Donaghy Claims Refs Are Biased

I'm not 100 percent sure what to make of Tim Donaghy's story of N.B.A. referees manipulating games. During his recent 60 Minutes interview he seemed almost believable at times and contradicted himself at others. For example he maintains that the integrity of his officiating never waivered even when he had bet on the game he was calling, but then later said that he and other officials would not give calls to Allen Iverson in order to send Iverson a message about his treatment of refs during games. I find it hard to believe that Donaghy, or any official in any sport, could truly remain 100 percent impartial with their own money on the line. The good news for the N.B.A. is that Donaghy has not implicated any other refs in the betting part of the scandal. He does maintain that many of them were unable to call games evenly do to their like or dislike of the players playing in a given game. The league launched an "internal investigation" and concluded that Donaghy was acting alone, and that even Donaghy himself was not altering the outcome of games. I'm not surprised that the investigation turned up little new information. Besides, if they had uncovered a league wide conspiracy do you think they would have gone to the public with it? It's in the best interest of of the commissioners office to sweep this under the rug as quickly as possible.


Maybe it isn't so hard to believe Donaghy's implication that the officials treat some players differently than others. That does not go just for basketball. N.F.L. players have complained recently about Tom Brady, among others, getting extra protection from refs on hits in the pocket. We have all seen plays where a pass rusher makes very little or marginal contact with a passer and has been called for a personal foul. Although he is retired it was widely understood that the strike zone for pitching great Greg Maddux was a little wider than it was for most other pitchers. Players like Larry Bird, Michael Jordan, and Kobe Bryant probably have gotten the benefit of the doubt more often than other players. In basketball many of the calls occur in that gray area open to much interpretation from refs. Is it coincidence that more often than not the calls go in favor of a select group of players? Let's face it , we have all seen obviously bad calls or non calls in the past that can only be explained by very poor judgement on the part of the officials or personal bias. Either way it is not good for the game. While I don't subscribe to the idea that there is wide spread manipulation among officials and umpires, it is perhaps possible that personal bias does occasionally play a part as Donaghy suggests. After all the refs are human, and we all have personal biases and preferences.


While we may never get down to the bottom of who new what and who did what regarding the Donaghy story I think we can all agree that the better and more consistant the officiating in any sport the more enjoyable it is to watch. The integrity of the game depends heavily on refs and umpires making good calls on a regular basis. When it is said and done we want the players to determine the outcome of games not the officials. It is a message that I hope commissioners of all sports are hearing loud and clear. I think we can all agree on that. Correct me if I'm wrong.