FanNation - The Republic of Sport

This is stupid, there are more black players than white players, so of course calls are going to go against a black player more often...if anything, black refs "helping a brotha out" is just as bad and can't be left alone.

THE FACTS
1) the NBA's black-player population is around 77 percent, while the white-player population is around 21 percent.
2) 68 percent of officials were white

so white blows whistle against a black player that helps another black player

Yea sound like racism LOL.....this is stupid

It says "at a greater rate," but the stat is pointless. I bet I could prove that black players score baskets at a higher rate, also -- does that mean the actual basketball is racist against white players? Or that black people dunk more, are the shoe companies racist against white people? As for Nash not being fast or athletic, maybe you should watch the game a little closer, Luv2Ball...

I don't think that this should be dismissed as easily as some here have thus far done so. That said, there are potential flaws. The NBA apparently did its own study that contradicts the one talked about here. The main difference is the NBA broke it down by referee, while the scholars who did this study had to rely upon more general data. That could have tipped the numbers, but, unfortunately, the NBA can't [won't?] release that study due to a deal with the union to keep the numbers confidential.

As for why Kobe has more difficulty than Nash--well, they both have less difficulty than perimeter players of years past because the NBA has changed the rules allowing for greater penetration. But it is difficult comparing Nash to Kobe because they play two different positions and, also, they play on different teams--teams may have to sag off Nash a little because he has Marion, Stoudemire, Raja Bell, Boris Diaw, and Leonardo Barbosa to pass to. Kobe, when he passes, doesn't have that luxury. The real comparison would be to Leonardo Barbosa or [if he ever played] Marcus Banks. That comparison would isolate the variables [the teammates and position] that I just mentioned. Barbosa, from what I've seen, doesn't have a much more difficult time getting to the hole or scoring, but I'll leave that debate to somebody who has seen more Suns games.

Guys, ITS A STUDY. There is a lilbit of true and a lilbit of false and thats that.

Another point: Kobe has the most free throw attempts of all players in the NBA. The number one white player on the list is Dirk Nowitski at 14. Nash is 82nd. That isn't the most fool proof indicator of who gets fouled more, but it should make us pause when comparing him to Kobe (1), Baron Davis (39 despite injured), Wade (16th, despite injured) and so on. It may reflect different positions on the team [those guys also shoot more], but it is useful to know.

Many of you don't understand what you read. The study reveals that white refs are calling fouls on black players at a rate higher than what can be expected from their 77% representation in the player population. The league needs to address this problem immediately.

http://www.82games.com/fouldraw.htm

This is accurate up to Feb 13th:

2006-07 NBA Player Foul Drawing Leaders (through Feb. 13th)

Kobe drew the most personal fouls. Nash wasn't in the top 20.

Wade drew the most shooting fouls. Nash wasn't in the top 20.

From what I can see, the argument that Nash is untouchable is simply untrue. It has nothing to back it up but personal suspicion.

It's not as simple as that. Kobe and Wade drive to the hoop far more often than Nash. It's natural that they would draw more personal fouls. That doesn't mean that Nash isn't receiving preferential treatment.

What about Richard Hamilton? He doesn't drive to the hole as much as they do, but received more personal fouls.

It's possible that Nash does receive preferential treatment. But there hasn't been any evidence presented except for [potentially fallible] personal witness accounts.

Jarobiso, I agree that no evidence has been presented beyond anecdotal in Nash's case.

From the long string of comments regarding Nash, my only conclusion is that Luv2Ball is racist.

First off, Luv2Ball, you are racist. 2nd, Nash is Canadian, the "Great White Hope" is an American thing, and second of all, Nash is the reigning 2-time MVP! Jordan is my favorite player of all time, but I am very aware that he got all the calls in his favor because his last name was Jordan. I'm not sure if you are aware, but Jordan is black. I'm serious, go do a google search on him... he's black, it's crazy!

Maybe white players commit fewer fouls.

^^ I agree with you about the 'no racism' but times change, there hasn't been a player like Jordan and i seriously doubt there ever will be, so for now...the media will have to report racism wherever it can.

i've played with white players and black players, and from my experience blacks have bad attitudes and if they are **** the dribble, they get mad and commit unnecessary fouls.

The study is about who commitsmost fouls, not who gets fouled the most. It's also a comparison on how many fouls the white refs call on different players compared to the black refs. There's still 77% black population in the league, but the study indicates that the white refs call more fouls on the black players than the black refs do.

The real question is: who's being racist? The white refs or the black refs? Are the fouls being called legitimate? This study implies that the white refs are the racist ones because they call more fouls on black players. How about the black refs being racist because they DON'T call legitimate fouls on the black players?

Is it that white refs are calling all fouls against black players and not all fouls on white players? Are black refs calling all fouls against white players and not all fouls on black players? Either way, it would be wrong. Yet being that black players outnumber white players, and white refs outnumber black refs, the numbers have to go against the black player.

No disrespect intended.

Remember folks,
The study which hasn't been release yet, but to a few media outlets, mentions rates not simple quantites. They are saying that referees call more fouls per black player than white player if the populations were narrowed 1:1. It says that the white refs have a considerable weight in how the numbers seem lopsided. Now does this mean anything? No. The NBA rightfully call this untrue because they measured referee teams (of 3) as opposed to individual refs. The study chose a set that makes scrutinizing this claim difficult. The NBA "claims" to have per single ref foul calls and more robust statistics and says those statistics point to the study being fallacy.

Why is this about racism? Racism is wayyyy to strong a word to be using. This sounds more like a case of personal biases coming into play.I'm certain that over time referee's know who fouls constantly and who doesn't and a pattern develops which has the ref's calling some non-fouls, and others letting some fouls go. Men can't stay impartial when it comes to sports: I prefer Tiger to Phil, I like Crosby more then Ovechkin, I'd prefer A-Rod to hit 76 then Barry to hit 756. Why? Because I am a sports fan. We know referee's love basketball, or they wouldn't have become referees, so you have to figure they have biases towards the players they see everyday, and they know how they play. If you brought in referee's from Europe for a ten-game test, I bet the foul calls and, specifically, who was fouling, would be right in line with the NBA ref's calls (except for the Raps -- they would be biased for the Raps)