Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How Former Ref Tim Donaghy Conspired to Fix NBA Games

espn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 93 posts

Re: How Former Ref Tim Donaghy Conspired to Fix NBA Games

#71

Post by lobster45 »

kodablah wrote: post #37

If the calls are so subjective that one can't tell the difference between a ref accidentally being way off and on purpose being way off, then maybe your sport/rules are the problem when being way off is either excusable or indeterminable. (in the NBA and some other sports, you can basically call a foul every play)

Back in 2002 I worked in IT for a California sports management firm. They had several NBA players as clients as well as NFL and MLB. One of the guys that worked there told me that the NBA was fixed. Everything included the lottery. Their goal was to get the high market teams to be in the Finals for TV ratings. Refs that were calling games to make this happen. Not sure if this was his opinion or fact, but it seems likely based on stories like this

Re: How Former Ref Tim Donaghy Conspired to Fix NBA Games

#72

Post by thatcat »

jaytaylor wrote: post #46
baumy wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Former competitive basketball player here, still play pickup regularly. "Nobody who has ever played even semicompetitive organized basketball could mistake this for an honest performance" is blatant hyperbole. I could not possibly disagree with you more re: 1984 Lakers/Celtics, and I'm a huge Lakers fan who'd love to believe they were really the better team. I'm not going to bother to click on the video, but I'm sure…

What is a "competitive basketball player"? Did you play professionally? Or were you just really competitive when you played ball? :p

OP probably played AAU, the competative league for youth basketball which is more intense than a local school league.

Re: How Former Ref Tim Donaghy Conspired to Fix NBA Games

#73

Post by everdev »

kodablah wrote: post #37

If the calls are so subjective that one can't tell the difference between a ref accidentally being way off and on purpose being way off, then maybe your sport/rules are the problem when being way off is either excusable or indeterminable. (in the NBA and some other sports, you can basically call a foul every play)

> Donaghy's track record of making calls that favored his bet was 23-3-4

They know which games he bet on and which games he officiated, so they can track his calls in games where he had a vested interest in affecting the outcome.

> The odds that Tim Donaghy would have randomly made calls that produced that imbalance are 6,155-to-1.

Basically, there's no way an unbiased ref could generate such an accurate prediction of the winner.

Re: How Former Ref Tim Donaghy Conspired to Fix NBA Games

#74

Post by differentView »

metabagel wrote: post #47
kodablah wrote: post #37

If the calls are so subjective that one can't tell the difference between a ref accidentally being way off and on purpose being way off, then maybe your sport/rules are the problem when being way off is either excusable or indeterminable. (in the NBA and some other sports, you can basically call a foul every play)

Game 3 of the NBA Finals in 2008 was pretty darn obvious. Anyone who watched that game had to have known that the game was fixed. http://www.espn.com/nba/news/story?id=3436401 “The Lakers attempted 40 free throws to the Kings' 25 in that game, and Los Angeles made 21 of 27 from the line while Sacramento converted 7 of 9 in the fourth quarter alone. In addition, a foul was called against Mike Bibby of the Kings after…

You misread the article. It was 2002 and wasn't the NBA Finals.

Re: How Former Ref Tim Donaghy Conspired to Fix NBA Games

#75

Post by Gene_Parmesan »

jds375 wrote: post #2

I would love to get more people's opinions on if this is still happening in the NBA and to what extent. Naturally, I would assume that this rarely happens still if ever. Modern methods of oversight and statistical methods ought to be enough to ensure such things don’t happen. The NBA has a vested interest in maintaining the legitimacy of the league and thus are naturally inclined to root out any kind of cheating or i…

I firmly believe that every major professional sports league is willing to twist some knobs and push some buttons in order to ensure/avoid certain outcomes which might be extremely beneficial/damaging to their business. Something as simple as fixing a draft lottery in advance, even just for the top player to be drafted, can have a huge impact on growing or shrinking certain teams' fanbases/markets. You could probably accomplish it with only a few people aware -- wouldn't need the entire league to be in cahoots -- and it's not really something like matchfixing.

And I'm sure that referees in most leagues are given directives about which players to favor, etc. In hockey, at least, it's really apparent that the superstars tend to get treated with kid gloves by the refs.

Having said that, I firmly do not believe what some others do, that entire sports are rigged a la pro wrestling. I think the leagues will, on rare occasion, step in to protect their investments. But I don't think someone's sitting behind the scenes writing out the storylines in advance.

Re: How Former Ref Tim Donaghy Conspired to Fix NBA Games

#76

Post by Godel_unicode »

porpoisely wrote: post #64
kodablah wrote: post #37

If the calls are so subjective that one can't tell the difference between a ref accidentally being way off and on purpose being way off, then maybe your sport/rules are the problem when being way off is either excusable or indeterminable. (in the NBA and some other sports, you can basically call a foul every play)

Yep. I think the most egregious example is in the NFL where you can call a hold ( on offense or defense ) on every play if you wanted to. Of course in baseball, the umpire can "manage" the game by changing their strike zone. I still don't understand why we need umpires to call balls and strikes. Can't they get video imaging system to make the call? This way we know it is objective.

You're assuming that the goal is to be objective. That's not always the case, and even when it is there are often overriding objectives.

Two examples are Mike Wilbon complaining that they should "let the players play in the fourth quarter", and Jon Gruden wanting to get rid of video entirely. Jon wants it to be a human game played and officiated by humans, with all the error that entails. See also limits on coaches challenges to keep the game from being bogged down.

Re: How Former Ref Tim Donaghy Conspired to Fix NBA Games

#77

Post by Godel_unicode »

ehavener wrote: post #61
UweSchmidt wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would propose doing away with refs entirely, like in Ultimate Frisbee. This would entail pretty radical changes to professional sports, but why not. At the highest level of play (and pay), contestants should be able to fiercely compete under principles of fairness and cooperation instead of establishing the current culture of flopping, doping and "off the field issues".

So I'm up by 1 with 20 seconds to go in game 7 of the finals and I foul you. You really think I'm gonna hand over my championship out of fairness? This would turn every professional sport into the UFC.

There are refs in UFC.

Re: How Former Ref Tim Donaghy Conspired to Fix NBA Games

#78

Post by Someone »

tabtab wrote: post #58
metabagel wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Game 3 of the NBA Finals in 2008 was pretty darn obvious. Anyone who watched that game had to have known that the game was fixed. http://www.espn.com/nba/news/story?id=3436401 “The Lakers attempted 40 free throws to the Kings' 25 in that game, and Los Angeles made 21 of 27 from the line while Sacramento converted 7 of 9 in the fourth quarter alone. In addition, a foul was called against Mike Bibby of the Kings after…

I would like to see a more objective scoring. Lopsided foul ratios are not solid evidence of bias by themselves. Teams play different styles and sometimes have bad defensive nights. Nor is a single bad call evidence of bias, such as the nosebleed incident. An example of a good evaluation would be several professional referees, not employed by the NBA, observe the videos of that game from different angles, and score t…

”Lopsided foul ratios are not solid evidence of bias by themselves. Teams play different styles”

Also, near the end of the game, I expect losing teams to commit more fouls, giving up free throws to prevent their opponent from using up the shot clock time.

”observe the videos of that game from different angles”

Ideally, you would process the video so that you can’t see who the players are or which team the player is on. I fear that isn’t possible, though. Experts likely will recognize players from their length and the way they play.

Re: How Former Ref Tim Donaghy Conspired to Fix NBA Games

#79

Post by mruts »

everdev wrote: post #73
kodablah wrote: post #37

If the calls are so subjective that one can't tell the difference between a ref accidentally being way off and on purpose being way off, then maybe your sport/rules are the problem when being way off is either excusable or indeterminable. (in the NBA and some other sports, you can basically call a foul every play)

> Donaghy's track record of making calls that favored his bet was 23-3-4 They know which games he bet on and which games he officiated, so they can track his calls in games where he had a vested interest in affecting the outcome. > The odds that Tim Donaghy would have randomly made calls that produced that imbalance are 6,155-to-1. Basically, there's no way an unbiased ref could generate such an accurate prediction o…

Those odds aren’t really that bad. Many poker hands have worse odds but no one is particularly amazed when they get them.

That being said, it does seem a little sketchy.

Re: How Former Ref Tim Donaghy Conspired to Fix NBA Games

#80

Post by mruts »

UweSchmidt wrote: post #49
kodablah wrote: post #37

If the calls are so subjective that one can't tell the difference between a ref accidentally being way off and on purpose being way off, then maybe your sport/rules are the problem when being way off is either excusable or indeterminable. (in the NBA and some other sports, you can basically call a foul every play)

I would propose doing away with refs entirely, like in Ultimate Frisbee. This would entail pretty radical changes to professional sports, but why not. At the highest level of play (and pay), contestants should be able to fiercely compete under principles of fairness and cooperation instead of establishing the current culture of flopping, doping and "off the field issues".

Are you serious? This isn’t how incentives work. The more money is on the line, the more you need refs.

This is true regardless of who’s playing or the culture of the sport. The only reason ultimate frisbee doesn’t have refs is because no one really cares about it.

Post reply on HN