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

Status
Not open for further replies.
This is all well and good when you chalk it up to an off night. Its completely different if these allegations are true because it means the league took it out of the players' hands intentionally.

Everybody, including the Lakers, was cheated if this was the case.
I agree completely. Not only do I feel bad for you kings fans, hell I am upset as a laker fan.

From all that has been said the league wanted the series to go to seven. Not that the league wanted the Lakers to win the series, but that they wanted it to get to seven.

This is just my opinion, but I believe that if the kings win game 4, there is no fix. Once the series was tied at 2 and the ratings and drama increased (if there is a fix) thats when the league made the call to have it go 7.

(even in this case I believe from what has been written that the zebras were the ones that put it into their own hands)

I believe that depending on what happened in game 5, game 6 was going to be fixed for the other team.

(although you may scoff at it, game 5 could just as well could have been fixed. Think about it, there is no way in hell that sac and LAL get screwed on their home floors)

No matter what way you cut it this sucks if its true.
 
The Lakers in game 5 were crying foul after that game. I remember it very well at Lakers ground. Anyhow, game five was nothing compared to game 6 in how bad it looked. We still talk about this 6 years after how bad of an officiated game that was. This just adds fuel to our fire.

I don't think the championship should be taken from the Lakers like I don't think an asterisk should be put next to Barry Bonds name... BUT in my heart I know the Kings were the champs that year.

Also.. Some people were talking about giving the Kings a top pick. that seems about right.. They take picks away for punishment right? Why not give the Kings a pick as punishment to the league?
 
But there is a difference... a major difference. Game 5 was like many other games in the playoffs at that time. The officiating favored the Kings, but it wasn't egregious. It wasn't blatant. I don't believe it was a conscious decision to decide the outcome of the game.

Game 6 on the other hand was egregious. It was blatant. If the Kings had won the series game 6 would still be talked about much more than game 5. There may be legitimate beefs on both sides, but one is a petite filet and the other is the whole cow.
Once again Perception ;)
 
It's been obvious in my opinion that this type of 'ref'ing has been done for years. Another "fixed" game in my opinion was 1993 Western Conference Fianls between the Suns and Sonics. The NBA was drooling over having a Barkley vs. Jordan matchup in the Finals. Game 7 had the Suns scoring a record 57 free throws in 64 attempts – 15-of-15 in the fourth quarter!! Whether it's extending series, superstar calls or wanting big time matchups, the League has been doing this for a while.
 
Someone posted this in a spurs site I frequent:

Here's a breakdown

Game 1:
Laker FT: 16-22
Kings FT: 16-17
Lakers Win

Game 2:
Laker FT: 15-25
Kings FT: 23-38
Kings Win

Game 3:
Kings FT: 21-35
Lakers FT: 8-15
Kings Win

Game 4:
Kings FT: 18-26
Lakers FT: 18-27
Lakers Win

Game 5:
Lakers FT: 17-23
Kings FT: 22-33
Kings Win

Game 6:
Kings FT: 18-25
Lakers FT: 34-40
Lakers Win

Game 7:
Lakers FT: 27-33
Kings FT: 15-36
Lakers Win
 
Last edited:
Someone posted this in a spurs site I frequent:

Here's a breakdown to your "conspiracy"

Game 1:
Laker FT: 16-22
Kings FT: 16-17
Lakers Win

Game 2:
Laker FT: 15-25
Kings FT: 23-38
Kings Win

Game 3:
Kings FT: 21-35
Lakers FT: 8-15
Kings Win

Game 4:
Kings FT: 18-26
Lakers FT: 18-27
Lakers Win

Game 5:
Lakers FT: 17-23
Kings FT: 22-33
Kings Win

Game 6:
Kings FT: 18-25
Lakers FT: 34-40
Lakers Win

Game 7:
Lakers FT: 27-33
Kings FT: 15-36
Lakers Win
damn the Kings were absolutely awful from the line in that series :(
 

Bricklayer

Don't Make Me Use The Bat
Someone posted this in a spurs site I frequent:

Here's a breakdown to your "conspiracy"

Game 1:
Laker FT: 16-22
Kings FT: 16-17
Lakers Win

Game 2:
Laker FT: 15-25
Kings FT: 23-38
Kings Win

Game 3:
Kings FT: 21-35
Lakers FT: 8-15
Kings Win

Game 4:
Kings FT: 18-26
Lakers FT: 18-27
Lakers Win

Game 5:
Lakers FT: 17-23
Kings FT: 22-33
Kings Win

Game 6:
Kings FT: 18-25
Lakers FT: 34-40
Lakers Win

Game 7:
Lakers FT: 27-33
Kings FT: 15-36
Lakers Win

As said conspiracy involved 27 FTs taken in ONE 4th QUARTER of the decisive game -- which would be perfectly in line with refs trying desperately to stave off a defeat, your numbers are meaningless. If you had never even watched the game nor seen the ridiculous calls, the pure statistical anomaly would jump out at you. When you take more FTs in the 4th quarer of a tight deciding game than the other team takes FTs in the entire game, you've got a problem. You might want to stay huddled tightly to the warm smog clouded bosom of lala land on this one, because you will find precious few takers throughout the rest of the world.
 

Capt. Factorial

trifolium contra tempestatem subrigere certum est
Staff member
Also.. Some people were talking about giving the Kings a top pick. that seems about right.. They take picks away for punishment right? Why not give the Kings a pick as punishment to the league?
Never gonna happen. Don't even dream about it.

First, the league would have to admit that there was biased officiating in Game 6. That, by itself, will almost certainly never happen. Stern will never admit short of proof beyond a reasonable doubt that there was anything intentional. Basically it's going to be "he-said, he-said" at best and Stern will simply take the side of the official who hasn't been criminally convicted for his role in refereeing scandals.

Even if there were proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the officiating was biased, unless that proof extends to the NBA front office itself, the league would simply fire the officials responsible and wash their hands of it.

And even if the league DOES have to take the fall, is there any precedent of rewarding draft picks, especially high ones, for an injustice perpetuated against a team? None that I can think of. And a high draft pick? Think of the screaming that would come from the lottery teams moved down a slot for a compensatory pick coming out of one misofficiated game. Think of the clamor from other teams - "Hey, we were wronged, too."

Basically, I figure 98% chance nothing happens at all. 1.5% chance of lip service from the NBA. 0.5% chance of lip service plus firings. 1 in about 10 million chance of the Kings receiving a compensatory pick at #31.

In the end there's going to be a lot of bluster from Sacramento, but nothing will come of it.
 
realistically, that year proved to be the one year the kings really had a shot at a title, and to hear the league conspired to take it away from the kings, man that hurts.
technically, they also had a shot the following year. but then GOD conspired to take it away from them. :(:(:(
 
Someone posted this in a spurs site I frequent:

Here's a breakdown to your "conspiracy"
If anything, that proves that there was a huge disparity in Game 6 from the way that the rest of the series was called.

When you look at the style of play of both teams that year, the Kings with their slashing, cutting, back-door plays, going to the rim (remember, in the previous series against the Mavs, they had something like 122 dunks and layups in five games), then you have the Lakers running their slow, deliberate triangle offense, and only Kobe and Shaq ever really got to the line. There's a reason right there why the Kings would be outshooting the Lakers from the line.

Another thing to consider is the fact that in Games 2 and 3, the Lakers were behind late in the game and were fouling to stop the clock. In Game 3, the Lakers shot 31 threes, Kobe shot nine of them, and fouled out. Shaq finished with five fouls. They got outplayed and weren't attacking the rim in that game.

Either way it goes, you have 28 quarters in a series, and one quarter stands out, six years later, as being inconsistent with the way the rest of the series was called. There's no way to justify the Lakers shooting 27 free throws in one quarter, especially at home in an elimination game, when they had only shot 13 in the first three quarters combined. Even with the poor officiating in Game 2 of this year's Finals, the Celtics didn't shoot anywhere near 27 free throws in any quarter. The Kings got cheated out of that game, and thus, out of the series.

Bottom line.
 
I just copied and posted what another guy wrote on another board because it showed the breakdown of free throws throughout the series. Ill edit the line with "so called conspiracy"

Edit: Jeesh, I didnt mean to ruffle feathers just wanted to show the free throws throughout the series.
 
Last edited:

SLAB

Hall of Famer
Not sure if this was posted yet.

Stern says "He's lying"

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=ap-bettingprobe&prov=ap&type=lgns

NEW YORK (AP)—NBA commissioner David Stern dismissed allegations from a former referee at the center of a gambling scandal that the 2002 playoff series was rigged by league referees and officials, calling the claims baseless.


“He turned on basically all of his colleagues in an attempt to demonstrate that he is not the only one who engaged in criminal activity,” Stern said of Tim Donaghy before Game 3 of the NBA finals in Los Angeles on Tuesday. “The U.S. attorney’s office, the FBI have fully investigated it, and Mr.

Donaghy is the only one who is guilty of a crime.”



The allegations about the 2002 series were contained in a letter filed by a lawyer for Donaghy, who pleaded guilty last year to felony charges alleging he took cash payoffs from gamblers and bet on games himself. Donaghy, 41, faces up to 33 months in prison at sentencing on July 14.


Without identifying anyone or naming teams, Donaghy also claimed the NBA routinely encouraged refs to ring up bogus fouls to manipulate results but discouraged them from calling technical fouls on star players to keep them in games and protect ticket sales and television ratings.



“If the NBA wanted a team to succeed, league officials would inform referees that opposing players were getting away with violations,” the letter said. “Referees then would call fouls on certain players, frequently resulting in victory for the opposing team.”
a basketball between the Washington Wizards and New Jersey Nets in Washington, D.C. In the letter, dated May 8, 2008 prosecutors asked a judge to consider giving Donaghy a break on his sentence for gambling on NBA games to reward his "substantial assistance" in an investigation that resulted in indictment and guilty pleas of a professional gambler and a middleman, both former high school classmates of the referee. Prosecutors say Donaghy faces up to 33 months in prison at sentencing on July 14. His attorney has asked for probation. " height="200" width="180"> In this April 10, 2007 file ph…
AP - Jun 3, 5:54 pm EDT



Donaghy’s lawyer has sought to convince a federal judge in Brooklyn that Donaghy, of Bradenton, Fla., deserves more credit for coming forward before he was charged to disclose behind-the-scenes misconduct within the NBA. The letter, filed Monday, suggests prosecutors have hurt Donaghy’s chances for a lesser prison term by downplaying the extent of his cooperation.


Both Donaghy’s attorney, John Lauro, and prosecutors declined comment.
The league said the scandal was limited to Donaghy and two co-defendants, both former high school classmates who also pleaded guilty to gambling charges.


“The NBA remains vigilant in protecting the integrity of our game and has fully cooperated with the government at every stage of its investigation,” Richard Buchanan, NBA executive vice president and general counsel, said in a statement. “The only criminal activity uncovered is Mr. Donaghy’s.”
Larnell McMorris, a spokesman for the NBA referees union, said in a statement that Donaghy “has had honesty and credibility issues from the get-go.”


Donaghy’s letter said that in the first of several meetings with prosecutors and the FBI in New York in 2007, he named names while describing “various examples of improper interactions and relationships between referees and other league employees, such as players, coaches and management.” For example, it said, referees broke NBA rules by hitting up players for autographs, socializing with coaches and accepting meals and merchandise from teams.


In one of several allegations of corrupt refereeing, Donaghy said he learned in May 2002 that two referees known as “company men” were working a best-of-seven series in which “Team 5” was leading 3-2. In the sixth game, he alleged they purposely ignored fouls made by opponent “Team 6” and made phantom calls putting its players at the free-throw line.
“Team 6” won the game and came back to win the series, the letter said.
 
I just copied and posted what another guy wrote on another board because it showed the breakdown of free throws throughout the series. Ill edit the line with "so called conspiracy"

Edit: Jeesh, I didnt mean to ruffle feathers just wanted to show the free throws throughout the series.
Whose feathers were ruffled?

If you post something irrelevant and imply that it is somehow relevant, then be ready to be told that it isn't. No big deal. I still don't know what the point was, though.
 
Stern's response doesn't really invalidate what Donaghy's letter claimed. All it does is refute the insinuations made by that letter and even more so the media's reporting of the letter.

Just because nobody else has been charged with or found guilty of a crime, doesn't mean that those two referees didn't bias their officiating to get the series to a seventh game, which is all Donaghy claimed. It also doesn't mean that the league didn't tell the officials to call the illegal screens on Yao by the book, which again is all that Donaghy claimed.
 
Last edited:
Whose feathers were ruffled?

If you post something irrelevant and imply that it is somehow relevant, then be ready to be told that it isn't. No big deal. I still don't know what the point was, though.
I didnt feel like it was irrelevant, the whole issue is that the series was fixed to go seven by calling phantom calls left and right. (which I am not disputing)

I thought that a breakdown of ft's game by game is relevant to the issue, (and if it isnt it is still interesting/informative to see) but like brick said the numbers dont take into account what fouls were called (the phantom fouls) thats all.
 
I didnt feel like it was irrelevant, the whole issue is that the series was fixed to go seven by calling phantom calls left and right. (which I am not disputing)

I thought that a breakdown of ft's game by game is relevant to the issue, (and if it isnt it is still interesting/informative to see) but like brick said the numbers dont take into account what fouls were called (the phantom fouls) thats all.
I thought the issue was that game 6 was "fixed" so that there would be seven games, and specifically that the fourth quarter was the clear aberration.

I just thought it was obvious that the full game free throw numbers themselves mean very little. Game 2 was nearly as lopsided for the Kings, and yet most Lakers and their fans point to game 5 as the example that goes the other way. Why? Because of the types of calls and the impact they had on the game. Posting just those free throw numbers is at best irrelevant (and of course at worst an attempt to distract from the real issue).
 
Well, this just confrims my thought for the past 6 years. I will forever believe that Game 6 was fixed.

And if by some chance it wasn't? Then the NBA has a bunch of idiots reffing big games. And blind idiots at that.

Seriously, if it wasn't fixed, I think the term idiot in the dictionary should have a grey shirt next to it.

If this was the NFL, MLB or NHL - I would bet that those refs would not be a part of ANY championship or playoff games.

And here's another thing to chew on - the NBA is having this problem with the refs for one reason. - There's no accountibility. They can do WHATEVER they want and do not have to answer for it. UNLESS, it's behind closed doors with Mr. Stern. I think that's saying something.

Hey NBA, Want to clear your name? Let your refs defend their calls to the media.

Bottom Line: Kings were screwed.
 
at this point, how can anyone believe anything that stern says? the refs are supposed to be above reproach, and then the donaghy scandal came to light last offseason. so not only was an official corrupt, but the nba failed to catch it.

and now, with the currently-made-public donaghy allegations about game 6, stern calls it "baseless" and focuses on discrediting donaghy instead of tackling the allegation. a few thoughts on that:

1) http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3437716 delaney (one of the game 6 refs) notes that the feds have not contacted him regarding donaghy's allegations. so mr. stern, um, how exactly is it baseless if it hasn't been investigated?

2) donaghy's allegations are only being made public now, which means the feds and the nba must've known about it prior. and yet, no investigation.

i used to like stern. now all i think he is is a smug little toad who spews nothing but rhetoric.
 
Best Story Ever, 5 years late.

Points are being made against a horrid investigation, involving government, which costs millions upon millions to fund, up front. Derek Fisher and Scott Pollard commented inquiringly without reserve, but both then suggested letting it go. And there in lies the problem or solution. Its technically our call, being the citizens of Sacramento, we could somehow organize resistance. But from my P.O.V>, this is old information. I was listening to the Radio, by myself, when Robert Horry's three went in. Sure, the series was the worst ref job of all time(overall). Lets not think of it as "the integrity of the game". Cheating and betting, describes it. Its always been the way it is today. And if appreciating the integrity of the game involves murdering it in public, I would vote no. Lately I'm trying to get in on the action, Boston looked a little thirsty last summer. Anyways, Scott Pollard volunteered to represent the team that may or may not have been impacted by the morally impaired state of the wcf2k2(alone) and said let it go. I'll let it go Scott. What goes around comes around. And when the Kings are in the WCF, hopefully soon, I wont have to like the Knicks next year. Called it. :cool:

Or MLB didn't turn eveyone away from these kind of procedures; and someone needs to take the NBA down! It's not nearly the twisted and sadistic NBA it could be, but when it gets there, I hope to be watching. Ron Artest deserves to be mentioned in this conversation. Seriously, I dont think this time is the right time to open the NBA's pandoras box. Next time the controversy might get bigger and better. Ratings Ratings Ratings, need to go down down down before David Stern even thinks about not laughing in a reporters face when asked about if any of this holds any water. And the only evidence production comes from the mind of a soon to be incarcerated human, who has zero credibility to date.

Who knows, if the judge overseeing the Donaghy case doesn't get paid off, we could be looking at a lengthy investigation...
 
And here's another thing to chew on - the NBA is having this problem with the refs for one reason. - There's no accountibility. They can do WHATEVER they want and do not have to answer for it. UNLESS, it's behind closed doors with Mr. Stern. I think that's saying something.

Hey NBA, Want to clear your name? Let your refs defend their calls to the media.

This is the major problem. I don't think that having the refs defend themselves to the media will help anything, but stop protecting the refs from any criticism or question about their ability to do their job effectively.

It's like Webber said after Game 6: 'I don't want to talk about it, because I'll just get fined.'

Nader mentioned that same point in his letter in 2002.

Instead of shielding the refs, make it clear that they are held to a higher standard, make it public when they are disciplined (I can only think of one instance when this was done), make it public when they make egregious mistakes, etc. Treat them the way you treat the rest of your employees.

The NBA treats its referees like they're authority figures, instead of just observers who are there to call violations. They have too much leeway with judgment calls, and they influence the games more than the officials in any other league. They're much more prone to have "god complexes" like we saw last year with Joey Crawford.

It doesn't help that Stern passes the buck and turns and points the finger at the known deviant in an attempt to absolve himself and his League of all guilt in the situation. He was trying to dodge the issue when Dan Patrick interviewed him following the Suns/Spurs controversy in last year's playoffs, and it was really annoying listening to him belittle the opinion of the majority of people who were watching that game and felt that the decisions were unfair. The NBA is having a problem, and has been lately, understanding what the public's perception is of the league and responding accordingly. And perhaps it's coming to light now that the reason for this is because Stern can't admit when he's wrong.

Everyone knows that Game 6 was atrocious, and the NBA has done nothing to even acknowledge that the officiating was bad. That's what has me so incensed, and has had me so incensed for six years.
 
Like JVG said, more transparency would help. Not only in complaints made to the league, but in regards to refs. The league says there's a merit system, yet the same refs get to call the playoff games and finals. Why isn't the merit system made public? Why aren't thier evaluations or reprimands made public? Because the league is in a no-win situation they created. If they release all this info, then the refs will get called out even more, and if the NBA continues to keep their dealings with the refs (and this supposed 'merit' system) behind closed doors, then the perception problems with the fans will continue.

The bottom line is that the less the fans know about the refs, the more it seems like they are hands of the league doing their bidding, however if the league releases more info on the refs, then the refs will get even more criticism, but at least the fans know what actions are being taken.

I honestly think the league doesn't release info because a lot of it is BS. I think the merit system is fake, and I think they don't want to release any info on deductions of pay or reprimands, because then it seems like they keep putting bad refs in games.

think they need to add refs to the game. If you think about it, you have 3 refs watching 10 players. Even if that Bibby foul was the result of human error, and not bias, then that tells me there needs to be more eyes on the court, and the addition of replay with a video ref wouldn't hurt.
 
Last edited:

Bricklayer

Don't Make Me Use The Bat
Like JVG said, more transparency would help. Not only in complaints made to the league, but in regards to refs. The league says there's a merit system, yet the same refs get to call the playoff games and finals. Why isn't the merit system made public? Why aren't thier evaluations or reprimands made public? Because the league is in a no-win situation they created. If they release all this info, then the refs will get called out even more, and if the NBA continues to keep their dealings with the refs (and this supposed 'merit' system) behind closed doors, then the perception problems with the fans will continue.

The bottom line is that the less the fans know about the refs, the more it seems like they are hands of the league doing their bidding, however if the league releases more info on the refs, then the refs will get even more criticism, but at least the fans know what actions are being taken.

I honestly think the league doesn't release info because a lot of it is BS. I think the merit system is fake, and I think they don't want to release any info on deductions of pay or reprimands, because then it seems like they keep putting bad refs in games.

think they need to add refs to the game. If you think about it, you have 3 refs watching 10 players. Even if that Bibby foul was the result of human error, and not bias, then that tells me there needs to be more eyes on the court, and the addition of replay with a video ref wouldn't hurt.

More refs = more fouls. That's not really a good thing.
 
Does David Stern or anybody else in the NBA offices instruct referees directly to officiate with bias to affect the outcome of games? Probably not (I can't say no for sure any more).

But what Stern does do, and what the league has done for years, is allow that to happen indirectly. There has always been a game-to-game and even quarter-to-quarter difference in how games are called. Often there is a clear tilt one way and then a tilt back the other.

I always chalked it up to the human fallibility of referees getting caught up in the subjectivity of their job. Leaning one way perhaps because of the crowd or because of complaints following the previous game, then leaning the other way to avoid the appearance of bias. I thought the NBA encouraged this by encouraging the officials to use subjectivity in making calls.

(I have referred a couple times on this forum to a Ric Bucher column from several years ago about time he spent with an officiating crew. In that column he mentions how the experienced referee indicated a borderline play should have been called as a charge because that helps tone down the aggressiveness and chippiniess that had been building, instead of the block that the younger referee called because it was technically correct... I wish I could find that column now.)

This culture among the referees appears to not just be human nature coming through, but instead based on priorities promoted by the league. There is undoubtedly no evil conspiracy, but the NBA and Stern himself seem to value "what's best for the league" so much that inconsistent officiating was tolerated and encouraged if the result was more big games, more star power and ultimately more revenue.

So what can be done to stop it? In my opinion there is one thing, although I don't know if that will happen with the current NBA leaders still in charge. The league needs to change its culture and make a conscious, concerted and consistent effort to get its officials to call games as objectively as possible. First quarter or fourth quarter? Doesn't matter. Star or scrub? Doesn't matter. Series clincher or exhibition game? Doesn't matter.

That solution may not make for the most exciting NBA games or even the most interest in the sport. It will, however, if done correctly, restore the integrity that is missing and make it much for difficult for this kind of embarrassment to happen again.
 
Stern should just admit that calls that were made in game six between the Lakers and Kings were wrong and should send an apology to the Sacramento Kings and to its fans.
Even though I was rooting for the Lakers to win that year as I watched game 6 I realized that something was wrong and that the referees were making a lot of bad calls just so that it would ensure that the Lakers would win. Even my brothers got mad when Bibby was called for that phantom foul on Bryant. The NBA needs to change the way its views its referees and make them act more professional since they are the ones that suppose to ensure that the games are played right.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.