TMC wrote:

migya wrote:I've explained already in this thread what I mean. It wouldn't slow the game a whole lot but when a foul is called and the game is stopped, that can be reviewed quickly and won't cost any more time at least

Best case, 30 seconds per foul... worst case, a couple of minutes if there's doubt.

32 wrote:The idea of reviewing calls is one thing; but how do you fix non-calls?

TMC wrote:

32 wrote:The idea of reviewing calls is one thing; but how do you fix non-calls?

Same way. The challenge should be allowed both ways. That's why I think it can't be done unless, as Colt suggested, each team is given a limited number of challenges...

32 wrote:But basketball's so fast that a challenge sounds impossible. In football, a challenge flag needs to be thrown before the next snap. In basketball, there's no 30-second pause to huddle, plan the attack, and start the play. Basketball challenges sound problematic from the start.

The whole idea of reviewing plays is good, in theory, but there's no design that could possibly keep every party (the ref's, the coaches, the player's, the fans) happy. If anybody proposes one, I'd be glad to hear it.

32 wrote:Oh, don't get me wrong. You'll get zero referee support from me (and that's speaking as a former basketball referee, myself). But I just didn't think the study seemed credible enough, after finding out that they used box scores instead of actual game footage.

If the points that colt brings up are all, in fact, true, than the NBA has a devastating case against them. But, as appealing as it is to simply incriminate the referees, I think that a study making that kind of claim has to be absolutely certain, which this study is not. I'm not saying it's not true, or that the evidence presented is wrong, I'm simply saying that they'd need a much stronger case against an association like the NBA.

cladden wrote:

32 wrote:Oh, don't get me wrong. You'll get zero referee support from me (and that's speaking as a former basketball referee, myself). But I just didn't think the study seemed credible enough, after finding out that they used box scores instead of actual game footage.

If the points that colt brings up are all, in fact, true, than the NBA has a devastating case against them. But, as appealing as it is to simply incriminate the referees, I think that a study making that kind of claim has to be absolutely certain, which this study is not. I'm not saying it's not true, or that the evidence presented is wrong, I'm simply saying that they'd need a much stronger case against an association like the NBA.

I don't see how using box-scores hurts the credibility of the study. They threw out all mixed officiating crews so all fouls were called by a ref that can be identified as either white or black. Ofcourse one can argue that maybe these things are more evident when an all-black or all-white crew come together but there's no uncertainty in the data at all.

coltraning wrote:

cladden wrote:

32 wrote:Oh, don't get me wrong. You'll get zero referee support from me (and that's speaking as a former basketball referee, myself). But I just didn't think the study seemed credible enough, after finding out that they used box scores instead of actual game footage.

If the points that colt brings up are all, in fact, true, than the NBA has a devastating case against them. But, as appealing as it is to simply incriminate the referees, I think that a study making that kind of claim has to be absolutely certain, which this study is not. I'm not saying it's not true, or that the evidence presented is wrong, I'm simply saying that they'd need a much stronger case against an association like the NBA.

I don't see how using box-scores hurts the credibility of the study. They threw out all mixed officiating crews so all fouls were called by a ref that can be identified as either white or black. Ofcourse one can argue that maybe these things are more evident when an all-black or all-white crew come together but there's no uncertainty in the data at all.

By far the most damning part of the study is the one getting the least attention. Thanks to Pest for, well, Pesting out these #s. All-White crews call triple the ratio of Ts and double the number of flagrants on Black players, compared to white players. I think Sjax and BD would agree with that. It's the part of the study that is beyond any statistical ambiguity and is the most troubling.

coltraning wrote:

cladden wrote:

32 wrote:Oh, don't get me wrong. You'll get zero referee support from me (and that's speaking as a former basketball referee, myself). But I just didn't think the study seemed credible enough, after finding out that they used box scores instead of actual game footage.

If the points that colt brings up are all, in fact, true, than the NBA has a devastating case against them. But, as appealing as it is to simply incriminate the referees, I think that a study making that kind of claim has to be absolutely certain, which this study is not. I'm not saying it's not true, or that the evidence presented is wrong, I'm simply saying that they'd need a much stronger case against an association like the NBA.

I don't see how using box-scores hurts the credibility of the study. They threw out all mixed officiating crews so all fouls were called by a ref that can be identified as either white or black. Ofcourse one can argue that maybe these things are more evident when an all-black or all-white crew come together but there's no uncertainty in the data at all.

By far the most damning part of the study is the one getting the least attention. Thanks to Pest for, well, Pesting out these #s. All-White crews call triple the ratio of Ts and double the number of flagrants on Black players, compared to white players. I think Sjax and BD would agree with that. It's the part of the study that is beyond any statistical ambiguity and is the most troubling.

32 wrote:

coltraning wrote:

cladden wrote:

32 wrote:Oh, don't get me wrong. You'll get zero referee support from me (and that's speaking as a former basketball referee, myself). But I just didn't think the study seemed credible enough, after finding out that they used box scores instead of actual game footage.

If the points that colt brings up are all, in fact, true, than the NBA has a devastating case against them. But, as appealing as it is to simply incriminate the referees, I think that a study making that kind of claim has to be absolutely certain, which this study is not. I'm not saying it's not true, or that the evidence presented is wrong, I'm simply saying that they'd need a much stronger case against an association like the NBA.

I don't see how using box-scores hurts the credibility of the study. They threw out all mixed officiating crews so all fouls were called by a ref that can be identified as either white or black. Ofcourse one can argue that maybe these things are more evident when an all-black or all-white crew come together but there's no uncertainty in the data at all.

By far the most damning part of the study is the one getting the least attention. Thanks to Pest for, well, Pesting out these #s. All-White crews call triple the ratio of Ts and double the number of flagrants on Black players, compared to white players. I think Sjax and BD would agree with that. It's the part of the study that is beyond any statistical ambiguity and is the most troubling.

Those numbers don't surprise me. I've been watching Stephen Jackson get legally mugged by the Utah Jazz for 4 straight games and he's getting little to no calls. Even the blindingly obvious calls aren't being made, when it involves Stephen Jackson.

You can say what you want about a guy, his history, or his attitude... but its just not right to allow someone to get clubbed and not hit back. Jackson's been whistled for ticky-tack fouls all series. That wouldn't bother me if it went both ways, but, unfortunately, Stephen Jackson gets NO whistles at all.

I used to think (when Jackson was on the Pacers) that he was whining for no reason... but now, when I see him play all the time, I can clearly see that he's complaining about bad calls. Jackson never yells at the ref over nothing.