide games! DO THEY? Yes. Is it because the league is rigged?
Not Usually, but not never.

p.s. Wait, maybe I missed your point. Donaghy could have been a 1-man wrecking
crew, but he didn't officiate the obviously-rigged Sac-LAL series.


----------



## BuckW4GM (Nov 2, 2005)

Kmurph said:


> You\fans don't come to watch Josh McRoberts play basketball and Brandon Roy sit on the bench do you?


if i'm a fan of the other 29 teams, i would absolutely rather see mcroberts play and roy sitting on the bench. why? because it would mean my team has a better chance at WINNING the game. and that's the key word there: WIN. being a fan, seeing my team win is by far the biggest aspect in my entertainment experience.

i watch sports for the fact that is it a competition of athleticism, skills, and determination. competition is competition only when it is fair. i love the game of basketball, and i can't imagine not enjoy watching it anytime soon. but if i ever believed that the game is fixed, i'll have better things to watch.


----------



## Paxil (Jan 1, 2003)

Kmurph... how do you think him lying will help him not go to jail? Most of his allegations have nothing to do with what he was charged with. I am sure during the investigation he did name names... but (and I am not a legal expert) by filing the letter or whatever the way he did it allowed it to become public... which *is* what he wanted. And the timing of course is interesting... right in the middle of the NBA finals after a game where everyone was talking about one sided calls for Boston. The timing I am sure... wasn't a coincidence. It was clearly his shot back at the NBA.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

I read some of the claims. It seems to me that many of the claims are borderline, where the NBA send down a message from up above about officiating, to make calls one way, and he is trying to interpret it as fixing a game. For instance, one of the allegations was that in the finals, the NBA contacted the officials and asked them to start making a call on an offensive foul for an illegal pick. Everybody knows Dallas was up in the series in question, and then over the next few games Miami got back into it, and part of the issue at hand was some illegal picks being called on Dallas, that were not being called the first few games. The thing is, the NBA told the refs to start calling it, but didn't inform the teams it wouldn't be called the way it was in games 1 and 2. He alleges it is a fix. I say it is a reach. The NBA does need to be more transparent in their communication with their officials and the way the calls are made, but I don't see it as fixing a series.


----------



## ucatchtrout (Feb 11, 2004)

e_blazer1 said:


> What I meant to say is that it bothers me that people are jumping on this as if Donaghy has credibility. IMO, he has none after what he did.


 What you are overlooking is that this is a federal investigation, and when you tell the feds something they check it out. And if you lie to them you do time in prison for lying to them. We are not talking about some sour grapes story a guy tosses out to the media, or even some bs story a dirtbag gives to a county prosecutor. We are talking feds here. Its a different ballgame when you deal with the feds. They have close to a hundred percent conviction rate, and they don't tolerate people lying to them. They'll let you walk on a lot of things but if you lie to them they will get you for it.

Donaghy has every reason to tell the truth here.

Stern has every reason to duck and cover.

Which is exactly what he did on ESPN today, in fact he got testy and defensive, and looked a lot like a guilty guy with something to hide. Not exactly what you'd expect to see from a guy in charge of a clean operation. You'd expect him to be transparent. Which he isn't. Not in the least.


----------



## ProZach (Oct 13, 2005)

Paxil said:


> Kmurph... how do you think him lying will help him not go to jail? Most of his allegations have nothing to do with what he was charged with. I am sure during the investigation he did name names... but (and I am not a legal expert) by filing the letter or whatever the way he did it allowed it to become public... which *is* what he wanted. And the timing of course is interesting... right in the middle of the NBA finals after a game where everyone was talking about one sided calls for Boston. The timing I am sure... wasn't a coincidence. It was clearly his shot back at the NBA.



He's trying to reduce his sentence by 'cooperating', duh. But since he was the only one who was guilty, he's apparently decided to feed into peoples paranoia and tell you conspiracy theorists what you want to hear. It's standard operating procedure. 

The funny thing about all of this is that everything we're hearing now is stuff Donaghy told the FBI a year ago. None of this is new to the FBI, only the public. That means that whether he's telling the truth or not, the FBI hasn't found anything on anyone else. Only Donaghy. Like Stern said, he's throwing crap at the wall and seeing what sticks. Do you know how many people would have to be involved or at least know about it if the league was in fact fixing games and playoff series? The FBI would have found something...

I do actually think that the timing could be, in part, a coincidence because Donaghy's going on trial in July and this is a common tactic for people in his situation. He's positioning himself. 

It's a little scary how many people are immediately choosing to believe Donaghy without a shred of evidence. All people have to do is accuse anymore and people go ape-****. And no, telling me to go watch tape of the Lakers/Kings game isn't evidence.


----------



## BlazerFan22 (Jul 4, 2006)

Kmurph said:


> So a guy who had been deceiving the NBA and his fellow officials for years, is fighting to not have to go prison for 25+ years...and so he floats innuendo (and we will see if names are dropped)...and suddenly now b\c it was to federal officials and he could be charged with a felony if he further lied,...well then there is no way he would lie, right?
> 
> Sorry I just don't buy this scenario...He has EVERY reason to lie his *** off...He doesn't want to go to jail for 25 years! Let's see what names come out, b\c if none come out, well then he is just playing games isn't he?...and even if he does name some names, then what? Unless those people under oath admit to what Donaghy alleges they said...and of course have some proof...then all this is a he said\she said....which means nothing...
> 
> ...


 We all like the NBA but why are you trying to help defend it?


----------



## B-Roy (Feb 12, 2008)

BlazerFan22 said:


> We all like the NBA but why are you trying to help defend it?


Because he believes there is no conspiracy? People have their own opinions, you don't have to agree with them.


----------



## BlazerFan22 (Jul 4, 2006)

wizmentor said:


> Do the math:
> 6 extra foul calls + 2 noncalls = (up to) 12 extra FT + 4 FT (other team should have gotten = 16 FT x 75% FT% = 12 points
> 
> Best in League vs. Worst in League, maybe 12 pts can be overcome.
> ...


 I don't think he was a 1-man wrecking
crew and I'm sure there is more games and alot more to this than we really know. Another thing If Donaghy was a 1-man wrecking
crew and he didn't officiate the obviously-rigged Sac-LAL series then who did afficiate it?


----------



## Paxil (Jan 1, 2003)

I don't think he can get off by cooperating now... it's too late for that. All he can do is hope to reduce his sentence, but nothing he mentioned pertains to what he was charged with. My guess... and I don't know... but I guess the Feds ONLY investigated the gambling charges. I doubt the fixing of the games even concerns them. Like Ed mentioned... nothing that Donaghy mentioned sounds illegal. Devious maybe... but not illegal. Nothing different that putting 'new and improved' on a box or having perennial going out of business sales.

The only thing that can hurt the NBA is us… and that isn’t going to happen. Remember that just about all of the things Donaghy alleges are really to make us happy. We want to see the Stars… we want the home team to win… the series to be extended. Do we get pissed that movies are not like real life? No. I don’t think there will ever be enough of an outcry to change the NBA.

I wish there was… I wish the NBA was the about athletic competition instead of refs manipulating the game and the players manipulating the refs by flopping. Sad state for such an awesome sport. I felt the game was manipulated before too… when they started promoting the power game… Shaq… dunks… conveniently making all-stars out of football players who can't shoot, pass or dribble to save their life. The NBA *created* that. That saw the fans were going wild over dunks… and started to change the way the game was called to facilitate more of that. 

Now excuse me while I go watch some more of my X-Files DVDs. The truth is out there.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

I just don't think it is a conspiracy...If Donaghy had something specific on other refs or NBA officials, we would be hearing about it...It just isn't there though IMO...

I could be wrong of course and a bombshell could drop...but I doubt it..

I just don't the think that the things most fans gripe about (star preferential treatment...home team getting the calls...extended playoff series) need to be dictated or guided to the refs by NBA officials...and that there is a logical explanation for it....human nature...

Hasoos makes a great point about some of the claims....They are very vague in nature and great leaps IMO are taken...going from the NBA telling refs to watch\call illegal picks to suddenly that being some hidden message for refs to "fix the game" against Dallas in this instance....

Sorry I just don't buy that a fix is in...those sort of things don't stay silent IMO, and I don't see any other refs stepping out and defending Donaghy or collaborating his allegations...The only guy saying such things is the guy who got busted for betting on games himself...So yeah, I think he is trying to save himself\lessen his sentence...


----------



## #10 (Jul 23, 2004)

ProZach said:


> The funny thing about all of this is that everything we're hearing now is stuff Donaghy told the FBI a year ago. None of this is new to the FBI, only the public. That means that whether he's telling the truth or not, the FBI hasn't found anything on anyone else. Only Donaghy. Like Stern said, he's throwing crap at the wall and seeing what sticks. *Do you know how many people would have to be involved or at least know about it if the league was in fact fixing games and playoff series?* The FBI would have found something...


uhh, maybe even less than 4? David Stern, and the ref(s) in question.


----------



## Ukrainefan (Aug 1, 2003)

Just a couple of things to look at when deciding who is credible. 

1.The prosecuters in this case have said that they believe that Donaghy has been completely truthful with them. (Sorry, I can not find the link for this; I know 100% that I read it on ESPN yesterday)

2. Stern says these are old allegations and have been thoroughly investigated by the FBI and the league. Then why does Bob Delaney (one of the referees in the Sacremento/Laker game) say he has never been questioned by the FBI or the league. Maybe the FBI didn't talk to him because, as a previous poster noted, there may not be a crime involved here. But wouldn't the league talk to him, even if he wasn't one of the two referees named, at least to ask him if if thought anything was odd in the calling of the game by his colleagues?
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3437716


----------



## ProZach (Oct 13, 2005)

#10 said:


> uhh, maybe even less than 4? David Stern, and the ref(s) in question.


So you view Stern like some evil puppet master. He works with no one, trusts no one, and while cloaked in secrecy he hatches evil plots all by himself. Behind closed doors he and a few refs exchange evil hand shakes, some money is passed, and those refs then go out and try to screw Sacremento in game 6 because that one game is so important to the game of basketball they'll risk everything. If Stern did it once, he did it a thousand times. You don't tamper one game in one season, get away with it, and then stop. For example, one would think he'd have tried to extend last years finals at least five games. After several years if you think only four people would even know about it you're living in crazytown.

Either there's a huge conspiracy, and the proof will soon come out, or the refs had an extremely bad stretch of calls, something I've seen countless times.


----------



## ProZach (Oct 13, 2005)

Ukrainefan said:


> Just a couple of things to look at when deciding who is credible.
> 
> 1.The prosecuters in this case have said that they believe that Donaghy has been completely truthful with them. (Sorry, I can not find the link for this; I know 100% that I read it on ESPN yesterday)
> u
> ...


The link you provided gives a great quote that hurts your 1st argument. 


> Delaney, a highly-decorated former New Jersey State trooper, said: "This is not the first time a known or convicted criminal has lied about me before the judicial system. I have an extensive law enforcement background and still train police officers. I have dealt with criminals and informants, and I know full well they are capable of doing and saying anything. I cannot comment any further without permission from the NBA."


----------



## Ukrainefan (Aug 1, 2003)

I have no doubt that criminals have told lies. However Delaney throws no light on this particular situation and I believe his statement is just part of the circling of the wagons by all (referees, players, coaches, sports press) who stand to lose if Donaghy is believed.


----------



## ProZach (Oct 13, 2005)

Ukrainefan said:


> I have no doubt that criminals have told lies. However Delaney throws no light on this particular situation and I believe his statement is just part of the circling of the wagons by all (referees, players, coaches, sports press) who stand to lose if Donaghy is believed.


Which is fine. But they don't stand to lose if Donaghy is believed, the only way they'll lose is if there's evidence. Let's just start with something more substantial than a criminals word of mouth... and go from there.


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

A couple of points.

Delaney denies that the game was rigged, but he also contradicts the claim that there was a full investigation. In its' own way, that claim is equally damaging.

Second, some of you are making this way too grandiose and complicated.

Being human, refs have biases, habits, and tendencies. The league prides itself on tracking these tendencies. If Dwayne Wade barrels into the lane and throws up a wild shot, some refs are more inclined than others to bail him out. Both Wade and the league know who those refs are.

If you want to subtly tilt the playing field to favor Miami, just make sure one or more of those refs are assigned to the game. You don't need to image Stern sneaking thru dark alleys handing out envelopes full of cash. He doesn't have to kidnap a ref's family and have them held hostage in a remote cabin in the Yukon. He doesn't have to hand out secret edicts. Above all, he doesn't need to do this for every game, or even a large percentage of them!


----------



## Public Defender (May 5, 2003)

I haven't read all that much about this, but it seems like to me Tim Donaghy is offering some sour grapes as well as what information he can, in hopes of a lighter sentence. That's fine, and I don't know that what he's saying is necessarily untrue, but neither does it seem illegal. 

However, I think the league should look into the tendencies of its referees - including what officials tend to call more of certain types of calls against certain players. The goal should be consistent application of the rules. And that should go for the home or away team, a superstar or a bench player, and if you ask me, the same rules ought to apply whether it's the first two minutes of Opening Night, or the last thirty seconds of Game 7 of the NBA Finals. The right call is the right call. (Oh, and as long as I'm on the topic - I was absolutely APPALLED by what commentators like Kenny Smith and others said about the foul on Brent Barry not being a foul because he didn't "sell it." These are the same guys who complain about flopping - which is selling a foul by another name, if you ask me...)


----------



## BlazerFan22 (Jul 4, 2006)

Public Defender said:


> I haven't read all that much about this, but it seems like to me Tim Donaghy is offering some sour grapes as well as what information he can, in hopes of a lighter sentence. That's fine, and I don't know that what he's saying is necessarily untrue, but neither does it seem illegal.
> 
> However, I think the league should look into the tendencies of its referees - including what officials tend to call more of certain types of calls against certain players. The goal should be consistent application of the rules. And that should go for the home or away team, a superstar or a bench player, and if you ask me, the same rules ought to apply whether it's the first two minutes of Opening Night, or the last thirty seconds of Game 7 of the NBA Finals. The right call is the right call. (Oh, and as long as I'm on the topic - I was absolutely APPALLED by what commentators like Kenny Smith and others said about the foul on Brent Barry not being a foul because he didn't "sell it." These are the same guys who complain about flopping - which is selling a foul by another name, if you ask me...)


First off I could be wrong but woulden't that hurt Tim Donaghy more if he was cought lieing? So why would he lie? Secound I think the NBA is in some hot water and David Stern knows it. David Stern just better hope that hot water dosen't get any deeper.


----------



## ProZach (Oct 13, 2005)

Oldmangrouch said:


> Second, some of you are making this way too grandiose and complicated.
> 
> Being human, refs have biases, habits, and tendencies. The league prides itself on tracking these tendencies. If Dwayne Wade barrels into the lane and throws up a wild shot, some refs are more inclined than others to bail him out. Both Wade and the league know who those refs are.
> 
> If you want to subtly tilt the playing field to favor Miami, just make sure one or more of those refs are assigned to the game.


What you speak of is common knowledge, and also not the topic. Your talking about habits and tendencies. You're talking about a situation where these refs are innocent, only guilty of being human. But Donaghy's accusing them and the league of far worse. 



Oldmangrouch said:


> You don't need to image Stern sneaking thru dark alleys handing out envelopes full of cash. He doesn't have to kidnap a ref's family and have them held hostage in a remote cabin in the Yukon. He doesn't have to hand out secret edicts. Above all, he doesn't need to do this for every game, or even a large percentage of them!


He doesn't need to do it at all! And if he does some, then why not others? There are countless circumstances where the league would have made more money if a different team advanced in the playoffs, or a series was extended another game. I just don't understand why everything's a conspiracy. I'm sure there is bias, I know there is star-treatment, home-court advantage, and bad calls. But refs consciously working in favor of a certain outcome on the whim of the league office is too farfetched for me without some shred of evidence. But I guess we're all guilty till proven innocent.



BlazerFan22 said:


> First off I could be wrong but woulden't that hurt Tim Donaghy more if he was cought lieing? So why would he lie?


Hurt him more than 25 years in prison? Something tells me he's not concerned with the possibility of a greater sentence, he's consumed with the possibility of a lesser sentence. 

Second, did you really just ask, "So why would he lie?" ... Seriously?


----------



## BlazerFan22 (Jul 4, 2006)

ProZach said:


> What you speak of is common knowledge, and also not the topic. Your talking about habits and tendencies. You're talking about a situation where these refs are innocent, only guilty of being human. But Donaghy's accusing them and the league of far worse.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 Well I think the NBA is in hot water and David Stern is just trying to brush it off like it's nothing. If the NBA has nothing to hide let the refs loose to talk. Stern doesen't let them talk public that tells me he has something to hide.


----------



## wizmentor (Nov 10, 2005)

The evidence of inappropriate reffing is mounting:

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/bk/bkn/5832413.html


----------



## BlazerFan22 (Jul 4, 2006)

wizmentor said:


> The evidence of inappropriate reffing is mounting:
> 
> http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/bk/bkn/5832413.html


thank you good read! The Donaghy and the league story is becomeing more interesting than these NBA finals. I wonder what team the league will decide to win.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

I am hoping that if nothing else, this event helps get the NBA reffing back in line. It should be more transparent, and the NBA should stop coming across as so condescending/pompous when making their decisions, and communicate the reasoning behind those calls.


----------



## BlazerFan22 (Jul 4, 2006)

Well we all know that the 02 Sac vs. LAL seriers was rigged. I don't think thats a question anymore. So if Donaghy wasen't even there to official and rigg that game in 02, Then why is there a question if there is more involved? Donaghy did not ref that game.


----------



## Entity (Feb 21, 2005)

BlazerFan22 said:


> Well we all know that the 02 Sac vs. LAL seriers was rigged. I don't think thats a question anymore. So if Donaghy wasen't even there to official and rigg that game in 02, Then why is there a question if there is more involved? Donaghy did not ref that game.


One of the very best methods of deception is to play into the biases of your target. Pick out the games that are the most controversial to fans and watch the magic work itself out.

I'm not going to come out and say I believe or disbelieve him yet. I've already expressed what it might mean to me if it's true. But I'm not going to make a decision based solely on the fact that he happened to picked the games that fans believe were the most likely to be fixed. It's very, very easy to make someone say "I knew it!"


----------



## BlazerFan22 (Jul 4, 2006)

Entity said:


> One of the very best methods of deception is to play into the biases of your target. Pick out the games that are the most controversial to fans and watch the magic work itself out.
> 
> I'm not going to come out and say I believe or disbelieve him yet. I've already expressed what it might mean to me if it's true. But I'm not going to make a decision based solely on the fact that he happened to picked the games that fans believe were the most likely to be fixed. It's very, very easy to make someone say "I knew it!"


Everyone knows that game was fixed for the Lakers even Phil Jackson and Laker fans themselves. Even Scott Pollord came out and said he knew something was going on. The point is Donaghy wasen't even reffing that game. So it had to involve others.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

wizmentor said:


> The evidence of inappropriate reffing is mounting:
> 
> http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/bk/bkn/5832413.html


nice read. I've heard/read/seen so many incidents of completely inappropriate behavior from officials like the ones relayed here, I find it easy to believe that the rot goes to the core. 

the suggestion the writer makes about having the officials a separate entity from the league (like MLB) seems an obvious move the league could make to improve the impressions that the league is fixing games... unless for some reason they don't want to give that up.

STOMP


----------



## BlazerFan22 (Jul 4, 2006)

If nothing is going on then why wont David Stern let the refs talk to the media or put them on the stand to defence to Donaghy? I just don't trust him.


----------



## ucatchtrout (Feb 11, 2004)

from hoopsworld



> Donaghy Sold Out Bavetta?
> 
> The ongoing investigation of recent admissions by former NBA referee Tim Donaghy appear to be on the verge of dragging a few other refs into the fray. While the NBA balances on the precipice of widening the chasm and denying anything and everything, it's coming out that the FBI investigation into Donaghy's revelations had a lot to do with fellow referee Dick Bavetta. Several people who have been questioned by the FBI have reported that they actually answered more questions about Bavetta than about Donaghy.
> 
> This is likely to get very ugly, and not because there is any truth to the NBA handing down orders from on high about what the outcomes of games should be. What seems more likely is that we're going to find instances where specific ref teams - independent of the NBA - made decisions to change outcomes to fuel their own gambling habits. Absolute power corrupts absolutely, and in the world of the NBA the refs are pretty close to having absolute power.


----------



## ucatchtrout (Feb 11, 2004)

So the feds are looking at Bavetta now.

Likely they will look at Jake ODonnell and the rest of those schmucks as well.

TD probably isn't the only turd in the barrell. He is just the one that got caught.


----------



## BlazerFan22 (Jul 4, 2006)

I knew there was more involved and where still just getting started.


----------

