RedWoodTree824 wrote:I would like to know why who calls fouls on which players should be considered confidential information.
Safety of the refs I would think. I think that's a pretty good reason.
So I guess every time a ref makes a call on public television they should censor it?
Did anyone say anything remotely close to that should happen? I can certainly see why they would try to keep it confidential as much as possible. Why does the public need to know who made what call? What good can possibly come from that?
Research purposes I guess. If every single call is made in front of the public in some form (be it on TV or live), then why should it ever be a secret?
Last edited by RedWoodTree824 on Wed May 02, 2007 7:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
knapplc wrote:I thought the response by the NBA debunking the study was pretty convincing.
Same here.
It's just so crazy to do a study on this because every game and every call is so different. Situations, players, tendencies, it's so hard. Some refs call more fouls overall than others on players of both race which can help skew the study. There's only so much you can do.
Interesting read though.
I agree that some situations can skew results, however (if the study was done correctly) a 13 season span consisting of 148,000 calls over 2004-2007 is a sample size that should be long enough to give good results. Also, (again if it was done right), the amount of skewed-ness in the data should not be a factor if the tests proved to be significant (have a p-error lower than 0.05 or even 0.01). If the p-error proves that the study was significant, then I would believe the study a little more. However, until I can see the statistical analysis, I have no idea how they came to these conclusions. If they used basic discriptive statistics then I would not believe it at all.
I agree. But is it 13 seasons from before and leading through 2004, or 2004-2007, because last I checked there were only 3 seasons played between 2004 and 2007.
If this study started in the early 90's I wonder how accurate it reflects current refs and the NBA today.
Right this was pretty confusing to me too, but I figured it was either 13 years, or 3, both of which I would think would be a good sample size. There are a lot of questions around this study, and as long as the are questions without reasonable statistically proven answers, than I would say the study is flawed..
RedWoodTree824 wrote:I would like to know why who calls fouls on which players should be considered confidential information.
Safety of the refs I would think. I think that's a pretty good reason.
So I guess every time a ref makes a call on public television they should censor it?
Did anyone say anything remotely close to that should happen? I can certainly see why they would try to keep it confidential as much as possible. Why does the public need to know who made what call? What good can possibly come from that?
Research purposes I guess. If every single call is made in front of the public in some form (be it on TV or live), then why should it ever be a secret?
There's a difference between maybe being able to pick out who made what call on a broadcast and having a public record of who made what call. It should be up to the NBA or officiating committee/office/whatever to look into individual circumstances. I see no reason for the NBA to put officials at risk for a past call they may have made. It's unlikely something would happen, but why risk it?
RedWoodTree824 wrote:I would like to know why who calls fouls on which players should be considered confidential information.
Safety of the refs I would think. I think that's a pretty good reason.
So I guess every time a ref makes a call on public television they should censor it?
Did anyone say anything remotely close to that should happen? I can certainly see why they would try to keep it confidential as much as possible. Why does the public need to know who made what call? What good can possibly come from that?
Research purposes I guess. If every single call is made in front of the public in some form (be it on TV or live), then why should it ever be a secret?
There's a difference between maybe being able to pick out who made what call on a broadcast and having a public record of who made what call. It should be up to the NBA or officiating committee/office/whatever to look into individual circumstances. I see no reason for the NBA to put officials at risk for a past call they may have made. It's unlikely something would happen, but why risk it?
You make a strong argument, but what would happen... someone would hunt a ref down? I would think that anyone who would be nuts enough to do something like that could find out which refs made a call that influenced a game WITHOUT it being displayed (via youtube or taping a game).
What I don't think should be public information is abortion doctors and their addresses (which I heard was published online somewhere, but I never actually looked.) People are hunting them down and killing them for personal beliefs. I would say it is something like this that houldn't be public info, but thats a whole 'nother issue.
I think basically anything that happens that affects sports should be available to the public. It's just my opinion, but I don't see much difference in publicly showing what the players did statistically through the course of the game.
I think that this issue is just a matter of opinion though and I respect yours, but it isn't the main issue of the article.
I wold guess that the reason the league doesn't publish or make public the information on which officials call what on whom has more to do with protecting the league than the individual ref. It could serve as a preemptive measure of keeping information confidential in the case of some kind of game fixing scandal, or even if accusations of referee grudges were made.
imo, this data means nothing as it assumes that blacks and whites foul at the same rate...until they do a study that says that blacks don't foul any more or less than whites i dont see how any of their data even matters
GiantsFan14 wrote:imo, this data means nothing as it assumes that blacks and whites foul at the same rate...until they do a study that says that blacks don't foul any more or less than whites i dont see how any of their data even matters
That was exactly my thought. We all know most of the stars are black and a lot of the white players have more of a supporting role, right? Well, maybe players in a supporting role are a little less aggressive and don't foul as much?
I wish all the blacks would start sleeping with all the whites so we could do away with this race BS forever.
GiantsFan14 wrote:imo, this data means nothing as it assumes that blacks and whites foul at the same rate...until they do a study that says that blacks don't foul any more or less than whites i dont see how any of their data even matters
That was exactly my thought. We all know most of the stars are black and a lot of the white players have more of a supporting role, right? Well, maybe players in a supporting role are a little less aggressive and don't foul as much?
I wish all the blacks would start sleeping with all the whites so we could do away with this race BS forever.
The thing is though, regardless of which race fouls more or less, the black refs call more fouls on the white players than black players (according to the study of course.)
The problem with "this race BS" is that even though people want to believe it doesn't exist, racism DOES exist. It is true that much of the racism claims are fabricated, and people assume race way too often, however it DOES exist in many cases.
Until all people who are racist all away without being negative influences on their offspring, we're going to have to deal with the race BS, which can be either a witch hunt claim, or legitimate. Even if racism were to be completely erased from the planet, the human race would find another physical difference to hate people about..
SO WE KEEP WAITING (waiting...),
WAITING FOR THE WORLD TO CHANGE!
Cafe Home
Fantasy Football
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by RedWoodTree824 » Wed May 02, 2007 7:16 pm 
