The NBA’s intentions were good when it decided to add a dose of clarity to officiating down the stretch of close games. Toward the tale end of last season, newly-implemented “Last Two-Minutes Reports” received nothing but positive attention across the basketball world. The league’s decision to publicly address questionable calls seemed a great one.
But that all changed once the postseason tipped off in mid-April. Several matchups between marquee teams not only came down to the wire, but included a series of head-scratching decisions or non-decisions by referees that helped decide games’ outcomes. Who could forget Dion Waiters shoving Manu Ginobili while inbounding the ball during the closing moments of Game 2 in the Western Conference Finals?
Not the officials, obviously. A couple weeks after opposition to Last Two-Minutes Reports reached its high-water mark, the National Basketball Referees Association called for an end to the process.
The NBRA’s official release on the matter can be read in full HERE. Notable reasons behind their position – which mostly stand in contrast to those of other L2MR opponents – are below.
Transparency does nothing to change the outcome of the game.
Transparency encourages anger and hostility towards NBA officials.
Eforts to promote transparency have encouraged the idea that perfection in ofciating is possible. Perfection is neither possible nor desirable; if every possible infraction were to be called, the game would be unwatchable and would cease to exist as a form of entertainment in this country.
Transparency has been misused as a catalyst by some teams to mobilize fans against the officials in an attempt to coerce more favorable treatment.
LeBron James and Steve Kerr highlight a lengthy list of players and coaches who came out against Last Two-Minutes Reporting since the playoffs began. And with the referees echoing their overarching stance, it seems only a matter of time until the league repeals what it called officiating transparency.
(NBRA)
