It's no mystery to anyone who sees my occasional posts that if I am a "hater" of anything, it is of bad officiating. So after watching the hideousness that was the Boston-Miami Game 1 officiating, I went out to my backyard basketball court to shoot baskets with my son and think a bit.
I like to direct my efforts to taking negative things and trying to make something positive and entertaining out of them. Something potentially wonderful came to me, and I couldn't help but laugh about the idea. My son asked what I was laughing about, I said "nothing," but it think it could indeed be something. It's up to you, Basketbawful readers, to tell me if it's worth my time and yours.
First, let me note that officiating aside, the Heat were taking Game 1. The C's were rusty and D Wade was unconscious.
BUT
On the heels of a Boston-Miami Game 1 that saw:
- Jermaine O'Neal receive a flagrant foul for having the nerve to let James Jones run into, and bounce off of, him
- Paul Pierce getting ejected for letting Dwayne Wade give him a forearm shiver
It was clearly time to take the power away from David Stern and the officials and give it back to us. I propose to you: The ACTUAL SCORE NBA Champion.
Let's use Boston-Miami Game 1 final score (99-90 in favor of Miami) as an example. Let's assume the Jermaine O'Neal flagrant foul call was garbage, and as a result, the Heat hit two free throws and received the ball and scored again. The Celtics' score would go to a +4, and the ACTUAL final score would be 99-94. If you factor in the Pierce call and ejection, depending on the several factors involved in the subsequent scoring / let down that followed, this could be a +3, and the Celtics lose 99-97. Is this scientific? Absolutely not. Could it be a down right fun way to skewer bad NBA officiating? You betcha.
I don't think I'll try to do this for any playoff rounds before the Finals, because I can't declare champions those teams that are unfairly cast out of the earlier rounds. However, if the team that loses the NBA Finals actually wins based on these putrid-officiating-adjustments, they are the NBA ACTUAL SCORE Champion.
It almost benefits me more if the Celtics aren't in the Finals, so I can't be accused of homerism. But I do consider myself fairly even-handed when it comes to judging crappy officiating. If I DO have a bias, it leans toward assuming officials suck.
Now this is all well and good, but inconsequential without something magnificent to go along with it, so depending on the outcome of the NBA and NBA ACTUAL SCORE Finals, I may:
- Visit the administrative offices / team representative of the NBA ACTUAL SCORE Champion to present a hand-made ACTUAL SCORE Trophy (Unless it's Atlanta - I'm not going to that dump of a city. Maybe I'd just make a phone call). Videos and pictures of the ceremony would, of course, go without saying.
- Present the Tim Donaghy award to the worst official of the finals (Joey Crawford would probably get a lifetime achievement award). This video would probably end up being more like a 60 Minutes segment, where I'm chasing the official, who's trying to keep his face concealed, across a parking lot.
Anyway, I'm still refining this idea, but it's up to all of you now. For me, anything that calls attention to the state of NBA officiating is worth it. And some day, who knows, the ACTUAL SCORE championship may be more valued by the winner than the Larry O'Brien Trophy. Dare to dream.
So, if you want a Finals ACTUAL SCORE champ and whatever fanfare I can conjure to come with it, submit a comment. A simple "YES DO IT" will suffice, if you like. But I want real numbers, people. If I'm gonna follow through on tormenting the administrative staffs of NBA teams, triple digits ain't gonna cut it. Quadrupes, beyotches. You heard me...if quadruple-digit number of folks read this blog, I want quadruple digit support.
And if you have any further ideas on what the rules of the "Actual Score" Finals should be, feel free to add your two cents. Or a cent. One penny is fine.
BASKETBALL FANS OF THE WORLD UNITE!
-ET
Labels: Evil Ted, NBA actual score champ, officiating
99 Comments:
Word of the Day
Previous Posts
Zach Randolph: Wanted ManBawful After Dark: Weekend Watch
Worst of the Playoff Night: Triple Lonely Man Edition
Worst of the Playoff Night: Spurs Escape Edition
Bawful After Dark: April 27, 2011
Worst of the Playoff Night: Regression to the Mean...
Dear Spurs: Thanks for the memories
Bawful After Dark: April 25, 2011
Worst of the Second Playoff Weekend
Worst of the Playoff Night: April 21, 2011
Links
Archive
January 2005February 2005
October 2005
November 2005
December 2005
January 2006
February 2006
March 2006
April 2006
May 2006
June 2006
July 2006
August 2006
September 2006
October 2006
November 2006
December 2006
January 2007
February 2007
March 2007
April 2007
May 2007
June 2007
July 2007
August 2007
September 2007
October 2007
November 2007
December 2007
January 2008
February 2008
March 2008
April 2008
May 2008
June 2008
July 2008
August 2008
September 2008
October 2008
November 2008
December 2008
January 2009
February 2009
March 2009
April 2009
May 2009
June 2009
July 2009
August 2009
September 2009
October 2009
November 2009
December 2009
January 2010
February 2010
March 2010
April 2010
May 2010
June 2010
July 2010
August 2010
September 2010
October 2010
November 2010
December 2010
January 2011
February 2011
March 2011
April 2011
May 2011
June 2011
July 2011
August 2011
September 2011
October 2011
November 2011
December 2011
January 2012
February 2012
March 2012
April 2012
May 2012
June 2012
July 2012
August 2012
September 2012
October 2012
November 2012
December 2012
January 2013
February 2013
March 2013
April 2013
May 2013
June 2013
July 2013
August 2013
September 2013
October 2013
November 2013
December 2013
April 2014
May 2014
June 2014
July 2014
August 2014
June 2018
July 2022
contact: basketbawful@yahoo.com
Don't panic.
Do it.
At any rate, anything involving E.T. and a video camera will always will result on making this a better world.
In the words of Starski (Ben Stiller) DO IT.
Also, since basketbawful is based in Chicago, should we vote early and often to reach the quadruple digits?
The Jermaine Flagrant, bad call. I agree. Was a normal foul
Pierces two techs. First one with James Jones he earned. I can only justify the 2nd one by saying it came so soon afterward. He should have known better than to react like that. That ref probably won't get anymore of these games that's for sure.
But for the record, I didn't think we played great. We had some good stretches and a godly game from James Jones. 10-10 FT's for a guy who never ever dribbles. I don't expect game 2 to be as easy
So DON'T do it. It was one game. Relax. I'm still terrified of this series partly because Ray Allen has been in God mode for a long while now.
Would basketball be the perfect game if the officiating was perfect?
In all fairness, Pierce deserved it.
P.S.: haven't watched the game yet, and this campaign could use some promotional video, for example the two calls you mentioned.
Keep in mind that pretty much EVERY other post from a Boston fan tonight on the various ESPN forums was blaming the loss on the refs, claiming the NBA is rigged, or that somehow David Stern has it *in* for the Celtics. The same thing happened with the Sixers after Doug Collins brought up FT differential.
So maybe you can pull it off but I'd appreciate it if you don't just duplicate the worst of the sore loser homer bitching what we have to put up with in NBA forums all over the place.
You're trophy ROCKS, though.
As a coach?
And as an official?
As someone who has been involved at the varsity or above level of all three categories, I can tell you this is not a good idea. Opinion can only take you so far.
"Let's assume the Jermaine O'Neal flagrant foul call was garbage, and as a result, the Heat hit two free throws and received the ball and scored again. The Celtics' score would go to a +4, and the ACTUAL final score would be 99-94. If you factor in the Pierce call and ejection, depending on the several factors involved in the subsequent scoring / let down that followed, this could be a +3, and the Celtics lose 99-97. Is this scientific? Absolutely not."
That is an absolutely laughable quote to anyone who takes the game of basketball seriously.
Should Jones get a techniqal for his armwrapping around Pierce? hardly, since he had no intention to hurt him and 2 similiar plays where against Lebron by boston, where he was armwrapped, that was graded as a personal foul. Should he get one for flopping? I would be fine with that but Pierce should definitely have one for putting his face in James Jones', he initiated the contact.
Yea Pierce shouldn't have been thrown out on that second play in the fourth, but it is hard to judge when we don't know what was said between the officials and Pierce before. but one could argue they actually, in points got the better deal, going on a 7-10 point run straight after.
so yea, the Pierce ejection was unfortunate, other than that I didn't think it was that bad.
And yes NBA officials suck balls!
If James Jones had been a Spanish soccer player (I won't say Manu) and actually hit the deck, holding his face, Pierce would have been tossed first time around. At his age, he needs to know better.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DP2jAEkT-oo
Teams making runs and the effort levels vary greatly because of the score in the game, so nothing of value comes from it.
And your whining about the fouls is ridiculous: the first one was a flagrant 1 not because it might have caused any harm but because it was unsportsmanlike conduct from O'Neal's part. If you ever played pickup basketball when a player does somthing like this, i.e steps in front of you and gives you an elbow - now this is what causes some heated exchanges. It was a downright dirty play.
Pierce's first tech was more than well-deserved - Pachulia was suspended for one game for a headbutt like this, so I might just hope for the same from the league office, but it won't happen as a superstar is involved, not just some random Georgian guy.
The second tech - I don't know what he might said, it seemed too harsh for me as well.
But what do you make of Rondo's foul on James in the first half, when little floppy guy bearhugged James from behind - at least a clear path foul, but you can plead the case that had it been not a physical freak like Lebron, it would have been a flagrant.
What gives?
What's wrong with just pointing out the bad reffing like usual?
http://refcalls.com/
Celtics turned the ball over too many times and D-Wade went off. Both mistakes can be corrected for game 2."
D-Wade is averaging 35ppg in the playoffs against the Big 3-era Boston Celtics, which is the highest of any player. From the way I read it, your making it sound like D-Wade's performance was a one off, but I don't think it is.
Is that scientific? Absolutely not.
I must agree with everyone who says that, while this idea is amusing in theory (and I'm sure your intent was to be amusing and not realistic), bringing it up with the detail that you did makes you sound like a sore loser.
If the roles had been reversed and Bosh got a T for letting Pierce plow into him with his wheelchair and Wade was ejected for a potentially dubious second technical, would there have been an Actual NBA Score Champ post? Somehow, it seems unlikely.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2yCgO1vRT8
Horward Eisley for 3!!!! Ye... nope... didn't count...
Harper for 2 with shot clock expired... and it's IN!!!
Do the math...
Yeah, i'm still pi$$ed after all these years!!!!
I'm a Celtics fan, but games like that make me less of an NBA fan. The crucial thing, I feel, is that the Heat did not need any help to win yesterday, but they got it anyway.
Krstic gave us nothing, Green had 0 rebounds in 22 minutes, and Davis tossed in another negative contribution. So we weren't going to win.
But it was also the case that Rondo's third foul was a complete joke, they quickly whistled a flagrant on JO for bracing himself before Jones launched into him, and they refused to call flagrants on either Jones or Wade in their attacks on Pierce.
You might say 24 vs 21 personal fouls is not a large disparity... if you hadn't watched the game. The third foul on Rondo (a major reason why he got only 32 minutes of run) was ridiculous. Again rewarding Jones for searching out the deck. The violation on Pierce for the out of bounds screen when LeBron was pushing him out of bounds doesn't count into that foul disparity, but it sure helped the Heat.
And it wasn't because the Celtics were any less aggressive. In the first half Pierce and Allen repeatedly went into the lane and came away with nothing but a Heat 'block'. I especially loved the slomo replays of LeBron's block on Green, which clearly showed another Heat player getting nothing but Green's head.
I wasn't expecting to win yesterday because at this point I think the Heat are better even in a fair competition (Krstic not disappearing would be nice). To not get that fair competition is sad.
and
"Bad idea. Basketball is a chaotic system sensitive to initial conditions,"
What they said.
yeah, me too. not to mention the many antics of dennis rodman that would've gotten him ejected in today's NBA
http://twitter.com/#!/paulpierce34
Jakob - No , I don't know the rulebook enough, but I'll do my best. Perhaps the refcalls.com (thanks Steph for calling my attention to that site) could be used as the arbiter.
Steph G - Thanks for being the most rational (albeit too serious) of the dissenters. And again, thanks for refcalls. Excellent to have that at my disposal.
Ignarus - As for execution, I will promise to keep it out of "fanboy" territory. I am about the entertainment. If you doubt my ability to execute sharp entertainment regarding subjects close to my heart, I can only assume you haven't been exposed to LarryLand:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eCe5LKrkPuU
Matt - Yes, the idea was inspired by the Celtics getting the shaft, but the execution will intentionally avoid bias. Chill.
William - "I'm all for it, but because I'd expect it to be entertaining, not because it might help change the system."
William gets it.
greggrant - At what point did I whine in my post? and yes, any absurd things the Celtics do will be harped upon (assuming they even get to the Finals).
Anacondahl - Word on Paul Pierce's Twitter was that Obama actually sent the order to kill Osama Bin Laden to express his support for the NBA ACTUAL SCORE Champ. You're welcome, Earth.
zyth - if there's a travel not called, I'll try to catch it.
Sport - Played in high school, coach my kids' team. And respect the game enormously. Asking about by "basketball experience" and my "respect for the game" is one of those high school debating club tactics that I love so much...
"That is an absolutely laughable quote to anyone who takes the game of basketball seriously."
High horse alert! What part of my post shouted "SERIOUS" to you? Shouldn't you be at Yahoo sports.com or something?
WV: 'extingst', a combination of extinct and extinguished, as in:
Despite playing enormously poorly, the Celtics in Game one weren't fully extingst until the refs had their say.
We can complain about bad calls, or non-calls, but there are endless reasons to come to a situation that is "decided" by refs, and this statement sounds ridiculous since they are not players and they don't play the game.
I like your style, and your videos are hilarious, but I don't think it's a big deal here.
"Asking about by 'basketball experience' and my 'respect for the game' is one of those high school debating club tactics that I love so much..."
Perhaps you're lumping my comment in with some others, but I certainly did not question either quality. You clearly do not posses the credentials to evaluate NBA officiating, its that simple.
I pointed out that your idea is laughable to anyone who takes the game seriously, I understand that you do not, I was definitely not suggesting that you do.
celtics score from last night should be 99-98 though because after the flagrant they made a 3 pointer. fuckin cHeat....
What part of my comment did made you feel the need to tell me to "chill"?
I thought my comment was pretty level-headed and non-inflammatory.
Telling someone who has generally been calm to 'chill' is, like asking someone about their credentials, a high-school level debate move. It implies that the person is behaving irrationally (thereby negating any point they were trying to make), which I don't think was the case.
Stick to the funny. You're very good at it.
"Chill" officially retracted. Now chill, will ya?
Sport - So I gotta spend 20 years officiating to be worthy of commenting on crappy officiating? Seriously? Are you like this at parties?
BRB, I have to go sign up to be an ocean liner captain, so that in 20 years I can have an opinion about whether Titanic Captain Edward John Smith did a good job.
And by the way, I take the game very seriously. I ref my kid's practice games, and it ain't easy, so I respect when it's done well, hate when it's done poorly, and despise when it's done poorly at the highest level when more is at stake and expected. The refs in my kid's league, for example, do a great job, so I naturally wonder why those at the top level can be so wrong so often.
On some level, I do want the analysis to have credence, so I would try to be as analytical and unbiased as possible to add teeth to the resulting satire. My dad often says "many a truth is said in jest," and if I can mine comedy gold while also making a well-tailored point, I will do so. If I decide as I'm doing it that it won't satirize to my standard, I won't.
Again, the primary goal is comedy, so I am now transferring my "chill" from Matt to you, and adding a second one for good measure.
My guess as to why kid's league refs don't blow very many calls (and I'm guessing you actually know the answer to this), is that the pace of the pro game is... uh... "elevated" in comparison to your average middle/high school game.
I know that, if I had to be a baseball umpire and I got to watch everything in slow motion, I'd pretty much be the best ump ever. In real time? Not so much.
The problem, is that if asked to define your terms, you probably would not be able to provide adequate definitions for each of the concepts you just laid down.
Officials train, and train, and train to properly adjudicate each rule, and especially, the points of emphasis for each season and playoff round. Do you know what any of the points of emphasis are for the season without looking them up? Just because you can look up the rule for travelling in the NBA rulebook and then show me a YouTube video where Dwyane Wade takes three steps before shooting, does not mean you are providing insightful, funny, or useful analysis.
Because you have access to instant reply, whatever argument you want to make about the officiating is a moot point without even debating the actual merit of the call you contest. Rather then studying to critique the captain of the Titanic, perhaps you'd rather create a montage of quarterbacks missing open receivers, tennis line judges making incorrect calls and umpires calling inaccurate balls and strikes. It might make you feel better.
"The refs in my kid's league, for example, do a great job, so I naturally wonder why those at the top level can be so wrong so often"
Really? Is that actually a sentence you would say out loud? Would it be accurate to say then that because the referees in a child's league dont have a problem, (and they definitely have to deal with James Jones vs. Paul Pierce type situations often) everyone in the successively higher levels of this sport should be equal in their fair administration of the rules? I'm not even sure I understand your point.
Sport-are you David Stern in disguise? Or are you married to a ref?
I posted as Arlen a few months back ET and we got into a similar argument. No hard feelings I hope, I respect what you do.
Fans of big-market recent championship teams are by far the most annoying of any fanbases out there. The last thing this site needs is a major contributor who actually writes funny stuff dropping all that to channel their inner whiney, self-indulgent, Boston fan.
You guys got to see your team win a ring. Now they're too old to compete. Deal with it (privately please).
**I know no one's making me read the posts, but I like this site, I'd rather read the funny stuff you WOULD HAVE written, and even more pertinent: Evil Ted asked.
It's a decent idea to make fun of the calls themselves, but if you're committing to saying that some team that didn't win SHOULD have won (even in a single game), it's taking it too far. Considering the options, either the actual champions won (not funny) or the actual champions lost (also not funny).
So even if you can avoid the bias problems (you would NOT have wanted to read my version of this when the Suns lost to the Spurs because of the Horry-Nash hip check), it's still most likely to just be sour-grapes fuel.
It's also a lot of fun to rip players, coaches, and even owners who whine about referees when they should be A) playing better, B) coaching better, or C) sitting down and shutting the fuck up (talking to YOU, 2006 Mark Cuban...). Nobody can DO anything about bad calls and the most annoying this players can do is loose their composure when you want them to play through it and win ANYWAY.
That's more or less where I'm coming from - I could be totally wrong and it'll be the funniest thing since Boozer took himself out on a duffel bag while trying to answer the door.
I guess I really think there's soooo much whining about the refs out there already that you'd have to go waaaay over the top to do something unexpected, since it's not just the calls you're focusing on, but who SHOULD have won.
If you DO go through with it, good luck. At least, from the looks of it, you won't have to deal with Lakers or Celtics fans.