GatewayRedbirds.com

Arthur Dent wrote:

StL Dan wrote:Lesee....the NBA is made up primarily black ballers...maybe 75% or more? And, more fouls are called on blacks than whites?

Truly mind boggling.

That's not what the study found. They found that white refs were more likely to call fouls on black players and black refs were more likely to call fouls on white players.

I'm a simpleton.

It's all bologna.

The biggest problem with this study was that they didn't actually watch the games -- they looked at BOX SCORES. If more white players got away with contact fouls in the paint, then you have to physically see the game, not pore through the results.

And should anyone really have taken this seriously? If you even halfway paid attention to the NBA during Shaq's dominant days, you would have noticed that he would go to the free throw line about 400 times per game.

GatewaySnayke wrote:The biggest problem with this study was that they didn't actually watch the games -- they looked at BOX SCORES. .

A highly publicized, much touted academic study using horribly flawed data? How can this be??

Could the people who did this study even pick a basketball out of a lineup?

Radio_Bugtussle wrote:

GatewaySnayke wrote:The biggest problem with this study was that they didn't actually watch the games -- they looked at BOX SCORES. .

A highly publicized, much touted academic study using horribly flawed data? How can this be??

Could the people who did this study even pick a basketball out of a lineup?

I'm quite sure those who conducted the study are well acquainted with the National Basketball Association and the young men who play ball.

GatewaySnayke wrote:The biggest problem with this study was that they didn't actually watch the games -- they looked at BOX SCORES.

The reason they did that is the NBA refuses to release that data not because they didn't think of the issue. The NBA claims that their own internal evaluation reverses these results, but they refuse to release the data to back up that claim. (They claim it's confidential personnel data, but the games are all broadcast on television, so that seems rather bogus to me.) Also, the other proposed methodological flaws (considering player's position, veteran status, home vs. away, etc.) are compensated for in the paper which is available free online.

It seems that all the methodological criticism is really about not wanting to accept the result.

The differences in the foul call rate were small, and no one is claiming that these results prove anybody is a racist.

This "study" proved three things to me.

1-Academic types are quite willing to accept obviously flawed methodology.

2-No subject is too trivial for study.

3-Anything can wind up in print or on the air if it's a slow enough news day.

I'd love to see the results of such a study on penalties called on Canadians, Europeans, Asians and Americans by NHL referees.

Now that would be interesting.

Radio_Bugtussle wrote:1-Academic types are quite willing to accept obviously flawed methodology.

There is nothing obviously flawed about the methodology. (I might add that from the NBA’s description of its own counter-study, the methodology there was obviously flawed.) The authors used a huge sample of all the NBA games between 1991 and 2004. Unless there is some weird systemic bias like black officials making significantly more foul calls than white officials, the large sample will provide averaging, and good results are still possible without knowing the specific official who made the call.

StL Dan wrote:I'd love to see the results of such a study on penalties called on Canadians, Europeans, Asians and Americans by NHL referees.

Now that would be interesting.

Indeed, it would be although there are significantly less penalty calls than foul calls, so it might be more difficult to study.

Arthur Dent wrote:

Radio_Bugtussle wrote:1-Academic types are quite willing to accept obviously flawed methodology.

There is nothing obviously flawed about the methodology. (I might add that from the NBA’s description of its own counter-study, the methodology there was obviously flawed.) The authors used a huge sample of all the NBA games between 1991 and 2004. Unless there is some weird systemic bias like black officials making significantly more foul calls than white officials, the large sample will provide averaging, and good results are still possible without knowing the specific official who made the call.

Maybe they did this, but I'd be interested to know whether they took position into account. 1) If there's a big difference in fouls committed by guards vs. post players, and 2) if there's a disparity in the racial makeup of the positions.