SlipperySam

The moderators have decreed (and they're absolutely right) that my other thread has outlived its usefulness (especially if I've now actually ascended to bona fide "troll" stature). So I'm going to stick to my word and leave this board now, although I still intend to come back next spring to issue an invitation to our board's Florida party. I want to thank all of you who have been so courteous and receptive to an outsider. I started posting before this series started, so there was no thought of gloating

Fatty, I opened this thread by commenting on the psychology of the game. Someone else (not I) switched the topic to refereeing. Because (as I've stated above) I believe in responding when someone responds to me, I replied as civilly as I'm capable of, even though the thread had gone off-topic. I never expected my response to be a popular one. But I am not a person who avoids topics just because I'm afraid my viewpoint will be unpopular. I think both teams have suffered from questionable calls. I'm just glad that Howard was not suspended, because I like to see both teams at full strength for games as important as these. May the better team win. Ironically (maybe I foresaw your "prostate" comment) it happens that I just did have my prostate checked. Other than the fact that I think the doctor enjoyed it a little too much, everything turned out fine. Thanks for your concern. You do your board proud with your comments. SlipperySam

Drew, After your apology, the only comment I made to you was to agree with you about DeRosa. If that somehow offended you, I apologize. As for leaving this board, I said (check it out): "After this thread dies down, I don't plan to stick around this board in the near future because I understand that the timing's just not right." It appears that this thread has not died down, as your own response helps to prove. I believe in responding to people who take the time to respond to me (whether their responses are positive or negative). SlipperySam

Cunning, I'll tell YOU again that these things even out. Perhaps people are more sensitive to the calls that go against them. For example, Perk got called for a key moving pick on which the replay clearly showed no more movement than as if someone blinked. For example, I don't know whether you watched any of the Celtics-Cavs series, but Celtics fans were justifiably up in arms about some of what Lebron got away with (including one drive on which he took three strides and THEN hopped with both feet before shooting. The Celtics were also brutalized on a number of hard foul situations. So what did the Celtics do? They followed Havlicek's example, played smarter and harder, and won the series going away. Perhaps the Magic will react to adversity in the same manner. Perhaps they won't. But it defies logic to think any single team is a recipient of disproportionately unfair treatment from the refs. Because many fans of every single team feel that way. I wish you had access to Stan and were able to ask him, "Do you think you lost two games because of the refs? At your practices, are you standing around moaning and groaning about the refs, or are you focusing on how to overcome executional deficiencies and mental errors?" Are the refs somehow keeping Lewis from scoring? Did the refs somehow mess up Carter on those free throws? By the same token, did the refs give special treatment to Pierce when he hit his two freebies in the clutch? Did the refs cast a favorable spell on KG and Rondo when they hit those clutch jumpers? Did the refs force JJ to make a huge mental error? Were the refs responsible for all of the gripes about the performances of Magic players that I've been reading on the "anger" thread? Hey, if it floats your boat to seek a repository of blame other than the team you very understandably love, that's obviously your right. If you really want to believe that bad calls go principally against your team, be my guest. I've been through a lot of wars and a lot of championships and a lot of frustrating seasons with a lot of teams, and neither of those options happens to represent reality to me. Take care, SlipperySam

Drew, I agree with you about DeRosa. I never saw anything like that before. If he wanted to hurt the fan, he should have passed the ball harder and lower. Was he trying to joke with the guy? I wouldn't be surprised if there's no rule covering what he did because it's too bizarre to envision as a possible occurrence. SlipperySam

Cunning, I'm not at all sure about the "intelligent" compliment. But I guarantee that I see everything you're talking about. I just don't happen to agree with the conspiracy complaints about refs. I understand that you and others on this board are justifiably upset and even enraged by the recent turn of events. And you apparently feel that the Magic is outthinking and outplaying the Celtics but that the refs are interfering just enough to tip the balance to the Celtics. The pure and simple fact is that, more often than not, the team that's more aggressive usually winds up not complaining as much about the refs. (Can you honestly say that team is the Magic so far in this series?) Bad calls happen, but I've never noticed any systematic favoratism toward a specific team. When the Celtics lose, I point to how they were outplayed, rather than seeking external excuses, when analyzing the present and looking toward the future. I once asked John Havlicek how he coped with bad calls against him. His answer? "I just play smarter and harder." SlipperySam

Magic2010Champs, If you mean I'll probably have croaked by next year, I'm not planning on it. But thanks for the good wishes. If you mean I probably won't be posting on this board next year, I just love antagonistic predictions that I personally have the power to thwart. After this thread dies down, I don't plan to stick around this board in the near future because I understand that the timing's just not right. But I still intend to issue an invitation to our Florida party next spring. SlipperySam

Thanks, O-dub. Maybe we'll meet down the road. SlipperySam

ninjapj, Thanks. I understand. Maybe, when we have our Florida board party next year, I'll make a return cameo and invite you guys. (Probably seven of you would outnumber us.) Thanks again, Sam

Thanks Emory. Maybe the timing was just wrong. As far as I know, I've had nothing to do with the outcomes of the past two games. I know I have no need to be someone's scapegoat. Whatever! SlipperySam

Drew, I'm sorry you feel that way. I guess some people feel that being a good fan of a team necessarily means hating anyone who's not. Interesting priorities. I just thought some convivial exchanges across forums could be interesting. We've found that to be the case with a number of Lakers fans on our Boston forum. I guess I just picked the wrong forum to approach. My bad. I'll simply say that, on our forum, we'd be happy to hear from anyone. The only requirement is civility. It's called Sam's Celtics Forum and may easily be googled. And you're also welcome to send me private emails at SlipSamCelt@aol.com. I won't bother you guys again. Thanks to a number of you for making me feel welcome, and good luck. SlipperySam

Cunning, Congratulations on being a working professional. So few of us are. In answer to your diversion from my original topic on this thead, yes, even in Boston, we understand that a city is not a village. But thanks for the clarification. To continue with you digression, I'm actually reasonably current with the controversies and legal developments involving referees. And there have certainly been refs who are worse than others...including some downright bad apples. I just don't think they've happened to favor large cities in the way that, for example, media promos do. Most of my observations over the years are that fans who complain that refs favor their favorite teams' opponents are equal opportunity complainers regardless of the city size represented by the opponent in question. In fact, now that I think about it, I never once saw or heard anyone say, "The refs constantly let Reggie Miller get away with kicking out on his jumper and initiating contact...but that really doesn't bother me because Indy is a smaller market." Yes, I do think refs should ideally "just let people play basketball and call the game fair(ly)." World peace is also a worthy goal. But, unfortunately, basketball is a game played by human beings and officiated and regulated by human beings. Some people may choose to preoccupy themselves with the inevitable imperfections resulting from those facts. I don't. And, as for providing what you do or don't "want to see," I guess I'll stick to providing my earnest opinions instead, if you don't mind. Enjoy tonight's game. SlipperySam

Cunning, I'd like to reply to your post, but I'm having just a bit of trouble understanding it. For example, the double negative in your first sentence suggests you think I AM basing some conclusions about the entire series on just one game. If so, I assure you that's not the case. As for referees, I tend not to believe in refs' tendencies for or against any single team. My philosophy is that bad calls happen. And, if a team allows its opponent to remain close enough so that one or two bad calls make the difference in a game, shame on them. I feel that players who become preoccupied by the refs may be losing more important focus; and I believe the same thing applies to me as a fan. Virtually every team's message board I've seen (including my own) includes people who think their team is getting a raw deal from refs. It's mathematically impossible that they could all be right. I'm often unhappy when a particular call goes against my team; but I've never believed there was some consistent referee bias for or against them. If you want to explain your points a little more, I'll be happy to try to respond more clearly. Thanks, SlipperySam Sam

In 61 years of following the Celtics (sorry), it would be easy to think I've pretty much seen it all. But, unless the Magic are a lot more permissive than the Celtics, we're all somewhat undernourished when it comes to our appetites for information on the players' psyches and what really goes on behind the scenes. I'm enclosing a link to an article that appears in today's Boston Globe: http://www.boston.com/sports/b...n_comes_full_circle/ It contains a reference to a disagreement between two Celtics players during Game One of this series. And it got me to thinking about which is preferable:

In 61 years of following the Celtics (sorry), it would be easy to think I've pretty much seen it all. But, unless the Magic are a lot more permissive than the Celtics, we're all somewhat undernourished when it comes to our appetites for information on the players' psyches and what really goes on behind the scenes. I'm enclosing a link to an article that appears in today's Boston Globe: http://www.boston.com/sports/b...n_comes_full_circle/ It contains a reference to a disagreement between two Celtics players during Game One of this series. And it got me to thinking about which is preferable: