Tweet
by David P. Greisman - The officiating was bad, they said, and perhaps corrupt. They expounded on conspiracy theories — that the outcome was rigged, they said, and that it was rigged because the league had a financial interest in what happened.
The reasons behind their conspiracy talk made sense, but there was never anything more than circumstantial evidence. The Sacramento Kings had lost Game 6 of the 2002 NBA Western Conference Finals to the Los Angeles Lakers, and they would go on to lose Game 7 and the series, too. The Lakers ultimately won the championship. The Kings and their fans, meanwhile, would spend years wondering whether everything that had gone down had truly been on the up-and-up.
The most common theory: The NBA had wanted the ratings and profits that could come with a Game 7. The league had the referees call more fouls on the Kings, sending Lakers players to the line and in essence giving them the win.
It is a perceived conflict of interest, being both the arbiter of the rules and the promoter of the sport. It is a situation that has led to allegations in the past, often from sore losers who are looking to latch on to some excuse for their defeat, and they are often fueled by circumstances that help support their conspiracies. It is unavoidable in the major pro sports: the league provides the structure by which rules are enforced and money is made. There are no teams, and no games, without it. [Click Here To Read More]
The reasons behind their conspiracy talk made sense, but there was never anything more than circumstantial evidence. The Sacramento Kings had lost Game 6 of the 2002 NBA Western Conference Finals to the Los Angeles Lakers, and they would go on to lose Game 7 and the series, too. The Lakers ultimately won the championship. The Kings and their fans, meanwhile, would spend years wondering whether everything that had gone down had truly been on the up-and-up.
The most common theory: The NBA had wanted the ratings and profits that could come with a Game 7. The league had the referees call more fouls on the Kings, sending Lakers players to the line and in essence giving them the win.
It is a perceived conflict of interest, being both the arbiter of the rules and the promoter of the sport. It is a situation that has led to allegations in the past, often from sore losers who are looking to latch on to some excuse for their defeat, and they are often fueled by circumstances that help support their conspiracies. It is unavoidable in the major pro sports: the league provides the structure by which rules are enforced and money is made. There are no teams, and no games, without it. [Click Here To Read More]
Comment