Donaghy ESPN interview

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

and that was the reason everybody on POR went ice cold and the Lakers Shaw went on fire.

Even if those 2 fouls were BS thats not enough to change the outcome...POR biggest lead was like 4 min into the 4th....If my timeline is correct the POR extended the lead after AS was out of the game.
right. Because if they'd fouled out Shaq (instead of Sabas) everything would have remained in a vacuum and the Lakers would have still won right? I'm sure Portland would have still been collapsing into the paint to help Sheed and Grant guard Horry (like they did Shaq) leaving Shaw open on the perimeter. Good point

:rolleyes2:

STOMP
 
Last edited:
That's right folks, it's all rigged. You might stop watching since the blazers have zero chance at winning a championship.

Lakers's numbah 16, coming up:pimp:
 
right. Because if they'd fouled out Shaq (instead of Sabas) everything would have remained in a vacuum and the Lakers would have still won right? I'm sure Portland would have still been collapsing into the paint to help Sheed and Grant guard Horry (like they did Shaq) leaving Shaw open on the perimeter. Good point

:rolleyes2:

STOMP

explain the bolded part of my previous post (60) not being true...rationally
 
The refs are human. Humans are susceptible to biases and tendencies, and in this case in dealing with certain players and plays, in both positive and negative ways in terms of calls going for or against players. This is never going to change in any facet of life. Politics, business, professional sports... Greed and the power to wield authority is never gonna go away. Rules are never followed to a T. It's too bad its so blatant in the NBA though, and absolutely nothing is done about it...

Like it would matter anyways
 
Not really... the NBA doesn't make stats available on individual ref calls... you can only see the whole game. Another ref could very well be calling the fouls. It appears at times that after a certain point in a game that a lot of weird calls are made for one team or another to even that stats. I have seen it time and time again... the game is over and the calls suddenly change and the team that is behind parades to the line.
 
Not really... the NBA doesn't make stats available on individual ref calls... you can only see the whole game. Another ref could very well be calling the fouls. It appears at times that after a certain point in a game that a lot of weird calls are made for one team or another to even that stats. I have seen it time and time again... the game is over and the calls suddenly change and the team that is behind parades to the line.

Yeah I was only half way through that article when I posted that link. I was about to post that exact thing after having finished the article.
 
explain the bolded part of my previous post (60) not being true...rationally
rationally??? No problem. If an officiating staff knows it can make all the 4th quarter calls (and no calls) in one teams favor like the game in question, they know it's highly likely that they can obtain their boss's desired results. It's not like those Lakers were without talent and Sabas had proven to be the only Blazer with the size to slow Shaq down. Removing AS from the game via ridiculous calls and allowing Shaq to maul any Blazer who dared enter the paint on the other end = a landslide of Laker advantages that they're very likely to capitalize on... have you ever seen a pro shooting open jumpers? Controlling the paint seems to be most every coach's recipe for winning hoops... allowing one side a decided advantage there seems a rational way to manipulate the results.

now without being homer in the face of all these revelations, please address your rational that I was making fun of in my previous post :)

STOMP
 
Last edited:
There were questionable fouls throughout the fourth quarter. At one point it seemed like we were playing against six Lakers. This after all of the momentum leading up to the game was on our side.

We missed a ton of shots. But, were there non-calls on some of those shots. Were we not getting a fair shake on the defensive-end and it got into our heads?

You believe what you want. I'll believe what I want.

That Blazers' team won it all that year.

There, I feel better now.

Are you certain we would've beaten the Pacers? They were a very good team.
 
Right, and remember Smitty getting hammered in the paint and another non-call, which I believe, consequently led to a fastbreak opportunity and score.

That non-call was fucking ridiculous. That non-call decided the game. Why do that to Steve Smith? A class act?
 
You know, though, now we know why Sheed got techs all the time. He was pissed at crooked officiating. I was soooooo pissed when Sheed got suspended for 7 games for yelling at Donaghy in the parking garage. To me, what two men do after work off the court shouldn't have resulted in any suspension, let alone for SEVEN games. I was furious.
 
You are a piece of shit Toko

Come on now, just because I don't suck blazer fans collective dick like you do is no reason to insult me.

The fact of the matter is, if a team has a 17 point lead in game 7 of the finals and somehow manages to lose it, that team did not deserve to win.

The 2000 jailblazers were simply chokers.
 
You know, though, now we know why Sheed got techs all the time. He was pissed at crooked officiating. I was soooooo pissed when Sheed got suspended for 7 games for yelling at Donaghy in the parking garage. To me, what two men do after work off the court shouldn't have resulted in any suspension, let alone for SEVEN games. I was furious.

Someone named BobWhitsittBestGM led the ESPN board in outrage. Most of the Sheed haters temporarily took Sheed's side. It was a splendid couple of weeks. Then all those turncoats reverted to their little snitty jealousies and defected to BBB. You know who you are.

As for clankers in the big playoff game, the bad calls may have induced the paranoid cold shooting.
 
Come on now, just because I don't suck blazer fans collective dick like you do is no reason to insult me.

The fact of the matter is, if a team has a 17 point lead in game 7 of the finals and somehow manages to lose it, that team did not deserve to win.

The 2000 jailblazers were simply chokers.
haha you have a serious hard on for the blazers man, you should just stop fighting it and become a fan now. Unless you really want to pretend to like the lakers forever.
 
I will admin I have never seen the 4th querter of 'that' game 7... but I have seen plenty of similar cases like... say with the Bulls in the playoffs where they would get on a roll and the refs would just go with it. You knew that during that roll one team was going to get a call every time they missed a shot and the other team was going to get nothing. With the crowd cheering and all the excitment no one will question it. My guess is that 4th quarter was like that. Yeah I bet the Blazer missed shots (some where they were hacked) and the Lakers rolled but if the refs helped out in even a few calls... that is the average winning margin right there. Hell... half the home games seem that way now. You can't be near as aggressive on the road.

The funny thing is though... when you look at the numbers... you can't see anything to support that. I looked a few years back... and saw nothing. I think it may be the evening out that you see at end of quarters and the end of the game any skewing if it is happening.

A game in recent memory where I thought something crazy going on was the first playoff game last year with the Rockets... within a few minutes of the game (even before we were blown out) I told my wife that there was no way we would win with the way the game was being called. (Touch fouls or Yao hitting Oden and Oden being called for a foul on one end and nothing on the other) It only took a few minutes of crazy calls before the game was decided... and yeah it didn't help that the Rockets couldn't miss.
 
Rasheed really was a piece of work. In terms of players that I spent time around, I have never heard so many teammates love a player more than Sheed. He truly was beloved by everyone on the team that I talked to.

With that said, I've never seen a player with a worse attitude towards the refs or the media. I mean, just a really nasty, awful, conceited, and hateful attitude towards the media. And in some cases I would say it was warranted. The things I saw while in the locker room were very distasteful towards Sheed. I saw Canzano attempt to bait him on multiple occasions, and I'm talking obvious trolling/baiting.

The really sad thing was that he was totally cool with black reporters. He'd give them a hug and talk to them like nothing was wrong, but if you were a white guy, he wouldn't give you the time of day. I once said "good game Sheed" in the locker room and he walked by like I wasn't even there. No other player would do that. I had great working relationships with all the other players on the team. I felt sorry for Sheed. He truly was embattled in his final couple years here. I thought it was funny that he chose Geoffrey C. Arnold to do that big interview with for the Oregonian, and Arnold hung him out to dry. Made him look like a racist.

Sheed will probably go down as one of the most misunderstood players in the history of the game.
 
Was Arnold wrong? You mentioned he treated people different based on the color of their skin...
 
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/phil_taylor/12/08/donaghy/index.html?xid=cnnbin

Interesting SI opinion piece about the NBA Officiating scandal.

Most ominously, Donaghy said he was forced to share his inside information with members of organized crime, who made millions of dollars, according to one federal agent, making bets based on Donaghy's tips.

So, let's review: The mob had its hooks into an NBA official, and ... actually, let's stop there for a moment. Think about that. The mob had its hooks into an NBA official. That's a chilling enough concept by itself. If organized crime figures could strong-arm Donaghy into helping them, why would they necessarily stop at just one ref, particularly after losing Donaghy as an inside source?

That's just one of many questions that should be asked of Stern, and not just by the investigators hired by the league, and not just by the FBI, which investigated Donaghy and, as Stern is quick to point out, did not find evidence to charge anyone else connected with the NBA of any criminal wrongdoing. But not finding sufficient evidence to prosecute isn't necessarily the same thing as saying that the league's officiating is 100 percent squeaky clean.

Stern and the league executives should be answering to someone -- perhaps Congress, as their baseball colleagues have had to do in regard to steroids, and their football colleagues in regard to anti-trust issues -- and should be compelled to provide more proof that their officiating is above reproach.


Calmly standing at a press conference podium and assuring us that Donaghy was a "rogue ref," as Stern often calls him, doesn't cut it. And neither does refusing to comment on the 60 Minutes story. The league should make its refereeing evaluations much more transparent and be far more specific in telling the public what actions it has taken to ensure there are no hidden agendas creeping into the way games are called. Stern and the league should be feeling about 100 degrees more heat on this than they are.
 
Yeah, I'd say good for Arnold for doing that.
 
The things I saw while in the locker room were very distasteful towards Sheed. I saw Canzano attempt to bait him on multiple occasions, and I'm talking obvious trolling/baiting.

As for Sheed's filtering of the media, it should be obvious that black people attacked constantly by racist white people will of course prefer to associate with other black people. Thank you Sheed for being hardwired to fight bad authority.
 
I thought it was funny that he chose Geoffrey C. Arnold to do that big interview with for the Oregonian, and Arnold hung him out to dry. Made him look like a racist.

Sheed will probably go down as one of the most misunderstood players in the history of the game.

Probably so. :)

http://www.opinioneditorials.com/guestcontributors/larson_20031215.html

What is the Deal with Rasheed Wallace?

Jan Larson

Rasheed Wallace, the Portland Trail Blazers' volatile power forward expressed his displeasure with the administration of the National Basketball Association in a recent epithet-laced interview [1] with Geoffrey C. Arnold of The Oregonian.

Wallace, 29 years of age in his ninth season in the NBA, is the fourth highest paid player in the league. He is also the main target of the Portland fans' ire on a team that hasn't won an NBA championship since 1977. Some fans, tired of his inconsistent play and propensity for garnering technical fouls (he holds the NBA single-season record of 41) have vowed to give up their season tickets if Wallace is not traded.

Wallace, known as much for his garish tattoos and fiery temper as for his basketball prowess, charges that the NBA exploits young black players for the enrichment of the predominantly (all except one) white ownership, "... they just want to draft who are dumb and dumber - straight out of high school. ... They look at black athletes like we're dumb ass . It's as if we're just going to shut up, sign for the money and do what they tell us."

Wallace has never been a choirboy. He's been arrested for possession of marijuana, has been ticketed for driving with a suspended license and has been fined thousands of dollars by both the Blazers and the league for various violations during his career.

Blazers' coach Maurice Cheeks has encouraged Wallace to take a leadership role on the team, but apparently Wallace doesn't share Cheeks' idea of leadership and seems to resent the idea of being a role model.

On one hand, Wallace claims that he doesn't play for the money, but rather because he wants to win games and win a league championship. But on the other hand, he says he will play for "whoever cuts the checks."

The attitude that Rasheed Wallace exhibits would not be unusual for a 21 or 22 year old, in his second or third year in the league, but Wallace should be well past the youthful irrational stage by now. He is married with children and one would think he might have grown up by now.

Approximately 80\% of the players in the NBA are black. The average salary for an NBA player is $4.9 million per season. These players are being paid for playing basketball.

Yes, the exploitation is quite evident.

The problem with professional basketball isn't with the players (or owners) who are earning millions. The problem is with those that forego their education and bet their futures on becoming professional ball players only to come up short with few, if any, alternatives.

Many young men with such prospects are struggling to finish school or are working long hours to support a family. Others are putting their lives on the line in Iraq or elsewhere around the world. Some fall by the wayside and end up living a life of crime, end up in prison or dead.

Fortunately for Wallace, he doesn't fall into any of these categories, at least not yet.

As is the case with many that have much, Wallace doesn't recognize or appreciate his unbelievably good fortune, a fortune that all but a very few will ever realize. Admittedly fame is often not it is all cracked up to be, but to complain that un- or under-educated young men, many of whom with otherwise few options in life are being exploited when making millions to play a game is too ludicrous for words.

Wallace is simply arrogant, self-centered and pompous and will one day find that his playing days are over and the man who "cuts the checks" is no longer cutting them in his name. He will then have plenty of time to reflect on how much better he could have been, not only on the court for his team, but off the court for his family and community. Maybe he'll also reflect on just how "exploited" he really was. Maybe, but considering that it is apparent that Wallace isn't the most inflated ball in the rack, I somehow doubt it.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top