PDA

View Full Version : Stern is the suck


rabbitproof
10-26-2007, 01:18 AM
Stern says refs broke gambling policies, but will change rules rather than issue punishments

By BRIAN MAHONEY, AP Basketball Writer
October 25, 2007

NEW YORK (AP) -- David Stern acknowledged Thursday that more than half of his 56 referees had violated NBA policies about casino gambling, but said none will be punished because he felt the rules were outdated.

Instead, Stern said he is altering the policies, leaning toward allowing referees to gamble in casinos during the offseason -- except for betting in sports books.

Link: http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=ap-sternspeaks&prov=ap&type=lgns

---

the fuck, stern?? who broke the rules? what rules did they break? this is entirely messed. this stinks of Cover Your Ass.

MavsX
10-26-2007, 07:06 AM
?

dalmations202
10-26-2007, 07:38 AM
Are you kidding, Stern has to cover this up. If not, it might hurt the bottom line. Wouldn't surprise me at all if Stern were involved in some of it. You never know how far up the line the corruption goes when you are talking as much money as they are.

Flacolaco
10-26-2007, 08:17 AM
Do you really care which refs played blackjack in Atlantic city? nickel slots in reno?

Who cares? I guess I don't.

They're human beings. Let them go to a dang casino in the off-season.

Just stay the hell away from the sports book.

edit: I just want to be clear, there are a great many number of reason to hate Stern, and I hate the bastard. I just don't think this is one of them.

mary
10-26-2007, 09:06 AM
I agree. If officials want to play craps during the offseason, I don't see why its a big deal. I guess the argument is that it would increase their risk of developing a gambling problem.

Honestly, I thought this thread was going to be about somethine else. This morning the Musers mentioned that Stern suggested eliminating timeouts during the last three minutes of the game. I can't find a single thing on it, or I would've posted a new thread.

foglemann
10-26-2007, 09:08 AM
Keep 'the suck' alive.

Man, I hate dictatorships and Stern is one of the worst in sports history. An old lawyer that happened to luck into taking over a league when Magic and Bird started in the league, give me a break. What has he ever done than have an annoying voice. He's terrible and no one should have the same job for more than 20 years.

Jack.Kerr
10-26-2007, 10:39 AM
I guess the argument is that it would increase their risk of developing a gambling probelm.

Not just a gambling problem, but a compromising gambling debt. And the thinking would also be that they'd be in closer association with people who'd know about and try to take advantage of their gambling "situation", much like happened with Donaghy.

I think the rule made (past tense) a lot of sense, and it stinks of ass-covering corruption that Stern is covering it up AFTER the fact; AFTER it comes to light that more than half of the officiating staff has been flouting the rule. Stern is showing himself more and more to be an increasingly "reactive" commissioner instead of a "proactive" one. I think he has lost his vision, and that it's time for a new person in the position.

I agree: Coverup.

mary
10-26-2007, 11:03 AM
Not just a gambling problem, but a compromising gambling debt. And the thinking would also be that they'd be in closer association with people who'd know about and try to take advantage of their gambling "situation", much like happened with Donaghy.


Donaghy was placing illegal sports bets with actual bookies..which is nothing like playing the slots at Vegas. Unless I'm mistaken, its was his sports betting that made him vulnerable to the criminal element.

I think we both agree that officials should in no way be allowed to bet on sports.

I agree that "gambling debt" can make you more susceptible to engaging in certain illegal activities that involve monetary gains...but "debt" is the keyword here. I can name plenty of other activities that generate debt that put people in difficult financial situations - overusing your credit cards, poor spending habits, having a lifestyle you can't afford, divorce, medical expenses....wouldn't ANY kind of debt make someone more vulnerable?

I apologize if you are referring to something else....I admit there are parts of the story I may have forgotten.

dalmations202
10-26-2007, 11:10 AM
Here's the problem as I see it.

Put yourself in Sterns shoes. You have just been informed that one of your refs has been busted with an association to organized crime.

Now that puts a knife into the cash cow that you have been milking for years.

Then it comes to light that over half the refs have been gambling and flaunting the rule you put in so many years ago. Now you can decide what to do.
1) Basically sweep it under the rug -- maybe even change the rule so they aren't seen as so bad and hope the bleeding stops and the cash cow keeps giving milk.
2) Fire all of them because of the integrity of the game -- of course when you do -- that is like yanking up with the knife because now you are admitting that gambling was taking place and many many fans might connect the dots of $$$, organized crime, crooked refs, and points --- basically calling the last few years of the NBA more WWF than basketball.
3) Fire just the refs that did the gambling -- while the knife is still cutting deep, you come across as better, only if you have any skeletons in the closet ---- you know they are coming out-- plus there is still the worry about the "connecting the dots", and you know that during every game for the next few years announcers will be talking about it making it last for a long time.

Don't ever kid yourself.........follow the $$$. Stern made a business decision to try and keep the cash cow flowing.

This was the best case scenario -- what if someone had information that he has been pictured at a casino or the public perception that he is crooked (he might or might not be) -- then the league would see more lawsuits than it could ever handle from people who had lost $$$$ on games for the last few years. The league would be bankrupt in weeks.

No, he is covering all he can, and hoping to stop the bleeding, and that is about the only thing he can do.

Putting Officials in the position to influence the outcome of games, and allowing betting of any kind is a BAD idea -- they know it -- but now they have to weather it.

Jack.Kerr
10-26-2007, 11:28 AM
Donaghy placing illegal sports bets with actual bookies..which is nothing like playing the slots at Vegas.

I apologize if you are referring to something else.

I've already gotten fuzzy on the Donaghy details, but it seems that he started feeding information to his associates because he was in a bit of a financial bind. I don't think I ever saw any information that detailed what caused the financial problems, so I'm not even saying they had a gambling origin. But it stands to reason that being in casinos: 1) would put referees that much closer to a situation where they could get into a financial problem; and 2) would put them around people immersed in the casino and gambling culture and in closer proximity to sports betting. And the new policy (as far as I'm understanding) doesn't say they can pay dollar slots in Vegas and nothing else. It says they can gamble in casinos, and starting off in low-stakes poker game doesn't innoculate a referree from getting in over his head. It's like seeing a Baptist preacher in a strip club. Makes you wonder what he's doing there.

I don't think the original rules were outdated. I think those type of conservative rules are exactly what an effective commissioner has to enact and enforce. Given the sensitivity of the referrees' positions, the NBA commissioner has to implement policies that prevent the possibility of an appearance of impropriety or that would possibly compromise the integrity of the game. Instead, now that there has been an actual documented compromise of the league's integrity, Stern is saying, "Oh what the hell."

He's got sixty NBA referee positions to fill. He can't find sixty people to fill them who can't stay out of casinos in order to hold their job? Doesn't make any sense to me.

rabbitproof
10-26-2007, 11:38 AM
This smells of Cover Your Ass because Stern says over half violated policies (without stating which ones) but references changing rules about going into casinos, implying but not stating all the offenses were playing 5 dollars of BJ.

We don't know if those were the only transgressions.

Beyond that, it's just weak from a character/respect perspective. Nobody knows which refs have disregard for league rules but everybody knows that Stern's respect for league rules is flakey.

jacktruth
10-26-2007, 11:43 AM
Do you really care which refs played blackjack in Atlantic city? nickel slots in reno?

Who cares? I guess I don't.

They're human beings. Let them go to a dang casino in the off-season.

Just stay the hell away from the sports book.

edit: I just want to be clear, there are a great many number of reason to hate Stern, and I hate the bastard. I just don't think this is one of them.
I think the question is who broke what rules. I don't have a problem if refs were playing slots or blackjack. What bothers me is that he does not disclose if they broke the rules about playing blackjack or broke the rules about betting on sports. He just said, they broke some rules and we are rewriting the rules.

Underdog
10-26-2007, 01:31 PM
So, if over half the people in prison are there for pot, then we should legalize it?

I like the idea of a law/rule being overturned if a majority of people are breaking it...

Vote Stern for President!

nowhereman
10-26-2007, 02:54 PM
So, if over half the people in prison are there for pot, then we should legalize it?

I like the idea of a law/rule being overturned if a majority of people are breaking it...

Vote Stern for President!

from a strictly logical standpoint, those are two different premises. Half the people in prison are by no means a majority of people. i'm just sayin' ;)

apparently, according to the Worldwide Leader in Sports Entertainment, at the last referee's convention they had, they had a poker table going. Sweet.

I think one of the central problems here is that referees are supposed to enforce the rules, and you never want the people enforcing rules to be circumventing their own rules. That's rank with illegitimacy.

Underdog
10-26-2007, 03:17 PM
from a strictly logical standpoint, those are two different premises. Half the people in prison are by no means a majority of people.


(i guess you had to be high when you read it...)