NBA's Integrity in Jeopardy

The recent news of NBA referee Tim Donaghy betting on basketball games he officiated in and influencing point spreads might not take the spotlight from Michael Vick, but it could be far more damaging. While Vick's recent indictment will hurt the Atlanta Falcons and his shoe sales, the integrity of the NBA could be at stake if the situation is not properly dealt with.

It is one thing for a player to say that he bet on games, even his own, but for an official to do so is far more dangerous. Pete Rose admitted to betting on games he played in and managed, but he (supposedly) always bet on his team to win. For an ultra-competitive player like Rose, it is hard to imagine him throwing a game. Even if he did, he could not lose a game entirely by himself. An official, however, can have far more influence. In baseball or football this could be tracked much more easily and the authorities could figure out if an official is corrupt. While the strike zone is somewhat open to interpretation, instant replay is so heavily used that it would likely be brought up if one umpire clearly seemed to favor one team over another. Football uses instant replay as a part of the game, now that coaches can challenge questionable calls, so it would again be difficult for a referee to greatly influence the outcome of a game without calling attention to himself.

On the other hand, basketball is completely different. A great deal of the referee's job is open to interpretation and instant replay is not used, except for at the end of quarters. What's more, the game moves so quickly that replay is not implemented as often, making it harder to discern whether or not a referee is biased. Calling fouls in the NBA is almost entirely a judgement call, to the point that hardly a call goes by without a complaint from a player or coach.

This issue goes far beyond Tim Donaghy. He is out of the NBA for good and now he's got to deal with the FBI. (On a side note, a story in the New York Times said that Donaghy had been sued by neighbors for shouting obscenities and setting a tractor on fire. He set a tractor on fire? How can anyone who does that to his neighbor be expected to officiate a slow-pitch softball game effectively, let alone a professional basketball game?) The real problem the NBA faces is finding a way to prove that other officials are not being influenced by gambling or anything else. It was not long ago that the NBA was forced to suspend long-time referee Joey Crawford from officiating Spurs games because of an apparent bias against Tim Duncan. There was also a great deal of complaining about calls going the way of the Miami Heat in the 2006 NBA Finals, as Dwyane Wade practically lived on the free throw line in the final 4 games of the series (all won by Miami).

David Stern is in a difficult spot here. It seems like the best thing the NBA can do is to make an example of Donaghy, to send a message to other officials, but mostly to fans. The problem is that there is very little Stern can do to Donaghy. He has already resigned and now his fate is in the hands of federal prosecutors. One possible course of action is for the NBA to start an organization to keep an eye out for corrupt officiating, but they have to be careful not to turn this into a witch hunt.

If Stern is not careful, this could play out similarly to baseball's steroids problems. What baseball has done wrong is they have insisted upon searching for answers about the past, rather than focusing on keeping steroids out of baseball in the present and future. The NBA should not take the same approach. Nothing could be more damaging to the league than discoveries that corrupt officiating has influenced outcomes of championships. It's possible that that has happened and now fans will have to consider it, but the NBA's concern should be cleaning up the sport and making sure this can't happen again.

In all likelihood, most of the NBA's officials are completely clean, but now the NBA has to prove to its fans that this is the case. Lucky for the NBA, they are "competing" for attention with Michael Vick. Unfortunately, that might not be enough.