fightinfunbags
Well-Known Member
Exhibit A - last night’s Sixers Nets game.What do you have backing up 'they are getting worse'?
Exhibit A - last night’s Sixers Nets game.What do you have backing up 'they are getting worse'?
It is a complete strawman because "The refs have to be perfect" isn't a position. It's absurd from the start. But its positioned as being legit, they set up that refs will always miss some calls (which of course they will), throw out a couple of percentages showing that the refs miss a few calls but get most right, and then claim victory over the refs have to be perfect myth. That is a strawman. It's taking the legitimate claim that the refs are missing calls, there could be a problem here, are they getting worse position and flipping it to the refs have to be perfect.
It wasn’t just bad. It was straight unprofessional. I’ve seen high school officials better at keeping control of a game.Nah.
There are poorly officiated games throughout the history of the sport.
Citing 1 game that was bad in your opinion is proof of absolutely nothing.
Oh I guess this year is the first with some questionable choicesExhibit A - last night’s Sixers Nets game.
It wasn’t just bad. It was straight unprofessional. I’ve seen high school officials better at keeping control of a game.
Got it. The new argument is that the officiating has always been ass and unaccountable. I feel better now.
What do you have backing up 'they are getting worse'?
Nobody really thinks the refs are suppose to be perfect? The entire Myth #1 that piece claimed to debunk was that they were perfect. You can't tell me that wasn't a strawman and then turnaround and tell me points that I myself made telling you why it was a strawman.Nobody really thinks the refs are supposed to be perfect.
But with the amount of complaining that goes down when they miss a call?
People most definitely do have unrealistic expectations.
And like @msgkings pointed out, you claimed they have gotten worse.
But where is your proof?
You have fallen into the perception trap too.
It's his go to pivot. Tlance is basically Captain Ref. No matter the sport, no matter how bad a call is, and no matter how consistently you see bad calls, the go to response is always some version of "reffing is hard, there will be blown calls *shoulder shrug*."
Nobody really thinks the refs are suppose to be perfect? The entire Myth #1 that piece claimed to debunk was that they were perfect. You can't tell me that wasn't a strawman and then turnaround and tell me points that I myself made telling you why it was a strawman.
It is the truth.
So until they incorporate technology to take pressure off of human officials, this will always be a problem.
Just as it always has been.
You are getting caught in semantics.
The point of that part of the argument is that officials who some of you call “terrible” get 92-95% of calls correct in a very tough game to officiate.
I guarantee none of the people who constantly clown the refs would guess anything close to that.
The “myth” is an exaggeration of what people here actually expect.
Did you read the article? It's not like the NBA doesn't want them to be as good as possible. They look at every game and give penalties and advances based on how good the refs do. Our point is simply that it can never be perfect and if it was worse this year they will see it on the tape and punish the worst offenders and promote the best.No one is denying there will always be bad calls. Yet you use this as a crutch to go against any officiating issue as if there is zero way to ever improve. Why bother to question if something could be better? They're human, bad calls happen. That's not an answer. That's a cop out
It's not semantics when it literally frames the argument that way. It could have just as easily started as "Myth: Refs are bad" if the author wanted to but didn't because that pathway opens up more discussion that with what they presented can't address.
And once again, you side step. It does not matter one ounce if a random person could do a better job than a trained professional official. It's one of your go to rebuttals any time any person brings up refereeing yet it holds no weight at all. What matters is if the actual refs are doing better/worse based on a set standard and in comparison to each other whether its current (as in recent seasons) or historical standards.
Technically myth one IS a strawman.Myth one is not a straw man at all.
It is data that backs up exactly what I have been saying all along.
Officiating has not gotten worse. In fact, if anything it has gotten better.
There is just way more attention paid to missed calls due to social media. So the perception is that it is worse.
But it really isn’t.
Officials will always miss calls because the job is impossibly hard. You just didn’t see the slow no replay from 4 different angles posted with a meme about how terrible the ref is 25 years ago.
The communication part?
I don’t know. I doubt that it is worse today, but that claim could be legit.
No one is denying there will always be bad calls. Yet you use this as a crutch to go against any officiating issue as if there is zero way to ever improve. Why bother to question if something could be better? They're human, bad calls happen. That's not an answer. That's a cop out
It's not semantics when it literally frames the argument that way. It could have just as easily started as "Myth: Refs are bad" if the author wanted to but didn't because that pathway opens up more discussion that with what they presented can't address.
And once again, you side step. It does not matter one ounce if a random person could do a better job than a trained professional official. It's one of your go to rebuttals any time any person brings up refereeing yet it holds no weight at all. What matters is if the actual refs are doing better/worse based on a set standard and in comparison to each other whether its current (as in recent seasons) or historical standards.
Technically myth one IS a strawman.
I'm not disagreeing with your second part, but with your first part? Don't blame me, I didn't create the English language.I don’t really care what you want to call it.
The people who who constantly talk about how much the refs suck at their jobs and that officials don’t get consequences for mistakes are wrong.
Quantitatively? I can't, n