WTF is this shit?! http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/boxscore?gid=2009100416 73 personal fouls and 94 free throw attempts?!! Get rid of these fools now!
I would equate it to a rookie cop, nit picking over every violation and law. Busting people for jay walking and busted tail lights. Stern can't be happy. This will put extra pressure on him to get things worked out.
On the plus side if you have Wade, Maggette or Kevin Martin in fantasy bball expect to win your FT category every single week.
God, this is going to be painful. I want to watch basketball games, not a 3.5 hour FT shooting contest. These games are going to last forever and be boring as hell. Well, those who wanted to eliminate the "superstar" calls, got their wish. The Minnesota Timberwolves and New Jersey Nets both just shot 56 FTs in a 4-quarter game. Seriously, I hate the "superstar" calls too, but this isn't the way to fix that problem. It just creates more (worse) problems. Stern needs to end the power play and bring back the refs. They already agreed to his pay cut (and pretty much do whatever he asks). So, let them keep their benefits and let's get back to business as usual. It may not be perfect, but it's sure a lot better than 94 frickin' FTs in a single regulation game. BNM
Replacing the refs will not affect the star treatment that Stern wants. Stern's marketing instincts decide who to watch closely and on which players to go easy. Word is passed down through the head of officials to the referees. In 1995, it looked like the strike would go on all season, but Stern suddenly settled about Dec. 2. The media reported that coaches and players were yelling all game long about bad calls. Now, Stern has hired the best officials from the NBDA and college. Unless Stern settles soon, those lower leagues will suffer without their best refs, forcing them to steal the best refs from even lower leagues (to become their worst refs). Those lower leagues will have to steal the best refs from leagues below them, all the way down to high school, YMCA, and finally the Boys and Girls Club. Stern is probably hearing from commissioners of college leagues about this, putting him under time pressure to settle. This strike will be settled not long after Dec. 2, like last time, not coincidentally the approximate start of the college season.
it's at least somewhat on the players and coaches to adjust to whats being called. I think that those who are calling for getting rid of the corrupt refs are forgetting that who is largely credited for corrupting the regular refs is still in charge. STOMP
Exactly. The refs are Stern's puppets. He pulls the strings. Not sure why he's being such a hard ass about cutting their benefits, after they already agreed to take a pay cut. If he kicks out the current guys, he'll have to train an entire new crop of refs how to do his bidding. BNM
Isn't this fairly normal for the pre-season? I seem to recall the Refs tend to be very strict on foul calls during the pre-season, and tend to loosen up as the season progresses. Probably mostly trying to "make a point", particularly when the league picks a new rule for emphasis. I'd be curious just how much more it really is than normal.. and if the replacement refs are really deserving of the blame for this.
These refs are going to call games more closely. They want to show they can see the fouls called so they have a chance to move up to the big leagues.
To respond to my own comment, I went and looked up Blazer preseason games last year. The foul totals in those games were: 60 58 44 51 51 29 40 So still not quite as high as we're seeing here. However, Portland plays at a slower pace so you'd expect less fouls than some other teams. Still seems like the replacement refs are calling more fouls though. Although, I suspect, just like we saw last year, it'll not be quite as bad as the first few games seem to imply.
From the game recap: “I don’t think (the officials) had much to do with it,” Bucks coach Scott Skiles said. “A huge percentage of our fouls were legitimate.” It's preseason, for the players and refs. I don't expect it to be a huge problem, yet. If it becomes a problem, the league will simply tell the refs to alter the way they officiate. I haven't been very pleased with the officiating in the league for many years now, so I don't care if they reach an agreement or not. There were points in the post-season last year where I had no idea what was a foul and what wasn't. There was no rhyme or reason to anything.
Do you expect a coach to come out, say anything negative about the refs, and donate $10k to the league fund?
When I read closely into Skiles' statement, I see "These new guys are donkey balls. Stern needs to stop playing hardball and get the real refs back so I can evaluate my players."
I got the exact same impression ... I thought it was actually a very deft way of stating it too. I don't care how "earned" a foul is, 94 FTs is fucking ridiculous and makes basketball unwatchable. We want fair and reasonable, not ticky tack and letter of the law -- basketball is best played when it's a little bit chippy and physical.
If they are upset about the game, I expect teams to do what they always do, which is to give critical feedback and complaints about certain calls or officials behind closed doors. Well, considering that's your own view, it's not surprising that you choose to interpret any quote to fit your view, even when there's nothing of substance to back you up. And it's the refs who need to quit playing hard-ball, as they have no leverage at all. Fair or not, that's the way it is. Wouldn't we all, but I haven't seen that if many years. Why would replacement refs be any different? I don't think it's surprising that refs who've never officiated the NBA before may take a few games to acclimate to the way the NBA game is played and officiated. It's different than international, it's different than college. Refs are always evaluated by their performance and I don't think the league wants 94 FT attempts a game, so I wouldn't worry.
My own view is that 94 free throws in a game is unwatchable, Skiles gave the following quote “I don’t think (the officials) had much to do with it,” Bucks coach Scott Skiles said. “A huge percentage of our fouls were legitimate.” He's certainly not criticizing the officials (which is smart since it would only net him a fine), but even though he claims a the lion's share of the fouls were legitimately earned he left it unsaid that some were not. I guess I'm not really seeing the controversy here?
