The NBA's Slogan Should Be " Where the Officiating is Subpar"

Steven Resnick by Senior Writer Written on June 09, 2009
LOS ANGELES, CA - JUNE 07:  Mickael Pietrus #20 of the Orlando Magic argues a call with referee Tom Washington #49 in the first quarter of Game Two of the 2009 NBA Finals against the Los Angeles Lakers at Staples Center on June 7, 2009 in Los Angeles, California. NOTE TO USER: User expressly acknowledges and agrees that, by downloading and or using this photograph, User is consenting to the terms and conditions of the Getty Images License Agreement.  (Photo by Jed Jacobsohn/Getty Images) (Photo by Jed Jacobsohn/Getty Images)
(Page 2 of 2)

Yes, fans want too see no-calls in certain situations, especially towards the end of the game, but this was clearly a foul. There's no denying it and this was an obvious foul call, but why would the refs swallow the whistle at this time? Only because Lee is a rookie if it were any other player on the Magic or Lakers there would have been a foul call and two free throws.

Lastly though, the league's ability to handle flagrant foul situations is absolutely ridiculous. Also, the number of flagrant foul calls in the playoffs that have been changed or rescinded is crazy.

The flagrant fouls in the league have become a joke.

Rajon Rondo can literally try to rip the face off of someone and only be called for a foul, but Rafer Alston can playfully smack Eddie House on the head and he gets suspended for a game.

There's absolutely no balance between the calls, and looking at the replay doesn't  remotely help because even with the replay the officials are still missing it.

In today's NBA, if a player is attacking the rim and the foul is hard it usually is automatically called a flagrant, even when making a play on the ball. Look at Trevor Ariza's hard foul on Rudy Fernandez.

Blazer fans were screaming bloody murder and wanting Ariza suspended for the play, but back in the late '80s and early '90s that play would be a common occurrence. It was a foul not a flagrant.

How many times has their been a player given a dunk because no player wanted to foul?

Yet, back watching the era of the "Bad Boys" and the extremely physical New York Knicks, if a player was attacking the rim the player would more than likely have to earn it from the charity stripe because they weren't going to allow a dunk or a free layup.

The NBA was much tougher back then and the defense was way better, but Stern changed the rules so teams could score more points. His reasoning is more fans want too see high flying and high scoring games, than watch a defensive struggle.

Which, may be the case, but now the game has become incredibly boring and way too predictable. A player gets burned on defense and it results in an easy layup.

Back in the late '80s or early '90s that player wouldn't have such an easy time getting to the rim.

(0)
...
Share This  
Crop_45x45
or to post this comment

5 Comments

There are no comments yet. Get the conversation started by leaving the first comment

Loading more comments...
posted just now
  • Loading...
  • Nobody has liked this comment yet
Cancel

This comment and all replies have been deleted This comment has been deleted Undo delete

209
reads

5
comments

written on June 09, 2009 Opinion

The best Lakers newsletter on the web

Subscribe Now

We will never share your email address


CBS Sports Official Partner
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Getty Images.
Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Getty Images is strictly prohibited.