We've been talking about all the problems that we're seeing with the way NBA games are being officiated. Biased refs, huge egos, star calls, etc. Now we have a ref allegedly betting on the games that he's officiated. Educated NBA fans are really upset with the state of the officiating. Similar to playing the role of Pistons GM in one of the posts here, how about playing the role of the commish? What would you do?

Quitting/firing yourself doesn't work because then you can't proceed with the changes.
:gun1:

I don't know why the NBA can't set up camera's all around the court or as many that are needed as necessary to do the officiating. Every time a violation would be committed a buzzer would go off and the play showing who committed what would be shown on the screen.

The camera's would identify a foul highlight it and the game would proceed accordingly. You could have two official who would not make any calls, but would be used to throw up jump balls and handle the ball prior to and between free throws and on in bounds plays.

The technology is there to do it.

It seems to me that the NBA eschews technology in favour of subjective review and decision making.

I don't know why the NBA can't set up camera's all around the court or as many that are needed as necessary to do the officiating. Every time a violation would be committed a buzzer would go off and the play showing who committed what would be shown on the screen.

The camera's would identify a foul highlight it and the game would proceed accordingly. You could have two official who would not make any calls, but would be used to throw up jump balls and handle the ball prior to and between free throws and on in bounds plays.

The technology is there to do it.

Interesting idea, in a perfect world that might work fine, but one thing I don't like about it is it would just make officials even more untouchable than they are now, at a time when the NBA needs to make things more transparent. Even if it could be argued that with more technology, the games would be called better, I don't think this will work for PR reasons. Fans will not like the idea of officials sitting together in some back room making calls. The NBA's biggest problem is not improving the actual product, it is marketing it to fans - making them believe that the product is better.

Let members of the Pistons Forum hire the refs. We should base the chosen members strictly on the originality of their Avatars..........

I don't know why the NBA can't set up camera's all around the court or as many that are needed as necessary to do the officiating. Every time a violation would be committed a buzzer would go off and the play showing who committed what would be shown on the screen.

The camera's would identify a foul highlight it and the game would proceed accordingly. You could have two official who would not make any calls, but would be used to throw up jump balls and handle the ball prior to and between free throws and on in bounds plays.

The technology is there to do it.

I don't like that idea. The game should not be reffed by machines. The challenge should be used. Refs will make bad calls. It is up to the team to know when the ref made a bad call and use the challenge wisely. Also the refs could do an instant replay after plays in the last 2 minutes of quarters, similar to the NFL.

they have to loosen the calls. you have to give defenses a chance and it will force teams to execute better. then if you don't call ticky tack stuff, you have less chance of missing another ticky tack foul.

Simplify the rules. Eliminate some grey areas.
(a), a travel is a travel IRREGARDLESS of player style. One step followed by a two foot hop is a violation.
(b) Most step back jumpers are a travelling violation.
(c) A foul in the last minute is the same foul as in the first minute.
(d) A hard foul committed AFTER the whistle blows is two fouls.
(e) Bring back the hand check. Get rid of the one hand is ok versus two hands is a foul when defending in the post crap.
(f) There is no shooting foul on guys flying backward toward the basket.
(g) Stiffarming a defensive player is a offensive foul, as is warding off a harrassing defender with a free arm while dribbling.
Just call it !!!

Educate fans about what exactly constitutes a foul. We make the most noise and know the least.

Penalize players for deception. Flopping should be a violation.

Make a flagrant 2 technical foul an automatic 2 game suspension. Define exactly what acts will bring the F2. ie wanton blow to the head, undercutting,

Each team should have a "designated flopper" - one who flops regularly and doesn't get called for it. Each team should also have a "designated driver" - one who drives to the basket without being contested. :pound:

Just let the player's call it themselves. It's a gentlemen's game.

I don't like that idea. The game should not be reffed by machines. The challenge should be used. Refs will make bad calls. It is up to the team to know when the ref made a bad call and use the challenge wisely. Also the refs could do an instant replay after plays in the last 2 minutes of quarters, similar to the NFL.

Then you are against Instant Replay?

:hoops:

Then you are against Instant Replay?

:hoops:

Not exactly. I did not like your version of using it because it seemed like too much. I am all for having replays in close calls, and late in quarters.

What about the idea of making each player wear one of those sensor suits that they use for the video game motion modeling? Then the computer can just call the fouls. There would be a lot of whining at first, but the players would get used to it... and there would be nobody to whine to... after stern is replaced by a supercomputer.

http://www.nba.com/media/suns/diaw_easports_220.jpg

That's so crazy, it's brilliant. Good one TaS.

How about this:

After years of speculation by angry fans, it's finally become clear that the NBA's referees aren't blind -- they're crooked. Here’s an idea for the NBA: Why not require all the refs to bet on games they officiate? It might be the only way to balance out this mess and make the games more entertaining, to boot. One ref will try to make sure San Antonio wins; another will be rooting for Phoenix to cover the points, thereby keeping the game close in the process; while the third takes the over, ensuring both teams combine for roughly 700 points to win a 100,000-to-1 miracle prop bet. Sure, taken separately this plan represents an astounding corruption of the game, but taken as a whole, you'd get a close, high-scoring game that would look fantastic on TV.

Blame Beckham! - Esquire (http://www.esquire.com/the-side/opinion/beckham073107)