convincing evidence of ref bias?

Question

The facts here are kind of crazy.  It seems danny crawford does not like the mavs--or in fact, hates them.

since 2001 in the playoffs the mavs are 52-35 when crawford is not officiating..........a pretty good record.  

when danny crawford is officiation they are 1-15 (and the only win was a total blowout).  two of those losses were crucial games in the 2006 finals.  

seems pretty ridiculous to me.  here's a link explaining more:

http://www.dallasbasketball.com/fullColumn.php?id=1615

. · Accepted Answer

Most NBA games are fixed.

baudkarma · Answer

It's interesting, but it's an isolated set of numbers.  I'd like to see Crawfords numbers for the rest of the games he reffed, and numbers for the other NBA referees as well.  It wouldn't surprise me if there are a lot of situations like this, were a certain referee/team combination results in a disproportionate number of wins or losses.  I doubt it's an intentional bias... more likely certain refs are more likely to call some fouls then others, so their style favors certain teams.

Need 2 Know · Answer

Anyone watching sports over a period of time, recognizes referee bias, its just a fact of the game, especially when they get away with "foul" calls, calls that often make or break a game.

maestrosantana · Answer

First off, 52-35 is not that great....without rings. Second... If it was like 1-27 then maybe ... but did you ever think that maybe the Maves suck?????

Here is a like to prove they do! You just have to add a 5-5 to this! 

http://www.nba.com/history/records/alltime_team_playoff_wl.html

GO LAKERS!!!

Trending News

convincing evidence of ref bias?

4 Answers