It seems to me that is what we are dealing with here in regards to Donaghy. I know a lot of people feel betrayed and burned and all other kinds of negative feelings regarding Donaghy and what he has done.

Unfortunately, I have not read anywhere about anyone attempting to diagnose him to see if in fact he has a pathological gambling disorder".

Yes, he has done something wrong, but someone with this disorder, has very little control over this disorder, unless they are part of a program like Gamblers Anonymous.

The problem as I see it, is that this episode has reflected badly on the league, primarily due to the media's handling of it. It is being sensationalized at the expense of an individual who probably has a sickness.

I think that the NBA must feel that if they try and present this situation to the public as an individual with a sickness, which pathological gambling is, the public will waive it off as so much BS damage control.

I don't agree with that. I think if this situation were presented to public as it really is, the majority of the public would be understanding the negative impact on the league would be minimal.

Postgraduate Medicine: Pathologic gambling disorder

Problem gambling - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Good observation, however I disagree that the public would be as accepting of this ref as you think.

Alcoholism is also a disease. If an alcoholic kills someone in a traffic accident the victims family doesn`t take it any better knowing the person that killed their loved one had this paticular disease.

I don't think that your analogy is valid. Causing someone to lose money on gambling, much of which was probably done illegally through bookies, is not akin to committing manslaughter, at least not that I am aware of.

I would say that this situation is more akin to President Clinton and Mayor Villaraigosa committing adultery while in office, which certainly had and continues to have a very major negative impact on our society in that by the example that it sets it says that it is alright to cheat on your spouse.

Clinton to this day is one of, if not, the best paid public speakers in the world and his wife, has a good chance to become our next President. Villaraigosa will probably go on to run for governor of CA and probably will get elected on his way to becoming the first Hispanic president of America.

I agree that problem gambling is a growing social ill that demands more awareness and something that people need to understand before they keep voting new casinos into their hometowns and watching ESPN poker competitions.

However this case in the NBA is not so much about the individual ref. Its rather about how he could have done it with all the checks/balances in place. And if this snuck in under the radar then what else has been going on? Thats the real issue.

i agree with Max. He can have this problem and go to rehab or therapy or whatever but the big problem is that the supposed checks and balances failed.

what disappoints me is the character assassination on donaghy. if people knew this, why did they let him continue? More about him will come to the surface. Its all just media spin to save face.

if you look around at sports sites, people aren't pointing fingers at Donaghy, they are pointing at Stern.

__________________

Yep, exactly right. But also easy to understand. Based on what you read about how the NBA polices the refs, it's all done within the context of performance. Refs are graded (perhaps) on a game by game basis, and those grades go into performance reviews that determine who has a job next year, who gets a raise, who gets to work in the playoffs, etc. Everything I've read says that this is the approach they've taken.

It's an approach that could easily miss a rogue ref, not trying to influence every game he or she works, but only selected ones, and then not enough to impact who wins, just the final score. The NBA's system, as with most performance evaluation systems, is based on the notion that the workers are motivated to maximize the benefits that the system controls. None of them work if the worker has other motivations.

It seems to me that the NBA (whether they should be thinking this way notwithstanding) was simply evaluating the wrong criteria and making the wrong assumptions about them. In many cases, you don't know what to look for until it's staring you in the face.

Which doesn't mean it's not possible to detect this kind of stuff. Any decent data miner should be able to pick up these sort of trends especially now that they know what to look for. We have statistical techniques that given the incredibly detailed info the NBA keeps on games and refs could highlight cases where something not too kosher is going on.

Now the question becomes, will the league put the checks and balances in place to really determine if this kind of stuff is happening, or will they try again to push the dirt under the rug and lose the integrity of the game?

__________________
"But first, are you experienced? Or have you you ever been experienced? Well, I have."
Jimi

I agree 100%.

I would think that there has to be a way to test or check for this disorder before hiring an official.

However, then you get into the sticky area of violation of civil liberties and that whole area of discussion has been and still is very divisive. That is not to say that it shouldn't be broached but it is a very sensitive area and needs special sensitivites when discussing.

That is a very good point!!

Time for Stern to hit the road.

All very good points, and maybe now is the time for the league to put in place some testing or evaluation that in quieter times might be vociferously challenged as violations of civil liberties.

That's a good point. The character assassination after the fact is pretty cowardly.

"Oh yeah....that guy was a real sal%%%%er...I knew it all along"

OK...but you waited until everyone else started piling on before you said anything. The Imus debacle was the same...once the cowards got a scent of blood they came out of the woodwork.