| 12 May 2009
Dear Stu, I'm extremely bothered by your recent comments about educating the league on what a flagrant foul actually is.
Before I start off on that, I want to say that I'm not one of those writers/bloggers that tries to argue every decision you make and tell people how much of an idiot you are. I understand the league-wide and historical importance of every suspension and fine you hand down. Everything you do has a ramification on the state and direction of the league. Everything you do sets a precedent. And the gravity of your every move must put a lot of stress on you to some extent.
And on a lot of key issues in the past, I've agreed with you. I thought it was smart for you to not suspend Rajon Rondo for a questionable play on the ball in Game 5 of the first round series between the Bulls and Celtics. And I even agreed with you on the suspensions of Amare Stoudemire and Boris Diaw back almost two years ago to the day. I think that you try to make a concerted effort to follow the letter of the law in the NBA and at the same time, taking into account the meaning and motive behind all of these infractions.
But there's a big problem that's brewing in the NBA and you're sitting right in the eye of the storm. Nobody knows what anything is anymore. We have no clue what a foul is at the end of the game. We have no clue what a foul is from one night to the next. We've learned in these NBA playoffs that we have no clue what a flagrant foul is and we're all confused as to why Ron Artest gets thrown out of games before he even has a chance to go crazy (#FreeRonArtest).
During these playoffs, we haven't seen situations that we can just blanket with the notion that the league has gone soft. That's not even the problem. The problem is that your officiating crew has no idea what a flagrant foul is. They have no idea of the game situation in Dallas and on top of that missed a blatant foul attempt by Antoine Wright. Ron Artest is thrown out of a game for a flagrant 2 on what I assume is a decision based on his history rather than based on what actually happened on the court. Most could argue (and I would too) that Ron Artest's foul that led to an ejection was questionable in it being a flagrant foul at all.
So when you come out and say something like this, "I look at it as opportunity for us to further educate the players as well as the coaches in terms of what a flagrant foul is. Certainly the league office has consistently communicated to both the competition committee members, as well as the teams, on an ongoing basis as these fouls occur. But if there's still some uncertainty with respect to what is a flagrant foul, what's a suspendable offense and what a hard foul is, then it's incumbent upon us here at the league office to do a better job going forward of educating everyone," it makes me want to give you the big middle finger and ask you not to insult our intelligence, especially my own.
It's hard for a lot of the higher-ups in the NBA and with teams to accept this but there are quite a few of us on the outside of the league that actually know a thing or two about your great association. We've studied the league like we're preparing for a final and we have a pretty good idea on the history, the present and where this league appears to be heading. We can rattle off referees' names on instant sight and don't need Marv Albert to point out that it's you in the stands and on camera with a look of "Crap, looks like I have to go into the office early tomorrow because of that foul."
There are a lot of us that know the game (not to be confused with the inner workings of the league office) nearly as well as anybody in your inner circle. We're not just fans; we're students of the league. So don't patronize us and put the blame off on everybody else. The NBA has a legitimate problem on their hands. Instead of educating the players and teams to make it look like they're just ignorant to what the rules are, how about you rewrite the rules to give a clearer definition? How about you invest in some extra education for the officials and send them through a camp every year that reinforces the rules? How about us working together on this instead of you dictating that those criticizing you are wrong?
You've got a real problem on your hands. You're losing fans and customers because they can't stand the lapse in officiating. The rules are too ambiguous and personally, it seems like it's designed that way to give you a scapegoat. We talk to people everyday, as I'm sure you do too, who are fed up with this league. And that's a shame. You can try to tailor the attendance numbers and team financial losses and inflate the good numbers all you want, but you aren't fooling anybody with that. We know the kind of dire straights that the league could be heading in with this economy. Please, don't piss on our heads and tell us it's raining. You can't afford to lose fans over bad officiating.
In fact, half the time it's probably not even the officials' fault. The rules and letter of the law need to be tightened up a little bit more and there needs to be more workshops reinforcing what's what in the NBA. The league office and guys like Joe Borgia, VP of referee operations, need to look at what's happening on the court and the reaction in the stands. In tough times like this, people turn to sports to get away from the tough things around them. But if you're just filling them up with more frustration, they're going to cut ties and find something else. You've got a mutiny rising among the masses.
You're not going to lose me. The diehards will never turn their back on you; we're too locked in. But the diehards are in the minority. You're losing fans. You're losing customers. You're losing season ticket holders. You're losing television viewers and product purchasers. You're losing the credibility that this league office worked so hard to build for more than 50 years. Don't lose the people that you're alienating with this.
That would be the most flagrant foul of all.
Sincerely,
Zach Harper
Talkhoops.net
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
