Please direct any replies to this poll to the Refs Betting on Games? thread to keep the commentary on this issue in one place.

Disclaimer:
At this point, the accusations against Donaghy are only allegations and not yet proven in court. The poll choices are from my personal conjecture and have no basis in fact.

This poll is private.

The league office!

Can there be any question? The buck stops there...don't it?

The "league office" has been more concerned about what types of clothes inactive players are wearing than they have to maintaining the integrity of the game.

Don't even try to tell me that Stern didn't know about this issue before now. The "almighty" Stern? He knew. So let the cover-up begin.

Do you mean others are involved in this incident, or others are involved although not necessarily in this particular case?

The NBA has the most intensive after game referee analysis of any sport. Yet they couldn't notice this guy throwing games? They don't notice Shaq's chargesor DWades ticky tack fouls?

NBA is corrupt, from top to bottom. Especially top, Mr. D. Sterns.

Take your pick...I'm open to both scenarios.

The NBA was so busy "over officiating" games, a guy trying to tweak the system would be free to operate a points shaving operation based on late game free throws and technicals.

Either the system is so broken a guy can hide within it or it is part of a much larger conspiracy.

It's easy to hide a thief in the Thieves Guild.

Do you think that the Pope and the Vatican know about all of these problematic priests and their carrying ons before it became public?

And if the Vatican knew about it, did they condone it by their inaction on the matter, before they were forced to do something by the public pressure exerted on them?

I don't know in either case, which may be a bit naive, but that is where I am at with it.

Here is how I see it...

There were fixed NBA games and nobody could tell them apart from the non-fixed games.

It is a game with so much leeway given to the officials that you can't even tell when they are mob pawns.

Stern starts his damage control!!

Everyone can bet their morning Starbucks and more that Stern has already started to call in some favors on this, Mark Cuban being among those lending a helping hand in damage control.

Notice the nature of the wording here.

Notice that the definition of credibility does not mention that anything was done wrong. Credibility goes only toward perception of what was done, not what was actually done.


Again above the issue is just one of perception by the public and perception in moral and ethical issues not legal issues. Moral and ethical issues are a matter of values. In some societies taking graft is a normal way of life. The President having a relationship with someone other than his wife, was not a legal question, but a question of integrity; i.e., in other words a moral and ethical question.

Here the article says that the issue is one of the publics' perception of a moral issue.

Judgment needs defending. Not that he did anything wrong. It is just that his judgment when making calls is being questioned.

Here the attempt was to cut off the publics' perception that one than one official could have bad judgment.

In the next quote Stern calls in a bunch of favors with his nemesis Mark Cuban. Of course if Cuban is going to defend the officials and the officiating than clearly this whole thing is over blown

Here Stern got players to say that not wasn't anything done by the official that was illegal, but why as a player (and who would know better) that even the issue of perception of wrong doing is a bunch of baloney.

Finally

Not one word in the whole article that something illegal may have been done by one or more officials.

What a crock

Sorry about that. My bad. Here is the link

NBA referees dealing with questions of credibility - NBA - Yahoo! Sports