So you have to either be a no-show at your stupid little game, or a no-show at watching The Greatest Show On Earth. So you choose to stand us up every time, and abrogate your reffly board duties as Board Ref. Hey, no problem.
Plumlee flagrant was legit. The shit calls were the foul on Dame for the block where it was really a borderline offensive foul as one angle showed Rose's hand post release making contact with Dame's arm. The same arm that had the block. There was also a Plumlee shot under the basket where he is mugged and no foul called but 15 seconds later at the other end a ticky tack foul was called. It seems clear to me that there is some sort of biased against the Blazers. Im trying to be impartial when watching the games, but there sure seems to be favoritism going against us.
well through 16 games we can see though there are some anomalies it seems the blazers get less foul calls than their opponents on a pretty consistent basis. opposing teams also tend to get far more free throws.
When your team is full of unknowns you're not going to get calls. I've said this multiple times leading into the season.
It's one of the biggest problems in the NBA. LeBron/Durant/Melo/Harden/Paul etc can make the exact same move, play or action as a lesser known player or a young player and it is called two different ways over and over again. Foul calls are very subjective to 'when' and 'who' and it is one of the reasons the TV ratings are so low. People see the obvious bias.
It's not right, but it's the way the NBA has operated at least since Stern was in charge. It's unreasonable to think it will change any time soon, if at all.
Compare them the the NFL and they barely register. There is a reason the NBA playoffs isn't on Network television until the Finals....it just doesn't draw enough to be financial viable and replace regular programming.
I don't think it's a bias against the Blazers, per se. Officials at all levels are subject to giving better teams and more established or better players or players with the bigger rep the "benefit of the doubt" on calls. I saw it every night playing in a big rec league for a few years when I was younger. The one on one nature of basketball makes it more visible. Right now, the Blazers are a young team fielding Lillard and a bunch of guys without reputations who "haven't paid their dues" and they aren't expected to contend for anything this year. They're playing a good, veteran team with a reputation for good defense from a major media market that is capable of doing well in the playoffs this year. Lillard is better than Rose at this point, but Rose still is a former MVP playing in Chicago and been in the league a couple more years. Of course, I do think the fact that it's Portland plays a part. But if you had Clyde Drexler in his prime going against the Atlanta Hawks or something like that, I think the Blazers would get a lot of the 50-50 calls and some that obviously should have been called against them. In the long run, this is actually good for the young guys. Don't expect to get the calls or learn the little tricks that get you those calls. All part of the growth process, IMO. It's not fair, but it is what it is.
I agree with everything but your last few words... It is only what it is if no one makes a change or tries to make a change. Its absolutely glaring, blatant and obvious and needs to be looked into by the NBA. In my opinion, this has a decent percentage to with smaller markets never getting good teams. How does a small market dig themselves out if they know their good players will never get the calls and better players wont go to the smaller market because they know they wont get the calls? I believe there is something to this and it should be addressed with at least some sort of study.
In principle, I agree. Until we have robots officiating and all the economic interests being neutral, it's hard for me to see it happening. There's always going to be some kind of inequality, be it through human error or human bias. And it can be overcome. The current Spurs and Cavs aren't big market or traditional powerhouses. Utah with Stockton and Malone ... the Blazers of the late 80s early 90s. I think it has more to do with not letting it break you, playing through it and earning your stripes. I just don't think this is against the Blazers. Pretty much every team that has a similar makeup to the Blazers in any sport has had to deal with it.
It's just difficult to watch when a foul is not dictated by what happens but rather who does it and/or how long they've been in the league. Weak.
