OT: Olympics proving that NBA officiating...

[_sturt_]

...is seriously askew.

I contend that the problem is not with the interntional refs, but with the NBA refs who have become the equivalent of professional wrestling refs at times... calling what they want to call, and mostly letting what should be ballet with a roundball to be turned into Austrailian rules football.

Don't get me wrong -- I want to see the US win, of course. But every time our guys get called for traveling or palming the ball, I have to admit that it gives me some satisfaction to see officiating that is honest to the actual rules of the game.

[swolehawk2]

I remember Richard Jefferson complaining that the refs called a foul on the US three consecutive times. Like it is a rule if you foul twice, on the next trip down you get a free foul....lol That's the problem with NBA officiating...fouls are influenced by when they happen and who commits them.

[Lascar78]

most definitely. Having grown up in europe that's always irked me in the nba game. Even worse than that is that refs admitedly give stars preferential treatment and home court advantage. I can't think of how many times I've heard a commentator say "well you know a rookie's not going to get that call" or "a star will get that call every time". It's complete BS. Everyone just accepts as a given that the refs aren't playing by the rules. It's like Shaq completely crossing the free throw line every time he shoots one too. Do the refs not see this?

Enforce every rule every time to every player. If a rule isn't necessary, remove it.

[macdaddy]

I agree 110%. The nba is scared to do that because then MJ, Kobe, Shaq while still great don't look as great.

Shaq espcially. Since when are you allowed to just push guys out of the way to get the basket.

[Lrenfro]

I totally agree that officials show favoritism. I believe that if you are the best then you don't need extra help. However due to my love for the excitement of the game. I would not want to watch a game where there is little slashing to the basket because of fear of fouls. No ankle breakers because they are scared to palm the ball. Games lasting 4 hours because they ball has to be in bounded every 15 sec because of a violation. I think it is something to think about when we demand fairness. What would you loose. What would you gain. You gain fairness, up the visibility of an average player and an even playing field. You loose your super stars your super plays and of course your superstar pay.

[Wretch]

Preferential officiating is one of them. 3 steps is 3 steps regardless of who takes them. If a guy barrells into a defender standing standing still, then it's a charge - no matter who is on either side. Tightening the officiating, calling things down the middle would definitely help to clean up the NBA. Though giving home teams an advantage and highlighting the league's stars is how the NBA markets it's game.

I don't think the international refs are any better though. I watched the game against Spain today and there were some calls for/against both teams that I just couldn't believe

The non call on Wade literally JUMPING on somebody trying to block a shot.

Spain getting the 3 point shot, well after the foul away from the ball, and getting the ball back.

The Booz kicking the ball out of bounds a step and a half in front of Gasol - who the refs said the ball went out on.

For the most part, the officiating was bad. The US has been whistled much harder than anyone else and has even been the victim of preferential treatment for the "home" team. To me, those things are the same in the NBA. I think that the game is moving so fast, and the refs don't have the birds eye view that we have, and mistakes are made. But ultimately, I wholeheartedly agree there are some things that simply need to be eliminated from how the league conducts business

[cyman3]

"Even worse than that is that refs admitedly give stars preferential treatment and home court advantage."

- absolutely! its amazing. Superstars are protected. simple as that!

[_sturt_]

Fairness and good basketball are not mutually-exclusive concepts.

It's unfortunate that somehow some people have come to believe that they are.

In the main, college basketball is proof that a game can be called according to the rules, giving both teams a virtually-equal possibility of winning the game, and still can be entertaining.

Go back before the Stern era of NBA basketball, or even the early years of his reign, and you can still see a game that is just plain beautiful to watch.

And it's why, unless the Hawks are playing, I refuse to watch an entire NBA game these days... after a few minutes, it's just appalling and is an insult to my intelligence, again, not unlike watching professional wrestling.

[Plainview1981]

The NBA has lost more and more sight about what basketball

really is. That's the problem. The USA team can't win gold

medal? Didn't think they would anyway. When you got scrubs

like LaBron James that don't do diddly squat and he is

supposed to carry the league and be the next big thing. Do

not look so impressive now.

[pathway23]

Give the international teams some credit.This Argentina squad that beat the US today beat a better US team a couple years ago. I saw that game.

[Employee8]

They should've had Ron Artest and Antoine Walker on that team instead of guys like Marbury and Iverson....At least Walker can play "LIKE" a PG at times(unlike those other two). and Ron Artest's Defense? Man.

[Lascar78]

the last thing they needed on that team was walker.

they needed michael redd or ray allen and some role players who understand team play.

you are being delusional if you think walker is more of a PG than marbury or Iverson. I mean seriously.

[Plainview1981]

right.....right..... I'll give them credit for beating

a declined product. The league isn't HALF as good as

it used to be.

[_sturt_]

It could certainly help if, next time, the previous year's NBA championship team is selected wholesale, filling only those slots created by the foreigners on that roster with other All-Star caliber players.

And yet, don't you just wonder why the Olympics is "amateur-participant-only" for every other sport except basketball?

That would be my druthers... deny any country the right to play any player who does the sport for a living.

[TROUBLEMAN69]

Quote:

---

And yet, don't you just wonder why the Olympics is "amateur-participant-only" for every other sport except basketball?

---

That's not true. The Olympics started allowing pro athletes in 1988. You have professional tennis, hockey, soccer, and basketball players. The only reason why you don't see MLB players is because the Summer Games take place during the season, and unlike Hockey the owners/commissioner doesn't want to interrupt it.

[_sturt_]

Okay... there's seemingly hundreds of sports, and four of them include professionals... the question remains... why? Under what possible good, consistent logic is that the case?

[chillzatl]

It has absolutely nothing to do with the actual sport. If people watch it enough that they can start paying the people to do it, it is considered a "professional" sport.

I consider all those runners, swimmers, track and field people to be professionals as well. They all compete year round in their chosen sport(s) and train just as much as anyone in our "professional" sports. They just don't have to get paid to inspire them to do it. The only reason they aren't making money at it is because the sport doesn't draw enough spectators to make it possible.

[TROUBLEMAN69]

Quote:

---

Okay... there's seemingly hundreds of sports, and four of them include professionals... the question remains... why? Under what possible good, consistent logic is that the case?

---

Actually there are more than four, but I didn't feel like going into great detail. I only wanted to give a couple of examples. I know the track athletes also compete for money, especially in European meets. I know that there is a professional beach volleyball league. My main point is all Olympic sports are open to professionals, but many pro's are making too much money elsewhere to really give a damn about an Olympic medal.

[Weez]

whereas the "smaller sport" professionals...like Phelps...need the Games as PR platform, to give them the possibility of endoresement dollars which will allow continued trainging...something that has rarely "truly" existed in the US, but look at the Chinese etc. (see how hard they fought against "losing Yao"?)...for the most part, the "regimes" are at an end. If you don't turn pro, or at least work part time...it's nearly impossible to continue with traing (want more proof? see the oldest olympic swimming teams ever...why?...becuase until just recently, even the top swimmers had few hopes of earning enough endorsement dollars or "race-money" on the grand prix meet circuit (only one of which is in the US each year)...Like Leia said, "Help us olympic one quatro, you're our only hope"