PDA

View Full Version : Sports Betting



Scott Campbell
07-21-2007, 10:23 AM
I wonder what Mark Cuban has to say about this one?



What's next for the NBA is a good hook

By Marc Stein
ESPN.com

You know it's not a good Friday, as a sports commissioner, when you wake up to a crisis that you'd gladly trade straight up for baseball's steroid scandal.

Or as my Bloomberg News colleague Scott Soshnick put it on ESPN's "Outside The Lines": It would have been a much, much better Friday for David Stern if he were merely faced with the news bulletin that one of his Michael Vick-sized stars was being indicted on charges of sponsoring a widespread dogfighting operation.

Instead …

This can only be described as a horrific Friday for Stern and his National Basketball Association. The New York Post's disclosure that a referee is being investigated by the FBI for betting on games and making calls to manipulate point spreads -- a referee later identified by multiple ESPN sources as 13-year vet Tim Donaghy -- will haunt this league for the foreseeable future.

It's difficult to imagine otherwise even whether Donaghy were to be found innocent.
Anthony: One big mistake

While some who are critical of the NBA point to this being an organization's problem, I see this more as probably one man's human error.

This is playing out as if in a movie. You just never know about the skeletons in somebody's closet.

When I was a player, I didn't think about how officiating could be affected this way. You deal with whatever adversity is out there on the court. Officials are like players, they are going to make mistakes.

But you don't think someone is making a mistake based on an ulterior motive. You don't think you'll see a "Goodfellas" scenario playing out, where somebody on the court becomes an agent for organized crime.

Now David Stern's got a big concern. And I think it's more of problem because it's an official rather than a player who's alleged to have done this.

The one element of our game the NBA has wanted to keep out of the public eye is the way officials are handled. You never hear about when they're fined or punished, and rightfully so. You don't want that kind of information coming into the picture of what happens on the court.

So when we see Joey Crawford situations come up in the future, it's going come under far more scrutiny and speculation. The NBA used to be able to put a big blanket over that. Stern won't have the same luxury moving forward. This is going to create issues for him -- he's dealt with players' suspension and trouble with the law -- now you're bringing these officiating issues to the forefront.

I don't know how he's going to deal with this.

It's hard to believe that Barry Bonds can probably claim a greater share of the public's trust than the NBA at large, but that's the ugly reality confronting Stern. As even Stern himself termed it in a statement issued Friday afternoon, Donaghy is accused of betraying "the most sacred trust in professional sports."

How long it takes to rebuild the public's confidence in NBA refereeing from here -- and the steps that the NBA will have to take to get there when confidence was already sagging so -- is something you can't even estimate at this early juncture.

Chances are it won't matter if this proves to be "a single NBA referee" acting alone, as Donaghy was described in the NBA's press release.

It doesn't seem to matter, as we speak, that formal charges have yet to be filed against him.

It doesn't even matter that the zillions of conspiracy theories that have been floated about the NBA over the past two decades -- most of them suggesting that the league was manipulating outcomes to support its superstars or big-market franchises in the quest for better TV ratings -- don't appear to have any connection to the things Donaghy is alleged to have done.

NBA conspiracy theorists have simply been waiting for some sort of proof that referees, for all the call-by-call video monitoring they get from their bosses, use their whistles unjustly to change games.

And they've never been closer to tangible proof than these claims against Donaghy, which allege that, for the past two seasons, he made calls intended to affect point spreads and thus ensure that he and his crime-ring connections could cash in on large bets.

Donaghy has already resigned … and the ref colleagues he has left behind already know the impact of his case. People in positions of power abuse that power all over the real world. Politicians, policemen and corporate honchos, you name it. There are law breakers everywhere. Yet in sports especially, guilt is assumed and innocence must be proven.

Unfair as that sounds.

So first the NBA has to prove to the masses that Donaghy is the only ref under suspicion of submitting to mob influences.

Stern will then have to bring a revolutionary level of transparency to his referee corps and its corresponding training/administration/review practices that can, as he says, "protect against this ever happening again."

Ideas, however, on how any of that gets done were pretty scarce on a dark, dark Friday.

How bleak is the situation? Various international soccer leagues have survived a handful of match-fixing scandals, but no referee, umpire, linesman or in-game official of any sort has ever been arrested or indicted for point-shaving or match-fixing in the history of America's four major sports.

So if this proves to be the Friday that finally launches the NBA on the road to fixing the credibility problem that has plagued its referees for years, as a few team executives have anonymously and optimistically suggested, Step 1 was a monumentally scary leap backward.

Marc Stein is the senior NBA writer for ESPN.com.

Scott Campbell
07-21-2007, 10:25 AM
Hmmmmm.........Packer/SF playoff loss........Jerry Rice fumbles......

Packnut
07-21-2007, 11:19 AM
Hmmmmm.........Packer/SF playoff loss........Jerry Rice fumbles......



The NBA is just the tip of the iceberg. As a degenerate gambler, :oops: I can guarentee the buying of refs in football has gone on in both the pro's and college level.

I remember a college game 4 or 5 years ago where Marshall was playing Miami (Ohio) and there were 2 of the worst pass interference calls in the history of football in the final minute of the game. Replays clearly showed the DB was'nt even close to the WR yet alone make contact. The same ref made both calls. The coaches from the losing team were so out-raged they took apart the coaches booth smashing all the monitors. One of the assitant coaches on the field was arrested for hitting a fan. Everyone including the announcers knew this one was fixed.

The fact that this stuff goes on should surprise no one. However, the fact that both the pro's and NCAA have done such a fantastic job of hiding it has always amazed me.

Scott Campbell
07-21-2007, 01:36 PM
Hmmmmm.........Packer/SF playoff loss........Jerry Rice fumbles......



The NBA is just the tip of the iceberg. As a degenerate gambler, :oops: I can guarentee the buying of refs in football has gone on in both the pro's and college level.


Well then quit complaining about all of Ted's excess cap space. The money is far better spent on the refs than on the Frank Walker's of the world.

:D

Scott Campbell
07-21-2007, 01:37 PM
I remember a college game 4 or 5 years ago where Marshall was playing Miami (Ohio) and there were 2 of the worst pass interference calls in the history of football in the final minute of the game.


How bout Oregon and Oklahoma?

oregonpackfan
07-21-2007, 01:46 PM
I remember a college game 4 or 5 years ago where Marshall was playing Miami (Ohio) and there were 2 of the worst pass interference calls in the history of football in the final minute of the game.


How bout Oregon and Oklahoma?

The fact that the referee reviewing the instant replays was from Portland, Oregon had nothing to do with it! :lol:

For the record, that referee never officiated another college game last season. He has since "retired" as an official.

Scott Campbell
07-21-2007, 01:49 PM
He has since "retired" as an official.


The question is, who funded that retirement? The league, or the mob?

Packnut
07-21-2007, 02:54 PM
Hmmmmm.........Packer/SF playoff loss........Jerry Rice fumbles......



The NBA is just the tip of the iceberg. As a degenerate gambler, :oops: I can guarentee the buying of refs in football has gone on in both the pro's and college level.


Well then quit complaining about all of Ted's excess cap space. The money is far better spent on the refs than on the Frank Walker's of the world.

:D


I don't recall the Pack get any calls the last few years so Teddy is obviously greasing the wrong refs!

Bretsky
07-21-2007, 04:10 PM
Hmmmmm.........Packer/SF playoff loss........Jerry Rice fumbles......



The NBA is just the tip of the iceberg. As a degenerate gambler, :oops: I can guarentee the buying of refs in football has gone on in both the pro's and college level.


Well then quit complaining about all of Ted's excess cap space. The money is far better spent on the refs than on the Frank Walker's of the world.

:D


I don't recall the Pack get any calls the last few years so Teddy is obviously greasing the wrong refs!


He's using the additional money to upgrade the technology he uses to scout college players. Nothing but state of art :lol:

Noodle
07-21-2007, 09:25 PM
I still think it'd be wicked hard for a single ref to exert enough control to affect consistently point spreads. The game just depends on too many variables. Football would be even tougher.

So this makes for a great story, but if in fact it was only one guy, then I think the mob may have been wasting its money.

To be honest, I feel kind of sorry for the guy. I've had a friend or two get in over their heads with gambling debts, and then do stupid, career ending things. They were almost thankful to get caught so that the nightmare would end.

The Leaper
07-23-2007, 07:58 AM
I still think it'd be wicked hard for a single ref to exert enough control to affect consistently point spreads.

I don't agree. In basketball, when a ref calls a foul, a player goes to the line to potentially score points. That seems like plenty of enough influence for me...especially in a sport where people already claim the only meaningful aspect is the last 2 minutes. Fouls also matter because you can call 2 quick fouls on a player and basically take them out of the game. NBA referees have a HUGE influence on the game when they want to.

Football is tougher. A ref can't really put points on the scoreboard like they can in basketball. In certain games, things could go a certain way where a ref has an influence...but that would only happen occasionally and not consistently enough to satisfy someone looking to fix games. Plus, many of the NFL refs have successful careers besides their "weekend hobby" so that money isn't as big an influence on them. NBA refs don't get paid that much when you consider it IS their career and how much influence they have on the game. That makes the potential to be enticed by gamblers even stronger.

Packnut
07-23-2007, 09:52 AM
I still think it'd be wicked hard for a single ref to exert enough control to affect consistently point spreads.

I don't agree. In basketball, when a ref calls a foul, a player goes to the line to potentially score points. That seems like plenty of enough influence for me...especially in a sport where people already claim the only meaningful aspect is the last 2 minutes. Fouls also matter because you can call 2 quick fouls on a player and basically take them out of the game. NBA referees have a HUGE influence on the game when they want to.

Football is tougher. A ref can't really put points on the scoreboard like they can in basketball. In certain games, things could go a certain way where a ref has an influence...but that would only happen occasionally and not consistently enough to satisfy someone looking to fix games. Plus, many of the NFL refs have successful careers besides their "weekend hobby" so that money isn't as big an influence on them. NBA refs don't get paid that much when you consider it IS their career and how much influence they have on the game. That makes the potential to be enticed by gamblers even stronger.


I would agree in the pro game it's much tougher and although I believe it has happened, it is a rare occurance. However, college is totally different. Those refs don't make much and the almighty buck is very powerful and especially in smaller conferences where games are not always on tv. The MAC and Ivy leagues are notorious for a game being fixed every now and then which is why most seasoned gamblers won't touch them.

Noodle
07-23-2007, 08:49 PM
I read a good article by Bill Simmons (the Sports Guy at Page 2 on ESPN.Com) explaining how the refs could mess with the over/under line, something I didn't think of.

It's also true that basketball has had more than it's share of point shaving scandals, though it usually involved players, not refs, and at the college level.

Outside of BC in 1996 and Paul Crewe in the Longest Yard, I'm not aware of too many football games being thrown for gambling, by players or refs. Hornung and Karras were not, to my knowledge, ever alleged to have messed with outcomes.

Little Whiskey
07-24-2007, 10:24 AM
I still think it'd be wicked hard

noodle, are you from the north-east? maybe maine? how do you say lobster? :D

Zool
07-24-2007, 10:52 AM
I still think it'd be wicked hard

noodle, are you from the north-east? maybe maine? how do you say lobster? :DChowdah.....say it. Say chowdah.

Freak Out
07-24-2007, 11:13 AM
Hmmmmm.........Packer/SF playoff loss........Jerry Rice fumbles......



The NBA is just the tip of the iceberg. As a degenerate gambler, :oops: I can guarentee the buying of refs in football has gone on in both the pro's and college level.


Well then quit complaining about all of Ted's excess cap space. The money is far better spent on the refs than on the Frank Walker's of the world.

:D

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Charles Woodson
07-24-2007, 01:03 PM
Quick question,

Do you all think that pro betting should be legal for athletes, but they can only bet for their team. i mean it would give them more drive to play for, imo

BallHawk
07-24-2007, 01:08 PM
Do you all think that pro betting should be legal for athletes, but they can only bet for their team. i mean it would give them more drive to play for, imo

No way. All it does is open the door to more things. If it was the issue of can, for example, Greg Jennings bet on the Colts beating the Bears in the Super Bowl if he makes that bet after that match-up has been determined, then that's an argument. However, having athletes betting on their own team would be disastrous.

Listen, these guys are earning millions of dollars a year. If that doesn't get them motivated to play then nothing will.

Noodle
07-24-2007, 03:27 PM
No way am I going to serve as your clown and amuse you by saying chowder and lobster, as I'm too busying pahking my cah in Hahvahd yahd.

I say no betting at no time for anyone involved in sports. Here's the problem -- you start out betting for your team, then you lose, and you lose big. Now you're in trouble, and your bookie pressures you to do bad stuff. It's just too big a risk. Make it black and white -- no betting, no time, no how.

Harlan Huckleby
07-24-2007, 04:23 PM
Waite Hoyt was a pitcher for the Red Sox. When he got injured, all across boston could be heard, "Hurt's hoyt!"