stephen jackson

holy shit. i'm not a big conspiracy theorist type when it comes to refs, but jesus christ. somebody needs to figure out why he is on the short end of the stick on so many calls. i mean, i know why, i guess, but is that really what the rules call for?

nba officiating is often assaulted for its unevenness and i think you don't need to look any further than stephen jackson as evidence. he is a marked man. i'm sure there are others. this implies that others are blessed, which is what people complain about. the refs motto is a foul is a foul. but that is clearly not the case. too much weight is given to circumstances beyond the actual play. the result is that stephen jackson gets says "what did i say?" and gets a ejected or gets fouled at the end of a game and gets no call.

no doubt if it was dwyane wade, a foul would have been called. if dwyane wade asked "what did i say?" the ref would have told him and probably gave him a make-up call a little later for "accidentally" giving him the earlier t.

i get that reffing is part of the game and that you need to lobby them and work them to your favor, but when they have tried to hard to remove this part of the game by issuing t's for arguing, what are they saying? we don't respond to insults, but we'll be more than happy to have you stroke our egos if you want a call.

jordan needs to throw his weight around a bit. he's still the greatest ever and that should could for something the way things are in the league.

 

I feel completely disrespected by the NBA and honestly, feel like I'm wasting my money as a season ticket holder. I'm not having fun and don't think I'll be renewing. If I wanted to watch scripted wrestling I'd watch wrestling.

Watching LeBron, Dwyane, KG and PP waltz into our building and bitch and moan through the whole game, while at the same time tossing Jack midway through a half (and calling a beyond bullshit FF1 on him against Miami) has left a bad taste in my mouth.

Don't feed me that shit that no one is allowed to talk to the refs anymore when that clearly isn't the case. And don't feed me that shit that Donaghy was a 'rogue wolf' and pretend that shit never happened. Clean up your dirty ass league, Stern. It's becoming a disgrace to basketball and that's sad, because there is so much young talent that you could be nurturing.

 

i don't think refs are dirty or anything, i just think the nba gives refs too much leeway. paul silas spoke about the call at the end of the game saying it was a judgment call. fouls should not be judgment calls. stepping out of bounds is not a judgment call. scoring a basket is not a judgment call. if fouls are judgment calls, then they become subjective and factors beyond what actually transpired will enter into the mix.

to me, the biggest deal with donaghy wasn't that he was betting on his own games, but that he knew which refs didn't like other players. wtf is up with that? a ref shouldn't have personal feelings towards the players on the court.

because jackson has a history with yelling at people and being a "bad guy" nba officials don't give him the respect he deserves as a player. they are there to call the game, not to doll out punishment for past transgressions. even the boston play by play guy said it was a bogus t -- that it "was not right". he basically called out the ref who did it. that's the opposing team's announcer saying the call was f'd up.

this isn't just about jackson, but it sheds light on an ugly fact. while i don't believe games are scripted, they are certainly not played on a level playing field.

 

I was definitely being way overdramatic to make a point but yes, it's bullshit the way Stephen Jackson is treated on a nightly basis. He drives hard and gets hammered, rarely gets calls. I don't know what more they want the guy to do cause he's been great on the court (for the most part) for Charlotte. When you hear rumors of a trade for Ron Artest falling through (thank god) cause he didn't want to play here, well that's how I thought Jack would be here too. But he's been the exact opposite. It's frustrating watching him try and lead our team and just never get the benefit of anything.

Like you said, we both know the reason why (ironically Artest and Jack being on the same team would have been HILARIOUS thank god again it didn't happen.) But he's paid his dues and he plays hard on a nightly basis.

I agree, call the game the same for everyone. Don't sit there and tell the fans that there will be no demonstrative motions towards the refs and then not call it for certain players. It's getting old.

KG is dirty btw, so glad to see that storyline getting some national run after our game here. I didn't know about the Boston pbp guys commenting on the T, good on them. It felt really bogus in person. Seeing Najera hit the 3 in Garnett's face felt so great. But I was still in a foul mood after the game because it felt like they just did everything they could to give the game to Boston.

And so when that doesn't work they have a 'no call' the next night negating a great comeback. Great, thanks.

 

I think Silas is right in that fouls are judgment calls. Contact doesn't always get a whistle, and in this case it didn't. It sure screwed the Bobcats, but on the other hand I've seen times where the Bobcats have benefitted from the ref not calling a foul that they could have called.

As far as Stephen Jackson goes, I'm not buying that he's some kind of victim of the refs bias towards him. He constantly rides the officials, and when you do that you get no benefit of the doubt from them. That's not any sort of slight to him, it's what happens around the league. If he wants to start getting calls at the end of the game, maybe it's not a great idea to yell obscenities at the ref when he calls a travel on you in the second quarter. He's done things like that for years, and when you do that there are consequences.

The biggest problem I have with what happened last night was the fact that the Bobcats had plenty of time to make a play and a timeout to boot. Instead of either pushing the ball up the court and doing something with it, or taking that timeout and drawing something up, they lolligagged it up the court and put the game in the hands of the ref(who 9 times out of 10 isn't going to make a call in that situation). The management of that sequence was horrible all around.

 

the jackson fouls was bullshit because during the boston game, with 3.5 seconds left and c's down 5, they called a foul that sent PP to the line for 3 shots...right after they bailed him out from traveling +2 right before that.

even worse last night (about 5 min left)was the bcats had grainger trapped with 4 sec on the clock. the ref blew the whistle because he "thought" he was going to call a TO.they inbound...shot ,foul,tip in.. that turned into a 4pt pacer swing. Thats not a judgement call, thats a total fuck-up by a ref who should be calling games for 8 year olds. steve martin was on the radio today and he didn't sugar coat the scenario. when asked if the bobcats "got screwed over" he said" they still aren't standing upright" lol.

DJ said he feels disrespected, and I do as well...actually more insulted that they pull this crap and I keep watching. If I didn't get free tickets I probably wouldn't watch. I'm a glutton, like a battered wife who keeps coming back for more.

 

they may have, but that doesn't make it any less problematic for the fans. it's a major turn off for fans when they don't feel like they're getting a fair shake.

you say he's not a victim then talk about why he's a victim. i wouldn't suggest he's innocent, but it's clear the game is not called the same for him as it is for other players. it would be difficult, then, to argue that a foul is a foul. if there are stephen jackson's in the league, then there are likely guys who get the opposite treatment. do people contribute to the reputation that precedes them? sure. but a ref should not be calling a game based on reputation. he should be calling the game on the floor.

if you really expect the players to control their emotions in a grueling season of travel and physically demanding performance, why can't you expect your refs to do the same? why should a ref get a free pass to hold a grudge against a guy who called him a name?

was it a bad play? perhaps. if you call a time-out, both teams get to make substitutions and draw up game plans. was the shot a desperation heave? yeah. did jackson get fouled? absolutely. and it wasn't just one of those "lean into the guy" kinds of fouls. collison swiped at the ball and got arm. that's why the ball went nowhere.

 

But fans are only going to see the things that go against them, not the times that it goes for them. So unless there's absolutely nothing that ever goes against them, they're going to feel like the refs are out to screw them. That's part of being a fan. Don't believe me? Look at the replay of the final play...

http://www.nba.com/video/games/pacers/2011/02/09/0021000774_cha_ind_recap.nba/index.html

then tell me how many steps Jackson took before he was fouled

I don't think what I said would paint Stephen Jackson as a victim, it's just the way that it is. I'd agree that a ref shouldn't call a game based on reputation, but they've been doing it forever. Wilt Chamberlain never fouled out a game, but do you really think he played the middle in 1045 games and never once committed six fouls? Michael Jordan never travelled, even though he took two steps every time he drove the lane. Hell, Rasheed Wallace once got a technical foul just for looking at a referee. Stephen Jackson knows all of that and still acts the way he acts. So in close calls, he's not going to get the benefit of the doubt. Is it fair? Maybe not, but on the other hand he knows they're not giong to give it to him.

I don't recall seeing Gerald Wallace, D.J. Augustin, or any of the other Bobcats not being able to control their emotions. And I personally don't think that not giving someone the benefit of the doubt on a close call qualifies as holding a grudge.

Collison was moving away from him and had his arm bent so it wasn't like he was swiping at the ball. I could see calling a foul (and being a Bobcats fan I think there should have been one called), but I can also see not calling a foul in that situation.

I think it's interesting that in the Villanova Rutgers game last night, the referee made the exact opposite call on a last second shot on basically the same foul, and everybody is complaining that he made the call instead of "letting them settle it themselves".

 

I can't really speak on the Indiana game. After the Duke comeback I saw the score and read about the no-call, and just didn't even want to ruin my good mood.

I understand that Jack puts himself in bad situations time after time, and that is frustrating too. If we could trade him straight up for Steph Curry I'd do it without even thinking. I've had enough of the Jack experiment. He can't change, and the refs are going to screw him in every close call. A back court of DJ, Steph and Gerald Henderson would be fun to watch, and GS is looking for a potential trade. I wish.


edit: I shouldn't say he can't change. He honestly made an effort for nearly a month. But the whole month of getting no calls would wear on anyone, it certainly wore on the fans. It's not a lot of fun watching the other team get a fast break when you feel like you should be shooting free throws.

 

that wasn't a travel by nba standards. and i don't mean "oh, everybody travels in the nba". i mean, he jumped and picked up his dribble in the same motion, then landed and went into his shot. maybe that's a travel in college, but not in the nba.

and yeah, people won't remember the times they get breaks as often as the times they get screwed. (altho, people who follow basketball a lot can tell you when a game is officiated poorly regardless of who the mistakes favored). but that's really the problem. if fans see an uneven application of the rules, they don't tend to think "well, you win some, you lose some" they think "fucking refs".

exactly. it's not fair. the refs are there to ensure fairness. it seems to be counter to the whole reason they're on the court if they aren't primarily focused on ensuring fair play. maybe jackson should just cite all the times he doesn't get a call and tell the refs they know why he's cussing at them and complaining all the time.

dj is pretty cool, but wallace has reacted to some things. no doubt jackson reacts more than others, but then, look at joey crawford and tell me he's not letting his emotions get to him.

here's collison's response to whether he fouled jackson or not:
"Don't ask me that question -- I don't like to lie. I'm trying to give a politically correct answer.''

a foul is a foul. that's my understanding. i know refs don't usually like to call fouls in those situations, but that's what they're supposed to do. by NOT calling a foul out in the open like that where everybody can see it, they are just as much part of the play as if they'd called the foul. it wasn't like the contact had only a limited effect on the ball. the ball didn't even make it to the 3pt line. if he'd still gotten off a shot that looked about as good as you'd expect, then you could say "well sure, maybe there was no foul". but how on earth did the ball do what it did if the contact was incidental?