From: davem@uvmark.uucp (Dave Meeks)
Subject: Re: Talk about bias... (was Re: game decided on last play)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 92 18:36:16 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Vmark Software, Inc.

In article <1992Aug11.194828.21445@cbnewsk.cb.att.com> lor@cbnewsk.cb.att.com (edward.lor) writes:
>In article <1992Aug11.005257.18643@uvmark.uucp> davem@uvmark.uucp (Dave Meeks) writes:
>>True.  But Ed, YOUR "evidence" is nothing but impression either.  It is YOUR
>>impression that certain events were bogus, and impression shared by other
>>people (possibly), but not shared by a lot of people as well.  
>But dumbo, I got your own words that there is such a thing as a "superstar
>favoritism". Not every team enjoyed the superstar roster for such a long time 
>span.  In other words, the Celtics have been one of the two teams enjoying
>superstar favoritism since 1980. That's not an impression, that's your own 
>testimony.

So, ... The Bulls with Jordan and Pippen (two all-stars, Olympians, etc..) 
aren't up there?  Detroit???  What about teams like Philadelphia and Milwaukee
and others in the early 80s??  I guess Dr. J didn't qualify, nor did Moses, 
etc...  If we go all the back to the early 80s, there are a lot of superstar
players, many of which are HOF/potential HOF players.  
>
>Yep, the list I provided. 

So, the Bird play happened AFTER THE BUZZER???
>
>But none of the players you name (except Moses) are HOF players. So Celtics
>have been enjoying the favoritism of 3 HOFers and 1 legend over the Bird/
>Magic era. The teams you named either 

But this is not something you can determine at this point.  Neither Bird
nor Magic (or Jordan) were HOF players in the early 80s.  They were superstars
that have had careers that have made them legends.  Many of the players listed
may very well become HOF players, only time will tell.  You look in retrospect
and try to apply EdLorian logic on them now.  Did Bird/Magic/Jordan get
superstar favoratism in the early 80s because the refs knew they were going
to the HOF???

>1) do not have players of HOF-caliber

I don't know, I would say a lot of the players listed have HOF potential.

>Oh, you mean judgement in enforcing the rules? That's not the judgement 
>call we are talking about.

Can't really seperate the two, except in a perfect world.  When dealing with
human judgement in enforcing the rules, the whole situation becomes a
judgement call.  

><1992Jun17.044736.9173@new.cs.brandeis.edu>. You admitted that the
>list of BG calls (the type) are just home jobs and the 7 calls "bad calls". 
>What more establishment do I need?

So now you are saying that I admitted that the list of BG calls are just 
home jobs???  No, I admitted that the "types of things" you conisder bogus
are nothing but home jobs that happen everywhere.  And where did I say the
7 calls were "bad calls".   Talk about strawman arguments...

>Yep, you can do that. I hope you can assemble your list of bogus calls
>for every team from 1980-1992 too, the period of our argument.

Don't need to.  Just need to list 7 calls I consider bogus for each team 
during this period, as that was the list you  provided.
-- 
David T. Meeks                    ||" We are jigsaw pieces, aligned on the 
VMark Software, Inc.              ||  perimeter edge, 
uvmark!davem@merk.com             ||  interlocked through a missing piece"
davem%uvmark@merk.com             ||" ...This world is totally Fugazi"
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro