Study: Referee Bias Exists, Just Not In The Expected Ways

M

Merdiesel

Starter
http://realgm.com/src_wiretap_archi...ee_bias_exists_just_not_in_the_expected_ways/
An academic study of NBA officiating found little to no evidence that referees favor teams from large media markets in the playoffs, which comes as a surprise to many conspiracy theorists. The same study, however, found that NBA referees tend to favor home teams, teams trailing in a game and teams trailing in a playoff series.
"We can say with fairly high confidence that the results are not just due to randomness or (statistical) noise, that even teams facing elimination have an additional advantage in these referee-based turnovers, discretionary turnovers," said Daniel F. Stone, assistant professor of economics at Oregon State University and one of the study's authors.
Click to expand...


What a ******* joke. This is David Stern trying to make an extra buck on a series. The same BS that cost the Sacramento Kings a championship and is the sole reason our team is last place right now. This makes me sick and I hope some day that the NBA is exposed for this ****. David Stern is to basketball as steroids are to baseball.


this study seems to have been held by realgm themselves.
 
The home team thing is well known and just human psychology -- same reason the home team plays better on its home court.

But without seeing the methodology or results (dramatic? subtle?) screeching about the other "biases" is rather vastly premature. It also could be nothing more than psychology -- as a ref you feel that maybe you screwed a team on an earlier call, or you called the 4th foul on their star or something, and now they are losing and you don't want to feel that you lost the game for them. Doesn't mean you intentionally make bad calls, just means that maybe you swallow your whistle a bit on that 6th foul on the star that will really finish them off.
 
I've never bought into this constant hysterical weak crutch of blaming officiating for any NBA team losing game after game - and branding Stern as the ultimate evil doer. It's too easy and too narrow-minded. Zebras are human, subject to some blown calls. No doubt they're occasionally swayed a bit by a boisterous home crowd, just as it might intimidate the opposing team. The Kings blew their chance for an NBA championship against the Lakers due to many factors not least of which was bricking a ton of free throws in the 4th quarter of game seven on their home court - revisionist history not withstanding.
 
"bias" would be giving the referees too much credit. call me when the article "Study: Referee Ineptitude Exists, In Exactly The Expected Ways" comes out.
 
PurpleHaze said:
I've never bought into this constant hysterical weak crutch of blaming officiating for any NBA team losing game after game - and branding Stern as the ultimate evil doer. It's too easy and too narrow-minded. Zebras are human, subject to some blown calls. No doubt they're occasionally swayed a bit by a boisterous home crowd, just as it might intimidate the opposing team. The Kings blew their chance for an NBA championship against the Lakers due to many factors not least of which was bricking a ton of free throws in the 4th quarter of game seven on their home court - revisionist history not withstanding.
Click to expand...

Thank you. Of course, it's so much easier to cry foul and point the finger of blame at someone else... and I know some fans will continue to do so until the end of time plus a couple of years.

I'm really tired of the whole "David Stern is the reason for every bad thing that's ever happened to _____" (fill in the name of your favorite franchise). I keep vowing to start "www.tinfoilhatswork.com"... I may actually do it one of these days just so all these ridiculous "studies" and "theories" about the vast conspiracies within the NBA will have a place to be recorded for posterity.
 
VF21 said:
I keep vowing to start "www.tinfoilhatswork.com"... I may actually do it one of these days just so all these ridiculous "studies" and "theories" about the vast conspiracies within the NBA will have a place to be recorded for posterity.
Click to expand...

tinfoil.jpg
 
Say what you want, but anyway you slice it, its complete bull****. The game should be controlled by the players not by the refs and by accepting it makes you look sheep.
 
Simply disagreeing with your assessment makes me a sheep? Hrm....


Baaaaaaaaa.

:rolleyes:
 
Merdiesel said:
Say what you want, but anyway you slice it, its complete bull****. The game should be controlled by the players not by the refs and by accepting it makes you look sheep.
Click to expand...


Did you know that taller men earn more money at work than shorter men?

Its not right, but its not because of some vast conspiracy against short people -- its because of built in human responses. I again want to see this referee study, I want to see its methodology, and I want to see its results. As referees are human there is no way any ratrional person would expect them to be absolutely consistent under every circumstance. So I want to see what are walking about here -- 1/2 a point a game to the underdog? That's not a conspiracy, that's psychology. 5 pts a game? then we need to look at what's going on.
 
NBA cheats. It's true.

The 'more informed' or 'more rational' posters can say whatever they want...


but it won't change my mind or the fact that it's true...
 
TheWileyVet said:
NBA cheats. It's true.

The 'more informed' or 'more rational' posters can say whatever they want...


but it won't change my mind or the fact that it's true...
Click to expand...


The baseless assertion followed by the fingers in the ears defense?

Come now.


The UN and Illuminati are trying to take over the world. More informed or rational people can say whatever they want, but it won't change my mind its true.

Mother Mary appeared in a pie crust I was baking. More informed or rational people can say whatever they want, but it won't change my mind its true.

Its the same structure, and where these things breed. People can believe anything and everything if they just decide to and willfully ignore any contrary voices. In the end its a lot simpler for one's psyche to just choose to believe instead of investigate, but it certianly doesn't lead you to be right very often. When you posit a conspiracy involving hundreds or even thousands of indivduals, working over decades, with nobody ever producing any concrete proof of anything...

If there's a study here, lets see it. Shouldn't be a problem if there's something really there.
 
I didn't even read the article. I don't need to read that article to reaffirm my opinion.


But using other random examples of conspiracy theories to try to make me look stupid definately makes you look smart :rolleyes:
 
One of the best quotes of all time to debunk a lot of silly nonsense (I think it was Carl Sagan) was that "extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof."

There are still millions of people all over the world who apparently believe the 911 terror attacks were a sinister inside job by the US government yet can't produce any credible proof. Such a massive conspiracy is made more ridiculously absurd since the bumbling government is unable keep a secret if more than one person knows anything about it. But the worst news for these conspiracy kooks is that Bin Laden long ago took full giddy credit for the mass murder plot praising 15 Saudi "martyrs" and others he dispatched on the monstrous suicide mission.

NBA headquarters is not unlike highest levels of the US government, sometimes bumbling, sometimes authoritarian, not perfect, surrounded by cops (the league officials) who are likewise not exactly saints but nobody in New York is hatching a big fat conspiracy from behind the Wizard of Oz curtain. Because if they did, eventually someone in that imperfect office would blow their cover, someone would pull back the curtain, and the whole multi-billion dollar enterprise would melt down in a New York minute.
 
TheWileyVet said:
How are you gonna delete all my posts but then leave your reply visable? Just like my posts responding to your deleted post, your reply to my deleted post is also 'irrelevant'.
Click to expand...

I deleted your last post not knowing she was still responding to it. The whole conversation is beyond irrelevant at this point. Debating a deleted response to a deleted post.
 
Bricklayer said:
I deleted your last post not knowing she was still responding to it. The whole conversation is beyond irrelevant at this point. Debating a deleted response to a deleted post.
Click to expand...

Oops. I just deleted the post you were responding to since I didn't know you were going to respond to it.

My bad.
 
If you take a moment and think with a level head, you would realize that every "conclusion" they came to in their study is just compassionate human response in favor of a percieved underdog.

Not even close to a surprise. Perhaps these findings are better viewed as self evident.
 
Last edited:
I know some ppl don't believe in NBA conspiracy or even think its stupid. But I really think it is not only entirely plausable in the NBA, but also that it happens!

Now do I think David Stern is calling in to the refs before playoff games, telling them who he wants to win? No I don't - at least I HOPE not. But when it comes down to it, the Zebras are in a position to severly influence the game without making it look incredibly obvious.

A disparity in calling few ticky tak fouls here and a few crucial bad calls in the 4th Q there can pretty make whatever team they 'want' win.

The NBA does cheat. They use sketch officiating to insulate their star players & marquee franchises and influence games/extend series in a way that would be most profitable.
 
IF the NBA cheated, we'd be watching the Lakers play the Cavaliers. If the fact we're not isn't proof of a lack of cheating/conspiracy, I don't know what is...
 
You can't say they didn't try. Lebron got the typical NBA star treatment (ghost fouls galore) but the Magic were the dominant team plain and simple - they should have swept the series in actuality.
 
Yes, the Magic were the dominant team but if we're talking conspiracy it isn't about dominance. It's about ratings... And a Lebron James-Kobe Bryant finals woild have been a ratings and therefore $$$$$ bonanza.

See, that's the problem with conspiracy theories. If you're going to insist on using them, you cannot be dissuaded by silly little things like one team dominating another. It wouldn't matter in a league governed by conspiracies and cheats.
 
If all you guys are admitting that the refs are bias towards home teams and superstars then how the **** is it a conspiracy???

I'm not saying Bush knocked down the towers, I'm purely saying I'm sick of everyone being OK with Refs being aloud to ref in favor of the home team or the superstar year in and year out. It ruins the sport.
 
Merdiesel said:
If all you guys are admitting that the refs are bias towards home teams and superstars then how the **** is it a conspiracy???

I'm not saying Bush knocked down the towers, I'm purely saying I'm sick of everyone being OK with Refs being aloud to ref in favor of the home team or the superstar year in and year out. It ruins the sport.
Click to expand...

Yeah I don't get how it is a conspiracy if everyone of you is agreeing it's true.
 
Merdiesel said:
If all you guys are admitting that the refs are bias towards home teams and superstars then how the **** is it a conspiracy???

I'm not saying Bush knocked down the towers, I'm purely saying I'm sick of everyone being OK with Refs being aloud to ref in favor of the home team or the superstar year in and year out. It ruins the sport.
Click to expand...

I would rather expect that referees favor the home team in virtually every sport, at every level. Natural human response to the crowd, the intimidation etc.

The superstar thing was once acknowledged as a consious choice and is hardly a secret conspiracy. Its also team and situation neutral -- you have the superstar, he'll get the calls, at least in theory. Doesn't matter who you are or what the series score is. In part its a response to a rather odd rule in basketball that we all accept without really thinking about it -- the ability to "foul out" of a game. So far as I know that does not exist in any other sport..well maybe soccer with its card system, but its rare there. But you don't "foul out" in football no matter how many penalties you rack up. Nor in baseball. Nor in hockey. Nobody can intentionally work on "fouling out" your best player to win the game. Only in basketball does this oddity exist, and combined with the overwhelming power of a superstar player in basketball compared to any other sport fouling one out can be game determinative. Even if there were no directive, officially or unoffically recognized, I would expect referees to show a bias toward superstars in that respect -- you would naturally be reluctant to make a call that could determine the game by fouling out a team's most important player unless it was pretty obvious. What really should have been done a long time ago, and has been occasionally talked about, is an elimnation of the foul out rule -- nobody fouls out of games. Still get two technicals and be gone. But no foul outs. Normally the formulation is that after your 6th every subsequent foul gives the opposing team 3 FTs rather than 2 so as to still actively discourage hacking. But you get to keep on playing. Would eliminate the need to protect anyone. Unfortunately this late in the game that would be a fairly radical change and is unlikely to happen.

The other half, superstar calls when the superstar is on offense is basically a benefit of the doubt rule combined with familiarity with the star's moves. If the star made that move a week ago and it was called a foul on his opponent, and he makes it again today, its going to be a foul on his opponent again. This works up and down the ranks of stars BTW. I get amused at Kobe jockers or LBJ haters complaining about phantom calls for LeBron -- there's nothing phantom abaout the calls he draws. He slams inside and there is almost always massive contact by one side or the other. I think a lot more things should just not be whistled either way, but these aren't touch fouls, nor would he let them be. Meanwhile we sit ehre complaingin about ref bias while our own best players wouldn't be nearly as effective if it were not for rather blatant flopping and ref baiting. He too gets all kinds of "benefit of the doubt" calls as he jumps into people, flails his arms, flops to the ground. Its ugly and far more "phantom" than LBJs freight train drives. The bias hardly begins and ends with a Kobe or LBJ. If it reaches even down to a Kevin Martin on the worst team in the league then you've got nearly universal penetration.
 
Last edited:
I'm not saying the NBA is or is not fixed/biased. I am speaking as a fan who fiercely defended the integrity of a sport I loved and chastised all the conspiracy theories who claimed otherwise.

I had, in the past, pointed to numerous facts that contradicted the "loony" fans who claimed conspiracy. I was a person who repeatedly said it just doesn't make sense for the league to favor one team over another. I pointed to numerous times in many games when late calls went against the teams supposedly benefited from the fixes, and cost them the games.

I have even reasoned that it's impossible for such conspiracy to exist for so long among so many people without at least one person ratting out.

And then in 2006, it all came crashing down. I was wrong. Dead wrong. There was a conpiracy, one that was several times bigger and involved more people than anyone could ever dream of; and no one talked, not even a hint of a conspiracy out in the open - until the law enforcement accidentally came across a wired-taped conversation involving an unrelated investigation. It turned out there were numerous fixes, conspiracy, and even some sports writers and commenators were involved.

All I have to say is, I've learned my lesson. I have faith that the NBA is not fixed but the bottom line is, I don't know. All I have to go on is just that, faith. Anyone who claims he/she knows for sure that the NBA is not fixed is equally quilty of blowing hot air as the ones who say it is fixed. The fact is, you don't know.

And yes, I'm referring to the Italian Serie A scandal. One that essentially rocked the sporting world (outside of USA). Three years later, we're still not sure how far and wide the conspiracy goes as witnesses refused to cooperate. A lot of people resigned, fired, or banned from the game; although only a few actually went to jail or fined.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/15/AR2006051501639.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/09/opinion/09Stille.html

What went on in Italy pre-2006 is similar to modern day NBA - long whispers of fixes, no proof whatsoever, a few bad apples were disciplined but they were just that - bad apples. Lots of fans who simply dismissed anyone who say "fixed." And lastly, whispers of fixes involve the referees instead of the players.

Is the NBA fixed? I hope not, but honestly, I don't know.
 
I don't know why acknowledging what would be a good business move is somehow a conspiracy. I've watched decades of NBA basketball and there has been partial treatment to superstars and superstar teams. It is not fixed, but the games are certainly influenced in that way. And why not? It is good business for the league. It makes less sense to ignore what people have seen just because it makes folks uncomfortable.
 
beb0p said:
I'm not saying the NBA is or is not fixed/biased.

...

Is the NBA fixed? I hope not, but honestly, I don't know.
Click to expand...

I believe there is a difference between a "bias," and a "fix."

A "fix," is a league-wide or referee-wide plan to screw or cheat someone. As in the outcome is already being planned ahead.

A "bias," is a personal feeling directing your actions. A ref can have a personal bias against a individual player, a la Tim Duncan... and effect an outcome.

I do believe that some NBA refs do have personal biases that effect games. They're human. And it's wrong. Some like this guy, others like another. And though they (some) try their best, it still comes out sometimes.

In 2002, no matter what anyone tells me, I will always believe Game 6 was not a bias, but one of the biggest fixes in all of sports. However, that was one of the last, if not the last I can remember.

I also believe that when a bad call has been made, this group of NBA refs have a major struggle with pride. When they know they're wrong and they get called out for it - they sometimes retaliate instead of admitting it and swallowing their whistle the next time.

So recapping.

Yes, the NBA individual refs have personal biases, that just by human nature - come out in a game.

The "Fix," is rare. IMO, Game 6 was the ultimate fix. There have been no fixes in the 09 playoffs. Just inconsistency and mediocrity.

Another issue that the refs have is pride. The "I'm never wrong, and I don't have to answer for it," syndrome.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top