They got beat by 20 points. How big of a factor could the refs have been? I didn't see the whole game, so I'm not sure, but if you get beat by 20, I think you have a lot to look at other than the officiating.
I will add, though, that this would be an ideal game for the NBA to "affect", because it adds some interest to what had been a pretty dull series, and Boston has a chance to win Game 6 on their own floor, although Orlando is 5-1 on the road in the playoffs.
I will add, though, that this would be an ideal game for the NBA to "affect", because it adds some interest to what had been a pretty dull series, and Boston has a chance to win Game 6 on their own floor, although Orlando is 5-1 on the road in the playoffs.
Bad officiating is bad officiating, be the final score close or far. You have no idea how far bad officiating can change the final score. It's a butterfly effect, and I'm not here to discuss whether the outcome of the game is affected, and if so, how much. You are focused on the win and loss, which is middle of the road. The view should either be myopic, in that bad calls are bad calls, or the grand scheme, in which this further damages credibility of the league, especially with David Stern basically telling people that they cannot express their opinion to obvious miscalls regardless of how blatant replays show the calls.
I watched. The Celtics never had any sort of team play. They were discombobulated from the start. You can say that they just didn't bring it that night. You could also argue that all the fouls took the Celtics out of the game from the start. I'm not going to debate that with you. Bad calls are bad calls. They need to be addressed, and there needs to be some sort of accountability from the NBA in terms of explaining what is going on. Stern's just leaving room for more conspirators.