Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: ref bias/conspiracy..

Expand Messages
  • mrintp2000
    Shaq gets away with murder. Yes he gets fouled a lot, but if the refs called all the fouls he committs, he d have to alter his game considerably. And the
    Message 1 of 5 , Jul 8, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      Shaq gets away with murder. Yes he gets fouled a lot, but if the refs
      called all the fouls he committs, he'd have to alter his game
      considerably. And the Lakers do seem to play defense using the clutch
      and grab.

      In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "Mike G" <msg_53@h...> wrote:
      > I recently got this message from a member (not sure if it was meant
      > for the whole group).
      >
      > -----
      >
      > Catching up on very old posts, and this caught my eye after the fact:
      >
      > Mike G wrote:
      > >
      > > My own guess is that the refs will blatantly hand the Lakers at
      > > least one game, and that it will therefore go 6 or 7.
      >
      > I take it you ended up being pretty surprised at the large ref bias
      > for the
      > Pistons in this series, including blatantly handing them game 4, huh?
      >
      > Whodathunkit? Makes you wonder if the league didn't listen to the
      > conspriracy theorists and react with a "We'll show them!"
      >
      > ------
      >
      > Can anyone corroborate the observation that ref bias handed the
      > Pistons a game, or if it was prevalent throughout? (I didn't see any
      > of the Finals.)
      >
      > If you are not a "conspiracy theorist", can you imagine how "they"
      > think? My own guess would be that a "conspiracy" would only surface
      > in close games, and not in a blowout series.
      >
      > Someone has written that the Lakers were shown favoritism in the
      > Wolves series, notably by "allowing" Malone to hold Garnett. Any
      > corroboration there?
    • John Hollinger
      The Lakers had the second-highest PF rate in the league, so there s somethign too that, but they were obviously smart about fouling (not in bonus,
      Message 2 of 5 , Jul 8, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        The Lakers had the second-highest PF rate in the league, so there's
        somethign too that, but they were obviously smart about fouling (not
        in bonus, non-shooting, etc.), because their rate of oppponent FTAs
        wasn't nearly as bad.



        --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "mrintp2000" <shzys@n...> wrote:
        > Shaq gets away with murder. Yes he gets fouled a lot, but if the
        refs
        > called all the fouls he committs, he'd have to alter his game
        > considerably. And the Lakers do seem to play defense using the
        clutch
        > and grab.
        >
        > In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "Mike G" <msg_53@h...> wrote:
        > > I recently got this message from a member (not sure if it was
        meant
        > > for the whole group).
        > >
        > > -----
        > >
        > > Catching up on very old posts, and this caught my eye after the
        fact:
        > >
        > > Mike G wrote:
        > > >
        > > > My own guess is that the refs will blatantly hand the Lakers at
        > > > least one game, and that it will therefore go 6 or 7.
        > >
        > > I take it you ended up being pretty surprised at the large ref
        bias
        > > for the
        > > Pistons in this series, including blatantly handing them game 4,
        huh?
        > >
        > > Whodathunkit? Makes you wonder if the league didn't listen to the
        > > conspriracy theorists and react with a "We'll show them!"
        > >
        > > ------
        > >
        > > Can anyone corroborate the observation that ref bias handed the
        > > Pistons a game, or if it was prevalent throughout? (I didn't see
        any
        > > of the Finals.)
        > >
        > > If you are not a "conspiracy theorist", can you imagine
        how "they"
        > > think? My own guess would be that a "conspiracy" would only
        surface
        > > in close games, and not in a blowout series.
        > >
        > > Someone has written that the Lakers were shown favoritism in the
        > > Wolves series, notably by "allowing" Malone to hold Garnett. Any
        > > corroboration there?
      • mrintp2000
        ... fouling?
        Message 3 of 5 , Jul 8, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          --- Interesting...is there any other possible explanation than "smart"
          fouling?

          In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "John Hollinger" <alleyoop2@y...> wrote:
          > The Lakers had the second-highest PF rate in the league, so there's
          > somethign too that, but they were obviously smart about fouling (not
          > in bonus, non-shooting, etc.), because their rate of oppponent FTAs
          > wasn't nearly as bad.
          >
          >
          >
          > --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "mrintp2000" <shzys@n...> wrote:
          > > Shaq gets away with murder. Yes he gets fouled a lot, but if the
          > refs
          > > called all the fouls he committs, he'd have to alter his game
          > > considerably. And the Lakers do seem to play defense using the
          > clutch
          > > and grab.
          > >
          > > In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "Mike G" <msg_53@h...> wrote:
          > > > I recently got this message from a member (not sure if it was
          > meant
          > > > for the whole group).
          > > >
          > > > -----
          > > >
          > > > Catching up on very old posts, and this caught my eye after the
          > fact:
          > > >
          > > > Mike G wrote:
          > > > >
          > > > > My own guess is that the refs will blatantly hand the Lakers at
          > > > > least one game, and that it will therefore go 6 or 7.
          > > >
          > > > I take it you ended up being pretty surprised at the large ref
          > bias
          > > > for the
          > > > Pistons in this series, including blatantly handing them game 4,
          > huh?
          > > >
          > > > Whodathunkit? Makes you wonder if the league didn't listen to the
          > > > conspriracy theorists and react with a "We'll show them!"
          > > >
          > > > ------
          > > >
          > > > Can anyone corroborate the observation that ref bias handed the
          > > > Pistons a game, or if it was prevalent throughout? (I didn't see
          > any
          > > > of the Finals.)
          > > >
          > > > If you are not a "conspiracy theorist", can you imagine
          > how "they"
          > > > think? My own guess would be that a "conspiracy" would only
          > surface
          > > > in close games, and not in a blowout series.
          > > >
          > > > Someone has written that the Lakers were shown favoritism in the
          > > > Wolves series, notably by "allowing" Malone to hold Garnett. Any
          > > > corroboration there?
        • Mike G
          ... I appreciate the comments and all; but I really was interested if any of the astute observers in here could confirm or deny what one person said
          Message 4 of 5 , Jul 9, 2004
          • 0 Attachment
            >
            > In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "John Hollinger" <alleyoop2@y...>
            wrote:
            > > The Lakers had the second-highest PF rate in the league, ...

            > > --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "mrintp2000" <shzys@n...>
            wrote:
            > > > Shaq gets away with murder. ...

            I appreciate the comments and all; but I really was interested if any
            of the astute observers in here could confirm or deny what one person
            said (off-list), about major ref bias for the Pistons.

            These things intrigue me, and people's perceptions of them not the
            least.


            I do not think foul rates indicate much about bias. Teams that are
            losing tend to foul more, do they not? Players who are ahead of the
            defense are going to be grabbed.

            As far as I know, Shaq hasn't murdered or hurt anyone. (Malone has.)
            I've always thought it helped Shaq on both ends of the stick. No
            offensive fouls = dunks. No defensive fouls = no FT to blow.
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.