Who Cares?

Referee Bill Kennedy, following slur by Rajon Rondo, announces he's gay

Veteran NBA referee Bill Kennedy has announced he is gay.

"I am proud to be an NBA referee and I am proud to be a gay man," Kennedy told Yahoo Sports. "I am following in the footsteps of others who have self-identified in the hopes that will send a message to young men and women in sports that you must allow no one to make you feel ashamed of who you are." ...

See the whole story here, courtesy of ESPN.

Kicking Back Comments: So before PC Principal comes to find me, the title of the article is not meant to demean Bill Kennedy for announcing he is a homosexual.

My comment is meant to ask, what difference does it make if Rondo made a slur of any type toward a referee? Why should it matter if the particular referee is gay or not? Rondo should get the book thrown at him for his words, period. 

The punishment handed down to Rondo is, by NBA standards, fairly astounding. I believe this is the first time an NBA player has been suspended for comments to a referee in the last 3 or 4 years, where a fine suffices in such cases.

From reports, the comment Rondo made came after he was given a lightning fast pair of technical fouls and was going to get his moneys worth for being run. These comments included a "homophobic slur" in his rant. That is if Rondo knew Kennedy was gay.

This has a couple of dimensions however as the Celtics and Kennedy have some history. Specifically Doc Rivers and Rondo have had other unpleasant conversations with Kennedy in the past, and some reports have it going both ways. Also, Kennedy's sexual orientation was to many an "open secret" to NBA teams and referees alike. While understandably, Kennedy is a private man and did not share this fact publicly, it was apparently known in NBA circles. 

[For any who care to take the flip side of the coin where no one knew of Kennedy's orientation, then frankly this is not an issue at all other than Rondo's bad behavior.]

Why then does it deserve special treatment from the NBA front office?

So we have a player popping off to a referee ... and who used a slur during the tirade ...
What is so unusual?

How many times have we as referees (or in traffic) collectively had our sexuality, gender, race, family relationships, heritage, and just about anything else a player (or other driver) can think of questioned openly?

Please don't misunderstand me, it is not right, and I am not condoning it, but to say it is rare is just factually incorrect.

Is the NBA now going to suspend, not just fine, ANY player who uses that slur without regard to whom it is directed to? If so, why have they not up to this point?

There is a double standard at play here and if the NBA is going to fine players for calling referees names ... that's great and it seems appropriate. If the NBA is going to start playing PC Principal by suspending players for what they think is "insensitive", not so great and are in for a world of trouble. (As one example, they were in Mexico for this game ... what is Rondo called Kennedy a slur in Spanish that he did not understand? Still a suspension?)

If Rondo was really demeaning Kennedy regarding his sexuality, and the NBA can look into his heart and determine that, a single game without pay is not nearly enough punishment for something so heinous. If this was truly the case (as Tom Ziller seems to believe in his recent article) Rondo should go for a very, very, very long time.

Instructive on this is Roberto Alomar and what his words cost him in time and treasure ... or some may say, ultimately gained him in understanding. For those who forgot, not only did Alomar spit on umpire John Hirschbeck but then made reference to his kids, one who just died from ALS and another who at that time was diagnosed with it. Hirschbeck had to be physically restrained from doing physical harm to Alomar the next day by Umpire Legend Jim Joyce.

Interestingly, I wonder if the whole thing actually forced Kennedy to make the public announcement of his homosexuality. As without Rondo getting popped and the NBA making more of it than they have anything in the past regarding dissent, does this even come up?

I for one am not sure, but would hope it was a discussion with Kennedy on such an intensely personal issue and not a way for the new commish to "show force."

For the dissent however, who cares, Rondo was mad and popped off. Throw the book at him and lets move on. If truly the alternative, get Rondo out, and move on.

Brilliant Analysis from A Legend

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar: Welcome to the Finger-Wagging Olympics

It's time to look at ourselves — and our collective moral outrage — in the mirror, says former NBA player Kareem Abdul-Jabbar.

Moral outrage is exhausting. And dangerous. The whole country has gotten a severe case of carpal tunnel syndrome from the newest popular sport of Extreme Finger Wagging. Not to mention the neck strain from Olympic tryouts for Morally Superior Head Shaking. All over the latest in a long line of rich white celebrities to come out of the racist closet. (Was it only a couple days ago that Cliven Bundy said blacks would be better off picking cotton as slaves? And only last June Paula Deen admitted using the “N” word?) ...

See the whole article here, courtesy of Time.

Kicking Back Comments: Brilliant analysis from one of the games legends. It for me was also a stark reminder that many of these folks are more than the one dimension they are best known for. Then again, this situation has also reminded me that there are some that are no good at the one thing they are supposed to be doing.

The former is an important lesson to remember as people are multi-dimensional and while they may be known for one thing, likely have many other skills to back that up. The latter unfortunately is that some (not just Senator Reid which I cited) will use any misfortune to their own advantage or gain.

This is after all the variety that we could describe as the spice of life.

 

A Tale of Two Sports Orginizations

After a bit of traveling, I am back in the States and firmly at my keyboard. I have to say too, that I could not have returned at a better time to make this comparison.

Recently we have been witness to two separate incidents of racism, and each organizing authorities action to them over this last week.

First, we have the NBA Clippers' owner Donald Sterling whose private conversation was surreptitiously recorded (in abrogation of CA law) making racist comments in the presence of his girlfriend. As a result, the NBA commissioner, upon a very brief deliberation period, suspended Sterling for life.

Now this is not to debate if it was too long, too short, or just right a suspension. Nor is it an invitation to debate the legality of the action. You can bet this will be taken to the courts and debated there, Donald is going to sue everybody over this one.

It is however meant to serve as a juxtaposition to the recent comments by FIFA president Sepp Blatter who stated after a contemporary event of racism with Dani Alves, where fans threw him a banana at a corner kick that, "... FIFA will not tolerate racism at this summer's World Cup."

What? Sepp, what about the incident that JUST HAPPENED!?!?!

As usual, it was a gutless response from FIFA to a serious issue.

Just for a second put the two next to each other:

NBA - Life Ban. Near instant trust restored in the league.

FIFA - Nothing. Except another promise to do more soon. Trust chasm widens even more (if possible).

Sounds about what I am expecting from FIFA in regard to governance ... nothing.

That said, Dani and compatriots reaction was simply brilliant in the face of such stupidity. Take a peek at the article. It was a unified and clever response to something vile.

Another "bad guy" gets away

Special thanks to John U. for bringing this one forward.

So with March madness safely behind us, I was mildly interested in basketball for a bit, but am over it now.

One thing I am not over though is the resignation of Ed Rush as PAC 12 Director if Officials.

Now for any who follow basketball, or referees, you likely know who Ed Rush is. For those who do not, he served as a referee in the NBA at age 26 (the youngest ever at the time), and eventually after a storied on court career, became the NBA director if officials from 1998 to 2003. In 2007 Mr. Rush started consulting with PAC 12, and became their Director Of Officials in May of 2012.

As has been reported in a variety of places, Mr. Rush "bullied" officials, and offered "$5,000 and a trip to Cancun" if they called a technical foul on Sean Miller of the Arizona Wildcats. My immediate reaction was somewhat bemused, until I found out he chose (or was forced) to retire his position after "an anonymous official" at the internal presentation felt "threatened" by the comment, and fans and the media swarmed at the inference of impropriety.

Earth to the "anonymous official":
You're never going to make it in the big leagues ... or even the college game for that matter.
Put on some big boy pants and try something else.

Earth to the media who helped cause the resignation:
Keep doing what you are doing. You are fools, and keep me "employed" as a blogger.

Now assuming momentarily that the comment was actually spoken, and I believe it was, as several officials in attendance corroborated it to be true ... what fool takes that seriously?

You would think it is an NFL team paying for players to hurt other players. While both on the surface are ludicrous, do we really think this was anything more than a joke, or a way to make a point, when discussed in such an open forum?

Of course not.

Does anyone out there, including the "official" who needs to don his adult pants think that discussions about "problem players" or "problem coaches" is inappropriate?

How many times as an official, or a parent, or as a spectator something like, "ooh I'd like to ..."? 

A rope, a tree, let's hang the ... Heard that one? Why are these people allowed to go on?

Lets go back to problem players. This conversation happens all the time, and yes, names are named in the big leagues ... and in the little leagues too folks.

Well this seems unfair you grouse ... somehow inappropriate and all.

Well how do all you people who clammer for match control think it's going to happen? Just let it unfold in front of all of our eyes and take a guess at what might happen next? Just react without a plan? Do you actually think that referees put some thought into managing the people behind the uniform and how to effectively deal with them to manage the match as a whole?

Let me take a soccer example. A former coach of the NE Revolution who was a tremendous player was particularly boisterous on the touchline. Not nasty, not foul (in the normal sense of the word), but always challenging, always pushing, and crossed the line several times.

As a younger 4th official in the league, I would have to regularly deal with him, and enjoyed the challenge as I saw through what he was doing and have (to this day) immense respect for him as a person. Guess what though, there were strategies we discussed to help us all manage the match. Most of the time they worked too.

Did my knowledge and discussion, sometimes in a joking way ("oh we'll have to send him this match") somehow get interpreted as "we need to take that action"?

Of course not ... it's just hyperbole to make a point.

Same thing here folks, it was clearly just a way to make a point.

Don't believe me? Fine.

Ask the other officials in attendance what they thought (which was done by the head of security for the PAC 12) ... and guess what, NO ONE ELSE TOOK IT SERIOUSLY.

Note to official big boy pants ... you stand alone.

What is truly sad is that something (or someone) so stupid serves to topple the career of someone who can do some real good in that situation.

By all accounts Ed was agressive in his pursuit of making these officials better, and anyone who really, really wants to be good at that craft needs to be able to get brutally honest to be able to do so.

Ed was that guy and this is a loss for the PAC 12.

By the way, internet mogul Mark Cuban was reported as saying, circa Jan. 8, 2002: "Ed Rush might have been a great ref, but I wouldn’t hire him to manage a Dairy Queen. His interest is not in the integrity of the game or improving the officiating ..." and some have reported is gleeful at the report of Ed's resignation.

That's okay ... I don't hold Mr. Cuban out as much of an athlete anyway. He to me is much more akin to an athletic supporter, like most fan(atics) who choose his path of dumping on good people.

After all of this, the one who was held out as a bad actor to make a point, Sean Miller, I am certain will get "kid gloves" treatment in the days ahead in a feigned attempt to avoid any "impropriety."

Rubbish.

Kudos to Tom Weir (USA Today) and the Chicago Bulls

Often times I rail and whine here about the need for adults to act like adults and stop blaming a referee for their own circumstances. Tom Weir and the Chicago Bulls did exactly that ... they did not blame the referee.

In Weir's story (Did refs hose Bulls last night? Not really) he provides a thoughtful analysis of the free throw situation across the series thus far, clearly indicating that the result was "fairly predictable" that the Bulls did not get to the line that much in game 5. He actually used facts, real facts to show that:

Going into Game 4the FT tries were near even, with Miami holding a 68-67 edge. That wasn't to be expected, given that Miami was one of the NBA's best teams at getting to the line during the regular season. The Heat's 2,288 FT attempts ranked third, behind only Denver (2,429) and Oklahoma City (2,401). The Bulls ranked 11th.

Equally heartening was that the Bulls did not play "the ref card", as Weir calls it. There were several great quotes from the Bulls who, I think, had a very enlightened view of what happened.

The Bulls didn't play the ref card. Carlos Boozer told the Chicago Tribune that, "We've never been an excuse team. We're not going to start being an excuse team now. They got fouled, I guess we didn't."

Added Taj Gibson: "Whatever happens, you can't argue with the ref. They're going to make the call, so you have to keep playing. You can't hang your head and whine about the call. You have to keep playing."

It gave me great hope that there are some level heads out there that at least recognize, even if the referee is wrong, that you have to keep going. Believe me, referees reflect deeply on mistakes they made, and even ones they did not, to make things better. Having a player or coach bark at you in the press does not make things any better, or help the overall situation.

Kudos to Mr. Weir and the Bulls.

LeBron James Part Owner of Liverpool FC?

No folks it is not a mis-print.

The deal between Mr. James and Fenway Sports Group will give Mr. James a minority interest in the soccer club Liverpool, which FSG owns. FSG, which also owns the Boston Red Sox, is partnering with Mr. James's sports-marketing firm, LRMR Branding & Marketing to become the exclusive world-wide representative for Mr. James.

See the full article "LeBron James, Fenway in Deal" courtesy of the WSJ for all the details.

NBA: Referee's Don't Count

The NY Times ran a piece the other day here talking about how the NBA intend to reign in players whining and in general carrying on in front of everyone when they may disagree with a decision from the referee.

I whole heartedly agree with the decision to do so as with any game, if it is not attractive to the spectators, there is a problem they need to resolve as it gets in the way of making money.

I can recall a similar problem a few years back in the "D League". There were some players who would get carried away, or even as a normal part of their lexicon would use the word "f*$k", as both an adjective and verb in every possible conjugation they could think of. The best of course when they used it as both parts of speech in the same sentence.

This had the predictable result of insulting the family of (4) who paid $30 of so to see a match on a nice summer evening on the cape ... for example.

This led to the predictable result of the league requiring the referees to be more stern about the language used by players and there was an expectation we would deal with it ... or the league will deal with us.

I have to admit, it did get better for a time, with the occasional slip that rang the top of the rafters. Over time it became more engraved to the players to just not do that ... and they responded well. I have my doubts personally about how the NBA players will react, but I guess we will see this season.

Where I laughed out load is in this part of the article:

League officials decided to crack down based on feedback from owners and market research.

While I agree this is a critical aspect of such a business, how about the abuse to the referees and respecting them as participants? How about respecting the game and not acting like a cry baby on steroids when something does not go your way? It takes market research and owners losing money to move the needle for something like this?

Yipes. I guess gone are the days of doing the right thing for the right reason. Generally it would seem our decisions are based on poll questions, and not a collective compass we have to keep our actions true.

We shall see how this one unfolds and how the NBA responds to the first sign of trouble.

I would opine the NFL has already summarily failed that test with allowing the Jets to allow Braylon Edwards a free pass on his recent DUI incident, as apparently there is no suspension on a first offence, regardless of how drunk a player was at the time of operation. Oh yeah, he's not being allowed to start on Sunday. I guess that counts.