The Tragedy of the NBA Referee

[Skandery]

I made this a new topic because I wanted to discuss more than simply, "Was Barry Fouled?".  To get that out of the way and succinctly answer the question.  Yes, Barry was fouled.  Now then did the Spurs deserve to win the game.  No.  While the direct result of the "non-call" results in a Spurs loss, the culmination of effort and actions throughout the entire game from the Spurs reflected the proper consequence. 

While the NBA rule book specifically delineates a definition for a "foul"; the truth of the matter is, a foul is not always a foul.  In practice, the rules do not apply the same way to the same situations.  I don't envy the plight of the NBA referee, after all, its my belief that 5 on 5 basketball is one of the hardest games to arbitrate.  Still the extreme inconsistency, stubborn refusal by the league office to implement technological aide, and overall culture of the NBA filtered through the superstar spectrum has resulted in absolutely the worst officiating of a multi-million dollar gaming endeavor in our country.  I consider myself a fan of the NBA, almost as much as I identify with a particular team or a particular player, and it stings to admit the depths of inequity that grips officiating in this league. 

In going back to the recent example at hand, Barry's teammates lament the fact he didn't do exactly what the league wants to eradicate in the first place.  Namely, flopping or selling the foul.  Through the inconsistent application of the rule, the referees breed further and more sophisticated aberrant action.  These unwritten rules of make-up calls, superstar calls, shifting stances on physicality erodes the innocense of competition and sportsmanship.  Why should an erroneous no-call be sufficient justice in response to an erroneous shot-clock reset?  With the technology at our disposal, the cameras, the angles, the slow motion, the digital preciseness of picture, why should an official have to guess at whether a ball grazed a rim.  Why should an official have to guess at exactly how much time ticked off after a clock malfunction.  Why does contact against Kobe constitute a foul on Harpring while the same contact does not constitute a foul on Bowen.  Why should the same low post maneuver that gets Turiaf charged with traveling be perfectly legal for Tim Duncan.  Why should the technical whistle be faster for Kobe and Rasheed then for Redd and Garnett.  Why?  The answer is simple.  There is no accountability placed on the NBA to improve the officiating.  Dollar signs speak to the health and viability of the league, as opposed to pure adherance to the rules, and we the consumers are satisfied.  We'll incessantly gripe but we won't stop watching and that is really all that matters. 

Despondant though I remain that officiating will continue to skew, I'd even go so far as to say subtely pervert, the games I love to watch.  Angry though I become that this ridiculous notion of players and coaches having to "adjust" to the referees is part and parcel of this noble game.  I'll continue to be a fan and I'll continue to watch . . .

. . . and continue to gripe.   

[WayOutWest]

What can you do?

It's not like any team is immune to the ref problem.  Most every team has a superstar player that gets the calls and some role player that does not, Walton for the Lakers is a good example.  Mix that in with the opposing teams superstar getting white glove treatment every time the air around his shooting hand is disturbed with your own hard working role players being hammared at the rim with no call and frustration runs rampant.

What can you do?

[Reality]

In going back to the recent example at hand, Barry's teammates lament the fact he didn't do exactly what the league wants to eradicate in the first place.  Namely, flopping or selling the foul. 

Disagree in large part.  I don't know what his teamates wanted him to do and after hearing Poppycocks stupid comments on the play his Owned By Phil basketball IQ shines thru once again.  While Barry did not need to flop to sell the call, he absolutely should have taken a shot while Swisher was landing on him.  Not put the ball on the floor and try to get out of Fishers way.  Huge error on Barrdogs part and had nothing to do with selling the call.  By shooting he was looking at 3 FTs instead of 2.  Well, unless Fisher was let to slide on that one also.  Definitely a possibility.

Why does contact against Kobe constitute a foul on Harpring while the same contact does not constitute a foul on Bowen.  Why should the same low post maneuver that gets Turiaf charged with traveling be perfectly legal for Tim Duncan.

  While i appreciate the spirit of your post, did you have to use not one but two once-in-a-millineum examples of Spurs getting the calls over the Lakers?  And Kobme at that?!

Otherwise right.  The NBA has zero interest in getting calls right.  Nor does the NFL or MLB.  I've never understood the "we'd rather have the human element (errors, flat out fixed corruption, etc) vs proper use of technology to help the officials" side.

[westkoast]

 Still the extreme inconsistency, stubborn refusal by the league office to implement technological aide, and overall culture of the NBA filtered through the superstar spectrum has resulted in absolutely the worst officiating of a multi-million dollar gaming endeavor in our country.  

I was thinking the same exact thing after hearing about baseball wanting to add cameras to aid their umps with telling if balls are foul or HRs.  IMO baseball umps are pretty good.  Granted the game is slower and their job is MUCH easier then an NBA ref.  That's a given.  The thing is they are talking about using technology to help improve call making even though they've seem to have it down for their sport.  Why can't the NBA think of alternative ways to improve officiating?  I think reviews would help in more situations then just clock issues or to see if a shot went in before the buzzer.   Maybe the NBA doesn't want to stretch the game out with a lot of instant replay, fine.  What about adding more referees on the court?  How about changing how certain referees are the one who have to make a call even if the outside ref had a better angle?  They haven't really addressed the referee issue in forever.  This Barry thing is just a reminder.  Not a starting point.  This has been going on since before even Michael Jordan shoved Byron Russell into the floor seats in the finals.

It also makes you wonder if there was more help in form of another ref, technology, or any other way they could aid the officials if you would see a betting scandal in the NBA at all.  The way they have it setup currently (and have for a really long time) makes it much easier to manipulate games.   Why not kill two birds with one stone?  Help the referees call the game better AND address any future betting scandals by adding another layer.

In going back to the recent example at hand, Barry's teammates lament the fact he didn't do exactly what the league wants to eradicate in the first place.  Namely, flopping or selling the foul.  Through the inconsistent application of the rule, the referees breed further and more sophisticated aberrant action.  These unwritten rules of make-up calls, superstar calls, shifting stances on physicality erodes the innocense of competition and sportsmanship.  Why should an erroneous no-call be sufficient justice in response to an erroneous shot-clock reset?  With the technology at our disposal, the cameras, the angles, the slow motion, the digital preciseness of picture, why should an official have to guess at whether a ball grazed a rim.  

This also ties into the league fining people for flopping.  If Barry acts he probably gets the call.....but then he would be fined.  His team *MIGHT* go into overtime but surely he would have been fined if this was the 2008-2009 season.  They will go back to review plays and slap a fine down for flops but cannot use technology during the game.  Okay...

Kurt Rambis talked about this yesterday during an interview.  He said Phil and himself ran up to the scorers table to ask Matt Smith (the stat guy for the night, also does Lakers Live! on the radio) to back up their claim that Fish's shot hit the rim since he had the video right in front of him.  The video showed they were right but that does not matter to Joey Crawford or any of the referees out there.  Even if they wanted to they couldn't go off that.  They don't have the option even if their ego's allowed them to check themselves.

Why should an official have to guess at exactly how much time ticked off after a clock malfunction. 

They don't.  This is the only thing they are allowed to use a replay for.  They don't get time left on the clock wrong very much anymore.  Shouldn't this push them in the direction of using technology to aid the referees?  We are approaching 2009-2010 and they are still calling games like its 1955 for the most part.

[westkoast]

Honestly this should be sticky at the top....thought Skander did an excellent job with this thread/idea.  Would like to hear others thoughts on this.

[rickortreat]

To condense it down, Skandery suggests that there is a problem with the refs and the league isn't willing to do anything about it because we will watch anyway.

What else is there to be said?  The NBA knows that the refs don't always get it right- they admitted as much themselves this week. But my guess is that Joey's crew will be part of the finals, even thought they blew the call in the Spurs/Lakers game.

What can the NBA do, and what are they willing to do to punish referees who blow obvious calls? It's not clear that they're willing to do anything, and even if they are, are loath to explain it to anyone else that the refs are being disciplined.

I can't stand the way the game is officiated.  There should be no subjectivity at all, with respect to who the player is.  If it's a foul when Rodney Carney does it, it's a foul when Kobe does it too.  And if someone is called for a reach in on Kobe, they should also be called for the same foul if it was a reach-in on Carney.  It's a travel whoever does it.

That is the simplest way, and it's also obviously the right way to call games.  You can't manufacture stars. Some players simply are better and even though we all have different eyes we can all recognize that Chris Paul is a much better player than Tony Parker. So let the players play and call the games straight and the better players will still excel.

The league should consider dropping all the current refs and giving some college refs the chance to step up.  Since they aren't part of the culture, they would be less likely to turn the other way when a Kobe makes a foul, anymore than if a Rondo does.