The Glory-torium is now open in the basement of this blog, check your cynicism at the door. Knock three times and give the doorman the secret words, "In Phil Rose We Trust".

Ladies and Gentlemen: The Gloritorium

Phil Jackson Leon Rose: "We'd like Melo to 'have success somewhere'"


Wednesday, May 2, 2007

Whiteys Still Dishing Out Oppression to the Brothers

Study of N.B.A. Sees Racial Bias in Calling Fouls

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/02/sports/basketball/02refs.html

I'm not really sure what to think about this. Seems there are so many variables involved that to come out with a small statistical difference is questionable and not so useful. Also, frequently you find what you are looking for.

I'm assuming that most of the darker refs are on average younger than their paler counterparts. I'm wondering how that plays out. I'd also be interested in how the older refs officiate the tatted-up, cornrowed, hip-hop generation of players.

It would have been more interesting to see if any specific individual refs made such calls at a "statistically significant" rate, rather than just a big composite number-crunching exercise. Unrelated, but I am glad that Joey Crawford is gone no matter how his calls were colored.

Thoughts?

5 comments:

jaqdavisone said...

Of course rascism exist in the nba it exist everywhere but to me this is stupid, of course fouls are going to be called more on blacks then whites look at the ratio. The nba has gots to be at least 95% black players therefore more calls on black players. SHeeesh My beef isn't with the nba its with David the dictator Stern who governs the nba like a white owned private school.

Anonymous said...

Jaq, you have to look at the article and what the authors of the study tried to do. Statistically, they found that black players made up 83% of the court time. And that 68% of the refs were white. They tried to factor in lots of variables, such as player aggressiveness, scrubs intentionally fouling, the fact that a disproportionate number of centers are white (and therefore more likely to foul by being the last line fo defense, etc).

They also tried to look at comparable white and black players, which is hard to do as there are comparatively few white players and styles vary widely.

I'm just uncertain how significant their statistical findings are, and think there are so many variables that it is hard to account for all of them. As I said, it would be more interesting to me to see which refs seemed to exhibit the most bias, according to their data.

Also, I'd be interested in whether white guys who appear to be hotheads or have attitude (maybe Chris Anderson, Jason Williams, Brad Miller) get whistled for more fouls than seemingly well-behaved players of both races. Or whether that also is true for Stephen Jackson, Rasheed, etc. Meaning that bad attitudes, surliiness, and such might be a more important factor than race. [I forget which coach was telling his players to learn the ref's names and to deal with them politely, in order to get the benefit of calls down the road].

Anyway, I think NBA directives and rule changes that seek to be friendly to white audiences and sponsors is probably a more important racial factor in shaping the NBA game. Things such as dress code and rules against hand-checking which favors outside shooters. But if this leads to more careful evaluation of refs, and more black refs, it's probably a good thing.

Anonymous said...

I believe Stern et al have suggested that the study was based on decisions made by 3-man crews, not by individual refs. If so, that's a tough variable to control.

Anonymous said...

From the study:
"But they said they continued to find the same phenomenon: that players who were similar in all ways except skin color drew foul calls at a rate difference of up to 4 ½ percent depending on the racial composition of an N.B.A. game’s three-person referee crew."

Since there are significantly fewer white players playing only 1/6 of the total minutes, I assume they'd need to find a black doppelganger for presumably every white player who gets significant minutes.

David Lee = _______?
Steve Nash = ______?
or
Mehmet Okur = _____?

But I suppose they are just talking about some abstract, theoretical players after trying to account for numerous variables?

This quote by one of the authors seemed rather tactless: “Basically, it suggests that if you spray-painted one of your starters white, you’d win a few more games,” Mr. Wolfers said.
This implies that all starters are black (because I assume spray-painting Okur white wouldn't have an effect on referee calls, though it probably would on Okur). It also assumes that a spray-painted player wouldn't commit more fouls or perform less well. And why not talk about spray painting a white guy a dark brown resulting in more losses?

I wonder what color Yao was for purposes of the study, or did they just remove him from the equation?

kam said...

The NBA study was more accurate because they know whcih officials made the calls. The independent study did not know which officials made the calls.

As a psychology nut, i think its possible that white officials on primarily black ref units (1 white ref, 2 black refs) might have called more fouls against white players to prove to their black colleague(s) that they are not biased towards the white player.

There is no way to know for sure from the independent study.

Necessities

Ye Newe Glory-torium

Here, dear readers, is the final resting place of all weary Knicks fans. Yes, here is where one comes when the Triangle refuses to have three sides, when biting one's lip from losing to win later is one loss too far,or when said fan simply hits 'rock' bottom. In short, "the ship be" eternally "sinking" here. Welcome aboard, rearrange the deck chairs as you please.