More Donaghy -- Alleging NBA Fixed Game 6 Series in 2002?

Status
Not open for further replies.
quick dog

quick dog

Starter
#241
#241
VF21 said:
Of the three refs, it was Ted Bernhardt if memory serves who made the most egregious calls. Where is he? While most of the controversy seems to be circling around Bavetta and Delaney, I'd sure like to know why he seemed to disappear out of the officiating ranks.
Click to expand...
Your question about Bernhardt prompted me to Google that jerk. Check this out. He screwed up a call in the 52nd NBA All-Star Game

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/scores103/103040/20030209NBA--EAST------0.htm

Here are some comments from the article:

""I thought it was the game-winner, but anything can happen in an NBA game," Jordan said. Anything did. A questionable foul call by referee Ted Bernhardt put Los Angeles Lakers guard Kobe Bryant at the line for three free throws with one second to go. Experiencing mixed emotions, Bryant made just two free throws to tie the game. "The first thing when Kobe got up, he said, 'I can't believe he called that,'" said Indiana forward Jermaine O'Neal, who committed the foul. "If I were a reporter, I'd go ask Ted Bernhardt why he called that because that would have been the perfect article to write." "That's a tough position to be in," Bryant said. "I would not wish that on none of these players in there." Bryant's free throws forced an unprecedented second extra session, which belonged entirely to Garnett. "
On 14 June 2007, there was a newspaper article suggesting that he may return to the NBA after his three-year hiatus from officiating for "personal reasons".

http://www.nba.com/grizzlies/features/petes_perspective_workouts-070615.html

Here are some comments from this article:

"The Denver Post reported that former NBA referee Ted Bernhardt may return to the league. The 16-year veteran had some personal issues that needed to be addressed and so he hasn’t officiated in the league for a couple of years. Here’s hoping that the league will get him on the floor to work summer league games and get him back in the rotation. At the time Ted left the officiating staff, he was one of the fine young officials on the rise, having been assigned to the NBA Finals. The NBA can always use more good officials. Ted, I’m rooting for you. "

Ted Bernhardt may be the guy that the FBI should shake-down. I suspect they aleady have done so.




To whomever tried to send me a personal message, my pop-ip blocker nailed it before I could read the name.
 
upinsmoke

upinsmoke

All-Star
#242
#242
If my memory serves me right i remember stern recently requesting to meet with donaghy why would he request that if did not think maybe he has dirt that has not been uncovered.
 
beb0p

beb0p

Starter
#243
#243
Bricklayer said:
No, if its a lie its brilliance is precisely in what he did NOT say. The very part that makes it suspsicious is the same part that has created so much buzz -- he chose an extremely well known and oft discussed event and basically tells them/impies exactly what everybody always thought about it anyway. There would be less reason to doubt him if it was an obscure game/series somewhere.
Click to expand...
Brick, if you tell a lie that resulted in the NBA seeking $1 millions from you, I wouldn't call that "Brilliant." But maybe you just have that much money (which would be a good thing right?).

I don't think you understood my point based on what you're saying now, cuz you've essentially used my point to make your point.

And why would there be less reason to doubt Donaghy if he blew the whistle on a lesser known series vs a the 2002 one? It's the same level of suspicions simply because he can't offer any proof either way.
 
Showtime

Showtime

Starter
#244
#244
I just read the ticker on ESPN, and it said that one of the refs in that game (Bob Delaney) said he was never questioned about those allegations, yet Stern said the matter was investigated by the feds and nothing came of it. How was an investigation done and completed by the feds without the refs ever being asked about it?

Also, Stern was asked about how long the league has known about the allegations of fixing games in '02 and '05, and said the NBA knew for about a year, and the matter was investigated by the feds, and no action was taken. Yet, when the follow up question was 'Do you think he was referring to the Sacramento LA series in '02?" Stern said he hadn't read the document because Tim's lawyer just released it. Well, which is it? Did the NBA know about it a year ago, or is this just coming out? Even Stern can't decide.

Very fishy and contradictory statements by the commish.
 
Last edited:
F

Flemdog

Prospect
#246
#246
I'm over it...I think...

My emotions over the last couple days have gone from angry, to happy over having my crackpot theories validated, to sad because something so special was snatched away from all of us.

I attended all 7 games of the 2002 Western Conference Finals and the low after game 4 and the high after game 5 were like few things I've ever experienced in a few days in my life.

I was sitting in the 2nd row next to the basket on the Kings end (the end the Lakers were shooting at in the 2nd half) I knew game 6 was a poorly officiated game watching it live, and I was heated at the game, but I really did not now the extend until getting home and looking over the final stats. Bringing out all the footage during the coverage of this story makes me not only have to go through this as the 2008 me but I have to literally look at the 2002 me react to call after call being made. It's like going through the death of a semi-close family member over and over again.

The only good/bad thing that allows me to sleep at night is that the Kings blew it in game 7. To say that game was ours for the taking is obviously an understatement. Were the Lakers lucky to win game 7, definitely. But you create luck by preparation to take advantage of situations at hand.

Taking the conspiracy even further I was trying to really think who would benefit the most by extending the series...and it's NBC. The ad revenue for what was dubbed "The Real Finals" for the cliche "Win or Go Home" NBC earned was I'm sure millions for both the game and the lead in/lead out programs.

Even though I watch just about every Kings game on NBA League Pass or listen online, I have not attended an NBA game since. To think about winning that series would of done not only to me personally (eternal happiness) assuming we would easily beat the Nets in the finals, we'd possibly be talking not just about 2002 but how many titles we won, not to mention the Kings would be playing the 2nd year in a new downtown arena.

Living in Los Angeles in the middle of the Lakers storm makes it even worse due to the fact that going into the season they looked lottery bound and now they look like contenders for the next handful of years. Lakers fans almost universally agree that the Kings were screwed in that game, but that's little consolation.

But personally, I'm ready to move on...I need to move on. We would all love to go back to 2002 but unless someone has the plans for the Flux Capacitor it's not going to happen.

P.S. Before I move on I do still have this image I kept from one of the sales sheets we were sent to order 2002 NBA Championship products.

http://www.tailgatesportsusa.com/images/sacramentonbachampsparking.jpg
 
K

kingsfan101

Starter
#247
#247
beb0p said:
Brick, if you tell a lie that resulted in the NBA seeking $1 millions from you, I wouldn't call that "Brilliant." But maybe you just have that much money (which would be a good thing right?).

I don't think you understood my point based on what you're saying now, cuz you've essentially used my point to make your point.

And why would there be less reason to doubt Donaghy if he blew the whistle on a lesser known series vs a the 2002 one? It's the same level of suspicions simply because he can't offer any proof either way.
Click to expand...
I think it was the reverse. Per my understanding, he made these allegations after NBA demanded $1M from him.

This is not to say that they are wrong, or that he wouldn't have made them otherwise. Just that, per my understanding, that was the sequence.
 
K

kingcrazy

Guest
#248
#248
So ridiculous

We've all known this for years and finally they confirm it for us.

This is just the tip of the iceberg.
 
B

BMiller52

All-Star
#249
#249
The FBI has questioned an ex-NBA referee about Dick Bavetta, one of three officials to work Game 6 of the 2002 Western Conference finals, according to The New York Times.

Hue Hollins, who retired in 2003, said the agents, who asked him about former NBA referee Tim Donaghy, also asked if he ever noticed that Bavetta "was making sure that the home team would win, and I told them I had no idea because I didn't work with him a lot," according to the Times.
Click to expand...
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3439554
 
S

Superman

All-Star
#250
#250
KA_2 said:
He doesn't have to do any of that, at least 8-10 FTs in the 4th quarter of Game 6 were intentional fouls on Shaq by the Kings. The discrepancy isn't nearly as severe considering the Game 5 BS in favor of the Kings. It evened out when they couldn't close the deal in Game 7 after the Game 6 BS in favor of the Lakers.
Click to expand...
What are you even talking about? Can you substantiate your claim that 8-10 FTA in that fourth quarter were intentional fouls on Shaq? Can you prove that?

And again, Game 7 should not have even been played. Period. If Game 6 is called fairly, there is no Game 7. Laker fans who keep bringing up Game 7, as if that justified Game 6, can kindly "kiss my Converse".
 
uolj

uolj

Starter
#253
#253
kingsfan101 said:
I think it was the reverse. Per my understanding, he made these allegations after NBA demanded $1M from him.

This is not to say that they are wrong, or that he wouldn't have made them otherwise. Just that, per my understanding, that was the sequence.
Click to expand...
He made the allegations first a while ago (last year probably). Then the NBA asked for the $1 million in a move unrelated to the allegations. Then he went public with what he told investigators previously likely because of the $1 million asked for by the NBA.
 
hrdboild

hrdboild

Moloch in whom I dream Angels!
Staff member
#255
#255
I think the Marcos Breton column sums up my attitude about this the best. It doesn't even matter all that much to me whether this is a case of a game being fixed or simply some terrible refereeing. Either way the outcome is the same. And what's ate at me the most over the years isn't so much the feeling that we were robbed (though that's a pretty hard thing to get over for a fan) it's the perception that complaining about it made you a whiner and a poor loser and a Sacramento "Queen". It's the gradually increasing lack of respect for a championship level team that never won a championship.

And you can trace the fallout right back to 2002. I don't think a team can ever recover from feeling like it didn't matter what you did because in the end the refs weren't going to allow you to win anyway. Reading the comments made by the players themselves, there was definitely a perception that they had no chance to win that game. And then the unceremonious manner in which that team was slowly dismantled piece by piece as fan favorites were dumped for nothing and then slumped off into retirement, injured and forgotten. That was adding insult to injury. I want to see all those players come back and get the parade they deserved. Rick Adelman too. I want them to know how much we appreciated them and how much we'd love to have them involved in this franchise in whatever way. Everything that has happened with this team since 2002 has been like one long hang-over from that disputed game 6.

Do I personally think the game was fixed by the NBA? No. But it didn't need to be. The way the rules are written and the way the game is called definitely favors certain players more than others. That's your biggest reason why the Shaq/Kobe Lakers won three years in a row. It's why the Phoenix Suns were never going to win a championship with Nash/Marion/Stoudamire. It's why Manu Ginobili is an All-Star in the NBA and Lebron James is virtually unstoppable. And the NBA is going to breath a sigh of relief when Shaq finally retires because in 26 years the league still hasn't figured out a way to fairly call games when he's playing. If you call him for the same fouls as everyone else, it's a foul every time he pivots towards the basket and sends a defender flying. If you're going to allow him to play then the defender has to practically mug him to try and stop the shot. Vlade figured it out though and it worked for 5 games. Same thing that happened to Yao in 2005. Somebody complained and the refs changed how they were calling the game as a result.* That can't happen. Not in the playoffs, not anywhere.

David Stern, you want to know what so many NBA fans are so outraged about? It's not just 2002. It's every game of every season where some questionable call directly affects the outcome. We want some kind of assurance that the game will be called consistently and objectively the same way, every game regardless of who the home team is or when the game takes place. We want to see mistakes corrected when they happen not apologized for the next day when it's too late to fix them. Until that happens there's always going to be a perception that the league is playing favorites.

* We already know this happened, by the way, because Stan Van Gundy stated it publicly in 2005 and got fined over it.
 
Last edited:
fansinceday1

fansinceday1

Starter
#256
#256
It seems that the kings losing game 7 is being used as a crutch to brush over game 6. The fact that the kings choked in game 7 is moot. It doesnt have anything to do with this conversation about game 6. I thought game 6 was rigged then, and I do now.

Laker fan using game 5 to justify game 6 is laughable. Game 6 is universally seen as one of the worst officiated game in pro sports. Not just the NBA but PRO SPORTS. That is hardly justification for webber's moving screen in game 5. Keep trying laker fan, keep trying.
 
hrdboild

hrdboild

Moloch in whom I dream Angels!
Staff member
#257
#257
Not to mention the refs never call a moving screen foul on last second buzzer beating shots. They generally let the players determine the outcome. And, if you look at the video, it wasn't even a moving screen!
 
Peja

Peja

Bench
#262
#262
NBA league as a symbol of regular games is officialy gone!It's not different than any other league in the world where some games are controlled by the refs.Because of their stupid interests,we lost the opportunity to become NBA champions and God knows how many years is going to take for the Kings to come back in the finals.
Stern,f**k you!
 
coolhandluke

coolhandluke

Starter
#263
#263
This may get serious. Feds are investigating about Dick Bavetta.

Two former NBA referees told ESPN on Thursday that federal investigators had questioned them about referee Dick Bavetta while conducting their probe into Tim Donaghy.

Former referee Hue Hollins said Thursday on ESPN's Outside The Lines that federal investigators "questioned me about Dick Bavetta more than they did about Tim Donaghy."
Click to expand...
ESPN Link
 
uolj

uolj

Starter
#264
#264
I think those investigations already happened when Donaghy first told the feds about the stuff that was in the letter just recently published. That's why Stern says that they did their investigations and nothing came of it.
 
xrzn

xrzn

Starter
#265
#265
Is the FBI investigating Donaghy's allegations? Will others be charged with crimes?
The FBI already has investigated the allegations. Donaghy first met with FBI agents in July 2007. A team of agents has been probing his stories ever since. As the result of their investigations, federal prosecutors have filed what is known as a 5(k) letter. The 5(k) letter means the agents have checked on the stories and have concluded Donaghy was truthful. The 5(k) letter does not apply to the 2002 Western Conference finals Game 6 because the statute of limitations had expired. More than five years went by before Donaghy described that game to any agents. There was no reason to look into that game because no one could be charged with a crime. The 5(k) letter does apply to statements Donaghy made to agents regarding the three games in 2005.
Click to expand...
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?id=3439659

So the FBI never check out the 2002 cause of the statute of limitations law but checked out the 2005 games and they indeed were truthful. Does anyone know how credible this is?
 
Bricklayer

Bricklayer

Don't Make Me Use The Bat
#266
#266
xrzn said:
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?id=3439659

So the FBI never check out the 2002 cause of the statute of limitations law but checked out the 2005 games and they indeed were truthful. Does anyone know how credible this is?
Click to expand...

Well it certainly sounds like a reasonable chain of events, although as I have mentioned before, there was always much more to go on in regards to the 2005 incident anyway (i.e. Donaghy was directly involved, and so was the league).
 
xrzn

xrzn

Starter
#267
#267
Bricklayer said:
Well it certainly sounds like a reasonable chain of events, although as I have mentioned before, there was always much more to go on in regards to the 2005 incident anyway (i.e. Donaghy was directly involved, and so was the league).
Click to expand...
So then this would prove that he would have no reason to lie about the 2002 fiasco. It would make no sense to tell the truth about one thing and then just make up a lie about another.
 
Bricklayer

Bricklayer

Don't Make Me Use The Bat
#268
#268
xrzn said:
So then this would prove that he would have no reason to lie about the 2002 fiasco. It would make no sense to tell the truth about one thing and then just make up a lie about another.
Click to expand...

Well...that's a bit of a leap.

You could just as well say that a saavy liar would be MORE liekly to make up lies happening more than 5 years ago precisely because the feds would be less likely to thoroughly investigate them.

In any case, from Donaghy's perspective the game has always been that he needs to look as knowledgible and cooperative as he can. And so if he knows a bunch fo stuff and spills hte beans on it, that's good. But if he only knows a few things, there is definite incentive for him to add as much padding -- preferably vague, uncheckable padding -- as he can to puff himself up and make him seem both more knowledgible and more important as a whistle blower.
 
uolj

uolj

Starter
#269
#269
Bricklayer said:
Well...that's a bit of a leap.

You could just as well say that a saavy liar would be MORE liekly to make up lies happening more than 5 years ago precisely because the feds would be less likely to thoroughly investigate them.

In any case, from Donaghy's perspective the game has always been that he needs to look as knowledgible and cooperative as he can. And so if he knows a bunch fo stuff and spills hte beans on it, that's good. But if he only knows a few things, there is definite incentive for him to add as much padding -- preferably vague, uncheckable padding -- as he can to puff himself up and make him seem both more knowledgible and more important as a whistle blower.
Click to expand...
I don't understand why you seem to be fighting this. I can't understand why Donaghy would lie here and I see nothing that indicates he is.

It's not like he is exposing some big conspiracy.

What you say is true if you're trying to come up with any possible reason why he would lie, but if someone's asking whether you think he is, I just don't see that it's likely. In fact, there's a lot more reason to believe he isn't. (It is very similar to Clemens' trainer in that respect.)
 
Bricklayer

Bricklayer

Don't Make Me Use The Bat
#270
#270
uolj said:
I don't understand why you seem to be fighting this. I can't understand why Donaghy would lie here and I see nothing that indicates he is.

It's not like he is exposing some big conspiracy.

What you say is true if you're trying to come up with any possible reason why he would lie, but if someone's asking whether you think he is, I just don't see that it's likely. In fact, there's a lot more reason to believe he isn't. (It is very similar to Clemens' trainer in that respect.)
Click to expand...
People are fundamentally underestimating the temptation to lie in Donaghy's position. This is a matter of his freedom. And the feds are going to put pressure on you to spill and spill some more. And when you run out of the good stuff, the real stuff, and they still want more...what do you do? You lie. Something nice, convenient, already suspected, uncheckable. You tell them exactly what they waant to hear so that they will cut you a break. It is a very old story in the criminal justice system.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.