Refs and their tendencies?

["Thomas Murphy" <tfmiii@worldnet.att.net>]

Some of you vented your disgust concerning the officiating of game 6 in
NYC. I agree, it was poor and seemed stacked in NY's favor. 

I've never bought into any of the "order's from above" theories regarding
refereeing, but this "Boston Sport's Guy"
http://home.digitalcity.com/boston/sportsguy/ might be on to something.
He's got a theory that doesn't depend on orders, just the league office
knowing the skill and/or personalities (i.e., "homers" or "neutrals") of
the refs they select for any given game. See what you think - its the most
plausible theory I've heard yet.

>>The Knicks get robbed in Indy in Game 2. Was it the NBA's master plan all
along? (6/2)

I'm usually not one for conspiracy theories. For instance, you always hear
things when the NBA is involved -- like how Michael Jordan's 20-month
"retirement" was really a secret suspension by David Stern (for MJ's
gambling foibles), or how the Knicks won the 1985 Lottery because the NBA
"froze" their envelope (so Stern would avoid pulling it out of the plastic
bucket) -- but none of that stuff has ever been proven.

And then you see Indiana "squeak" by the Knicks in Game Two of the Eastern
Conference Finals last night... and it makes you wonder.

First, the facts: The Knicks were robbed. Down by two points with 25
seconds remaining, Indiana's Antonio Davis received an entry pass and
wheeled into Marcus Camby -- who had already established position --
throwing a right elbow into Camby's chest and bowling the Knicks forward
over. The call? Foul on Camby. So instead of putting Camby on the line with
a two-point lead, the referees allowed Davis to tie the game.

After the Knicks turned the ball over on the following possession, Reggie
Miller drove on Chris Childs in the final seconds, leaned in, stepped back
and threw up a fallaway prayer that clanged off the rim... but it didn't
matter. Foul on Childs. It didn't matter that he barely bumped Miller or
that Miller created all the contact on the play. A foul is a foul. 

Especially when the NBA needs a seven-game series.

Of course, the Pacers ended up winning the game (88-86) after Patrick Ewing
misfired on a last-second shot for the 956th time in his career. Even the
Indy players seemed curiously subdued after the game; Miller admitted that
it was a "questionable call" in the post-game interview and repeatedly
expressed disgust with his team's play. 

More telling was the reaction from the Indiana fans after the last two foul
calls: They almost seemed embarrassed. I'm telling you, in three decades of
watching NBA games, I've never heard a home crowd react to two crucial
calls in such a subdued, hushed, "I can't believe they're giving us this
game" fashion. The Davis play was especially astounding, considering he
could have been called for TWO fouls on the play -- one for the charge and
one for the forearm that knocked Camby flying -- yet he ended up on the
free throw line with a chance to tie the game

Now for the personal commentary: Yesterday I called my buddy Joe House to
talk about Game Two. Neither of us are Knicks fans, but we've both been
inspired by their play over the past five weeks (I mean, let's be honest...
the Knicks are fun to watch right now). Anyway, we both agreed that the NBA
would do everything possible to make sure that this series returned to New
York tied at 1-1, especially after three sweeps in the second round and
especially after the Spurs jumped up 2-0 on the Blazers yesterday. It's
just common sense. The NBA needs more playoff games so NBC can make more
money. That's the bottom line.

So how does the NBA go about this? They assign their least competent
referees to the game. Why? Because bad referees are always more likely to
make calls in favor of the home team.

They get swayed by the crowd because they're bad. It's that easy.

And if you think I'm making that up, you need a history lesson. For
instance, whenever the NBA needed a well-officiated game over the last 15
years -- like Game 4 of the Finals in '84 and '87 Finals or Game 6 of the
Finals in of the '96 and '99 -- you would always see the same referees on
the court (usually at least two from a group including Earl Strom, Jake
O'Donnell, Joey Crawford, and Mike Mathis). It went without saying. By that
same token, whenever the NBA "needed" the home team to steal a game, weaker
lead officials like Hue Hollins, Lee Evans, Dick Bavetta and Steve Javie
always seem to be suddenly involved (for instance, it was Hollins who
called that infamous foul on Scottie Pippen against Hubie Davis five years
ago that ended up catapulting New York into the '94 Finals).

Sounds crazy? Just wait. When last night's game started, I noticed
Bavetta's bald head and Hollins' dazed face and instantly started bitching
to my girlfriend, who looked at me as if I were insane.

"Oh, here we go!" I yelled. "This one's already been called in by Dictator
Stern."

"What are you talking about?" she said. 

"Just watch. This one's in the bag. I wish I could call a bookie in Vegas
right now."

And then the refs (Bavetta, Hollins and Joe Forte -- aka Curly, Moe and
Larry) proceeded to call 390 fouls on the Knicks in the first five minutes.
No lie. It was the first time in TNT history that they ever had to post the
"FOUL TROUBLE" graphic before the halfway point of the first quarter. 

Meanwhile, the Sports Gal was looking at me like I had just turned into
Whoopi Goldberg's psychic character from "Ghost."

"I don't know how you know these things," she said. "I'm going upstairs to
read a magazine. I hate when you get like this."

She ended up missing a glorious effort by the Knicks. First Larry Johnson
kept them in the game with a jaw-dropping 20 first-half points, despite the
fact that he was using Xavier McDaniel's offensive arsenal from the 1995
season. Then the Knicks actually seized the lead in the fourth quarter
behind inspired play from the electric Latrell Sprewell (MJ who?) and the
always-mercurial Marcus Camby (who hasn't played hard since his UMass days
but has turned into the next Bill Russell). I'm telling you, the Knicks
were ready to leave Indiana with a 2-0 lead last night.

If that sounds unbelievable, well... it is. The Knicks came out of nowhere
this spring. Count me among those skeptics who believed that their wins
over Miami and a depleted Atlanta team were flukes -- I never thought the
Knicks had a chance in this series. And yet the Knicks play hard, they play
with passion, and they play together, one of those unique developments that
make you love basketball and remember why you love sports in the first
place. Two months ago, they were dead. Now they're playing like the team
from "Hoosiers," with Latrell Sprewell as a corn-rowed, tattoed,
coach-choking Jimmy Chitwood. Who could have predicted this?

Of course, the NBA doesn't care. They need a seven-game series, even if it
means that Indiana -- a decaying, lifeless team that makes Bob Hope look
energetic by comparison -- might back into the freaking Finals this year.
So what if the Knicks are playing harder? So what if the Knicks are more
fun to watch? The NBA needs more games, dammit!

And that's why this series is going seven games. Mark my words.

Better yet, just print this column out and stick it in a frozen envelope<<

A snip from his 6-10 column:

>>Final prediction on the Knicks-Pacers series: I think Indiana will still
prevail in seven, assuming the Pacers realize the following three things:

1. The only player on the Knicks who can make a jumper is Johnson. If
you're doubling down low on Sprewell or Houston, you can't leave LJ open.

2. Play off Sprewell and Houston and make them shoot jumpers. They can't
make them consistently.

3. Put the game in the hands of Miller and Rose, not Smits and Jackson.

That's pretty simple.

Then again, the NBA might have their own ideas. Make sure you check out the
referees for Game Six -- if Joey Crawford's involved, you know the NBA
wants a well-officiated game with referees that won't be influenced by the
home crowd. If the Steve Javies and Hue Hollins's of the world are involved
-- watch out. Indy needs a ten-point lead down the stretch to pull out the
win or else those guys will fold in front of the New York crowd (remember
Antonio Davis' charge in Game 2, or LJ's "continuation" four-point play
where he took two steps and set himself after the foul, but the shot still
counted?).

And you think I'm kidding about this...<<

Game Six refs: Dick Bavetta, Hue Hollins, Mike Mathis. 
Personal Fouls: NYK: 16, IP: 35
Foul Shots: NYK: 27-33, IP: 9-9
http://www.espn.go.com/nba/1999/990611/boxscore/indnyk.html

Best wishes

Tom Murphy