There are 107 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Sports conspiracy theories

  • Otter
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 22,936
Originally posted by pantstickle:
Originally posted by TheSixthRing:
Not this s**t again

This s**t always.

People don't want to believe their team lost because another one was better. It has to be a conspiracy. The fact that Kobe is still winning, and their team fizzled out, should convince Kings fans that there was no conspiracy, but it won't.

I agree in general. But look at how many of these involve basketball. Refs play too big of a role in those games, and with only 5 players on the court, each person can have that much more of an impact as well. Point shaving, has occurred in basketball. Referees have influenced games, Donaghy.
Originally posted by pantstickle:
Originally posted by TheSixthRing:
Not this s**t again

This s**t always.

People don't want to believe their team lost because another one was better. It has to be a conspiracy. The fact that Kobe is still winning, and their team fizzled out, should convince Kings fans that there was no conspiracy, but it won't.

the reason the kings suck is because of the 2002 WCF
  • boast
  • All City
  • Posts: 87,455
Originally posted by Otter:
Originally posted by pantstickle:
Originally posted by TheSixthRing:
Not this s**t again

This s**t always.

People don't want to believe their team lost because another one was better. It has to be a conspiracy. The fact that Kobe is still winning, and their team fizzled out, should convince Kings fans that there was no conspiracy, but it won't.

I agree in general. But look at how many of these involve basketball. Refs play too big of a role in those games, and with only 5 players on the court, each person can have that much more of an impact as well. Point shaving, has occurred in basketball. Referees have influenced games, Donaghy.

exactly.
Originally posted by Otter:
Originally posted by pantstickle:
Originally posted by TheSixthRing:
Not this s**t again

This s**t always.

People don't want to believe their team lost because another one was better. It has to be a conspiracy. The fact that Kobe is still winning, and their team fizzled out, should convince Kings fans that there was no conspiracy, but it won't.

I agree in general. But look at how many of these involve basketball. Refs play too big of a role in those games, and with only 5 players on the court, each person can have that much more of an impact as well. Point shaving, has occurred in basketball. Referees have influenced games, Donaghy.

The difference between basketball and football is that you can easily see almost all of the action on a basketball court. We see a very small percentage of what's actually going on in football, due to camera angles (don't see WRs & DBs) or having a lot of people clustered together (O-Line vs. D-Line)

Considerably more money is gambled on football, and there are plenty of opportunities for a crooked ref to impact the outcome of a game without ever getting caught or noticed by the fans. There are also a lot fewer scoring opportunities, giving the ref a much greater chance of effecting the outcome.

There are a lot more 50/50 calls in b-ball than in football as well. People complain about basketball because they can see just about everything, and the nature of the sport leads to blurry lines.

I'd guess that football's fixed a lot more often than basketball. More money on the line, less likelihood of anyone noticing.
[ Edited by LA9erFan on Nov 1, 2010 at 6:24 PM ]
  • Otter
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 22,936
Originally posted by LA9erFan:
Originally posted by Otter:
Originally posted by pantstickle:
Originally posted by TheSixthRing:
Not this s**t again

This s**t always.

People don't want to believe their team lost because another one was better. It has to be a conspiracy. The fact that Kobe is still winning, and their team fizzled out, should convince Kings fans that there was no conspiracy, but it won't.

I agree in general. But look at how many of these involve basketball. Refs play too big of a role in those games, and with only 5 players on the court, each person can have that much more of an impact as well. Point shaving, has occurred in basketball. Referees have influenced games, Donaghy.

The difference between basketball and football is that you can easily see almost all of the action on a basketball court. We see a very small percentage of what's actually going on in football, due to camera angles (don't see WRs & DBs) or having a lot of people clustered together (O-Line vs. D-Line)

Considerably more money is gambled on football, and there are plenty of opportunities for a crooked ref to impact the outcome of a game without ever getting caught or noticed by the fans. There are also a lot fewer scoring opportunities, giving the ref a much greater chance of effecting the outcome.

There are a lot more 50/50 calls in b-ball than in football as well. People complain about basketball because they can see just about everything, and the nature of the sport leads to blurry lines.

I'd guess that football's fixed a lot more often than basketball. More money on the line, less likelihood of anyone noticing.

I agree that more money is gambled on football. But I don't think fixing could be as prevalent as it could be in basketball. (that was awkwardly worded, but that's because I agree with pants post. I don't think it occurs in either sport to a degree that people some people suggest)

In football you would have to get greater participation from players on the same team. You couldn't bribe a single o-lineman in a point shaving scheme, as they don't have any impact on the defensive side of the ball. It has been done of course, I think BC was guilty of it back in the day, and that guy that played for the colts, his name is escaping me.

Contrast that to basketball, that if you want to effect the outcome for one team you could in theory bribe one guy, one of the starting 5. What happens if the 2-guard decides to tank a game compared to a HB in football.

Probably a discussion better facilitated in a bar compared to a message board. Up until the first bottle is broken on the table and someone is stabbed with it of course.
Originally posted by sincalfaithful:
Originally posted by pantstickle:
Originally posted by TheSixthRing:
Not this s**t again

This s**t always.

People don't want to believe their team lost because another one was better. It has to be a conspiracy. The fact that Kobe is still winning, and their team fizzled out, should convince Kings fans that there was no conspiracy, but it won't.

the reason the kings suck is because of the 2002 WCF

my theory:
the kings suck because the maloof bro's were losing too much money trying to win a championship. so they gave up and brought their focus back to casinos.

the were only good to begin with because they just so happened to land a couple good players and randomly got a coach.

why i believe it:
they're frickin casino owners, the nba is a secondary business to them.
Originally posted by 49erfeeeever808:
Originally posted by sincalfaithful:
Originally posted by pantstickle:
Originally posted by TheSixthRing:
Not this s**t again

This s**t always.

People don't want to believe their team lost because another one was better. It has to be a conspiracy. The fact that Kobe is still winning, and their team fizzled out, should convince Kings fans that there was no conspiracy, but it won't.

the reason the kings suck is because of the 2002 WCF

my theory:
the kings suck because the maloof bro's were losing too much money trying to win a championship. so they gave up and brought their focus back to casinos.

the were only good to begin with because they just so happened to land a couple good players and randomly got a coach.

why i believe it:
they're frickin casino owners, the nba is a secondary business to them.

None of this makes any sense. YOu guys are all wrong about why the Kings fell apart. Bottom line is they got old. It happens to damn near every team. They would've had a few more years as contenders if Webber hadn't blown out his knee and needed microfracture surgey but he did. Then Peja got old with a bad back(just look at how bad he's playing for NO on that huge contract), Mike Bibby got old and didn't play as well when they wanted a change from Adelman and he wasn't in a motion offense, Christie got old and had to be traded, Vlade got old and had a bad back.

I'm not really sure where all this "kings fans blame the NBA conspiracy against them for their team falling apart" or "the maloofs decided they wanted to lose money on their NBA team by losing a lot of games so they could focus on a casino that's doing poorly right now" theories came from. The only thing is if the officiating had went our way in game 6 or not so many terrible calls, then yeah we probably would have a championship and a new arena now. But the team still would've gotten old and we still would be right where we are now, just probably with a new arena. But we didn't play well when we had the chance in game 7 either and things didn't work out so it semi-evens out. The bottom line is the team got old, all teams do.
[ Edited by WillistheWall on Nov 1, 2010 at 10:54 PM ]
Quote:
Conspiracy Theory
The Chinese female gymnasts in 2008 were, like, 10 years old.

Why People Believe It
They looked like 10-year-olds.

HAHA
Originally posted by WillistheWall:
Originally posted by 49erfeeeever808:
Originally posted by sincalfaithful:
Originally posted by pantstickle:
Originally posted by TheSixthRing:
Not this s**t again

This s**t always.

People don't want to believe their team lost because another one was better. It has to be a conspiracy. The fact that Kobe is still winning, and their team fizzled out, should convince Kings fans that there was no conspiracy, but it won't.

the reason the kings suck is because of the 2002 WCF

my theory:
the kings suck because the maloof bro's were losing too much money trying to win a championship. so they gave up and brought their focus back to casinos.

the were only good to begin with because they just so happened to land a couple good players and randomly got a coach.

why i believe it:
they're frickin casino owners, the nba is a secondary business to them.

None of this makes any sense. YOu guys are all wrong about why the Kings fell apart. Bottom line is they got old. It happens to damn near every team. They would've had a few more years as contenders if Webber hadn't blown out his knee and needed microfracture surgey but he did. Then Peja got old with a bad back(just look at how bad he's playing for NO on that huge contract), Mike Bibby got old and didn't play as well when they wanted a change from Adelman and he wasn't in a motion offense, Christie got old and had to be traded, Vlade got old and had a bad back.

I'm not really sure where all this "kings fans blame the NBA conspiracy against them for their team falling apart" or "the maloofs decided they wanted to lose money on their NBA team by losing a lot of games so they could focus on a casino that's doing poorly right now" theories came from. The only thing is if the officiating had went our way in game 6 or not so many terrible calls, then yeah we probably would have a championship and a new arena now. But the team still would've gotten old and we still would be right where we are now, just probably with a new arena. But we didn't play well when we had the chance in game 7 either and things didn't work out so it semi-evens out. The bottom line is the team got old, all teams do.

that's not what i said.

i said my belief is that were losing too much money trying to win a championship. NOT that they wanted to lose money on their team.

i'll bet the average/decent teams make more money than the championship teams.


....and i think this flaw characterizes many teams in every sport btw, not just the kings. (niners are one of them)
Originally posted by 49erfeeeever808:
Originally posted by WillistheWall:
Originally posted by 49erfeeeever808:
Originally posted by sincalfaithful:
Originally posted by pantstickle:
Originally posted by TheSixthRing:
Not this s**t again

This s**t always.

People don't want to believe their team lost because another one was better. It has to be a conspiracy. The fact that Kobe is still winning, and their team fizzled out, should convince Kings fans that there was no conspiracy, but it won't.

the reason the kings suck is because of the 2002 WCF

my theory:
the kings suck because the maloof bro's were losing too much money trying to win a championship. so they gave up and brought their focus back to casinos.

the were only good to begin with because they just so happened to land a couple good players and randomly got a coach.

why i believe it:
they're frickin casino owners, the nba is a secondary business to them.

None of this makes any sense. YOu guys are all wrong about why the Kings fell apart. Bottom line is they got old. It happens to damn near every team. They would've had a few more years as contenders if Webber hadn't blown out his knee and needed microfracture surgey but he did. Then Peja got old with a bad back(just look at how bad he's playing for NO on that huge contract), Mike Bibby got old and didn't play as well when they wanted a change from Adelman and he wasn't in a motion offense, Christie got old and had to be traded, Vlade got old and had a bad back.

I'm not really sure where all this "kings fans blame the NBA conspiracy against them for their team falling apart" or "the maloofs decided they wanted to lose money on their NBA team by losing a lot of games so they could focus on a casino that's doing poorly right now" theories came from. The only thing is if the officiating had went our way in game 6 or not so many terrible calls, then yeah we probably would have a championship and a new arena now. But the team still would've gotten old and we still would be right where we are now, just probably with a new arena. But we didn't play well when we had the chance in game 7 either and things didn't work out so it semi-evens out. The bottom line is the team got old, all teams do.

that's not what i said.

i said my belief is that were losing too much money trying to win a championship. NOT that they wanted to lose money on their team.

i'll bet the average/decent teams make more money than the championship teams.


....and i think this flaw characterizes many teams in every sport btw, not just the kings. (niners are one of them)

Nah the problem isn't that the weren't spending money. They were in the luxury tax for a while and over the cap up until this year. This year is the first year in 3 or 4 years they've had a chance to do anything. They were over the cap so they couldn't buy anymore star players, and it's not like they were the Lakers who were built around a superstar in his prime so it's not like buying complimentary players worked. The team is finally looking like they might make a comeback primarily because they started spending less money on veteran players and made an effort to play the young guys and get more young players through the draft.
Originally posted by Otter:
Originally posted by LA9erFan:
Originally posted by Otter:
Originally posted by pantstickle:
Originally posted by TheSixthRing:
Not this s**t again

This s**t always.

People don't want to believe their team lost because another one was better. It has to be a conspiracy. The fact that Kobe is still winning, and their team fizzled out, should convince Kings fans that there was no conspiracy, but it won't.

I agree in general. But look at how many of these involve basketball. Refs play too big of a role in those games, and with only 5 players on the court, each person can have that much more of an impact as well. Point shaving, has occurred in basketball. Referees have influenced games, Donaghy.

The difference between basketball and football is that you can easily see almost all of the action on a basketball court. We see a very small percentage of what's actually going on in football, due to camera angles (don't see WRs & DBs) or having a lot of people clustered together (O-Line vs. D-Line)

Considerably more money is gambled on football, and there are plenty of opportunities for a crooked ref to impact the outcome of a game without ever getting caught or noticed by the fans. There are also a lot fewer scoring opportunities, giving the ref a much greater chance of effecting the outcome.

There are a lot more 50/50 calls in b-ball than in football as well. People complain about basketball because they can see just about everything, and the nature of the sport leads to blurry lines.

I'd guess that football's fixed a lot more often than basketball. More money on the line, less likelihood of anyone noticing.

I agree that more money is gambled on football. But I don't think fixing could be as prevalent as it could be in basketball. (that was awkwardly worded, but that's because I agree with pants post. I don't think it occurs in either sport to a degree that people some people suggest)

In football you would have to get greater participation from players on the same team. You couldn't bribe a single o-lineman in a point shaving scheme, as they don't have any impact on the defensive side of the ball. It has been done of course, I think BC was guilty of it back in the day, and that guy that played for the colts, his name is escaping me.

Contrast that to basketball, that if you want to effect the outcome for one team you could in theory bribe one guy, one of the starting 5. What happens if the 2-guard decides to tank a game compared to a HB in football.

Probably a discussion better facilitated in a bar compared to a message board. Up until the first bottle is broken on the table and someone is stabbed with it of course.

He'd have to be making a TON of money gambling, considering a starter would likely make a lot of money. If a starting NBA player was even accused of something like that, his potential earnings would drop significantly.

I'm sure just not being a part of a point-shaving scheme would generate more money than gambling on basketball games; especially for a starter. I could see why a ref would, because they aren't making millions, but not a player, and definitely not a starter.
Originally posted by pantstickle:
Originally posted by TheSixthRing:
Not this s**t again

This s**t always.

People don't want to believe their team lost because another one was better. It has to be a conspiracy. The fact that Kobe is still winning, and their team fizzled out, should convince Kings fans that there was no conspiracy, but it won't.

That year the Kings were, maybe not the better team per say, but every bit as good. And they had a deciding game taken from them. You all seem to recall a bad call here or there, but that's a tad different than a string of bad calls that changed the outcome of a game that was ready to be put in the books.
Originally posted by silkyjohnson:
Originally posted by pantstickle:
Originally posted by TheSixthRing:
Not this s**t again

This s**t always.

People don't want to believe their team lost because another one was better. It has to be a conspiracy. The fact that Kobe is still winning, and their team fizzled out, should convince Kings fans that there was no conspiracy, but it won't.

That year the Kings were, maybe not the better team per say, but every bit as good. And they had a deciding game taken from them. You all seem to recall a bad call here or there, but that's a tad different than a string of bad calls that changed the outcome of a game that was ready to be put in the books.

I wrote a long response, but this happened more than 8 years ago. I .
[ Edited by LA9erFan on Nov 2, 2010 at 8:24 AM ]
Originally posted by silkyjohnson:
Originally posted by pantstickle:
Originally posted by TheSixthRing:
Not this s**t again

This s**t always.

People don't want to believe their team lost because another one was better. It has to be a conspiracy. The fact that Kobe is still winning, and their team fizzled out, should convince Kings fans that there was no conspiracy, but it won't.

That year the Kings were, maybe not the better team per say, but every bit as good. And they had a deciding game taken from them. You all seem to recall a bad call here or there, but that's a tad different than a string of bad calls that changed the outcome of a game that was ready to be put in the books.

The simplest answer is generally the right one, and in this scenario, it just makes more sense that the Lakers were better.
Originally posted by LA9erFan:
Originally posted by silkyjohnson:
Originally posted by pantstickle:
Originally posted by TheSixthRing:
Not this s**t again

This s**t always.

People don't want to believe their team lost because another one was better. It has to be a conspiracy. The fact that Kobe is still winning, and their team fizzled out, should convince Kings fans that there was no conspiracy, but it won't.

That year the Kings were, maybe not the better team per say, but every bit as good. And they had a deciding game taken from them. You all seem to recall a bad call here or there, but that's a tad different than a string of bad calls that changed the outcome of a game that was ready to be put in the books.

I agree that the Kings were every bit as good as the Lakers that year, but how was that game ready to be put in the books? I don't think the Kings had more than a 6 point lead at any point in the second half.

And as has been mentioned before, the Lakers got totally screwed at the end of Game 5, as well as the entirety of that game. Shaq, in his prime, played 32 minutes, shot one free throw, and fouled out.

No one talks or cares about that game because the Lakers won the series.

Since we are going into detail here why don't you rewatch the 2nd half of game 4 when the Kings were blowing the Fakers out and Phil switched Kobe to guard Bibby in the second half and Kobe fouled Bibby SO MANY EFFIN TIMES that even Bill Walton was saying on TV "what is going on, those are fouls, you have to call that". And I love the inbounds play in game 6 where Kobe almost BREAKS BIBBY'S NOSE with an elbow but Bibby gets a foul (In addition, a foul was called against Mike Bibby of the Kings after he was shoved and elbowed by Kobe Bryant, denying the Kings an opportunity to try for a tying basket) or my favorite one on all. Game 6, Pollard is in the lane stationary with arms straight up (and why this is bad is that the NBA's camera was in perfect position to see this phantom call) Shaq catches the pass and starts to turn around for a short hook shot (about 6-8 feet from the basket) now understand, there is LITERALLY 3 feet between theses two players, there was NO contact between these to on this play. Whistle, foul, but wait, upon replay you can clearly see that Dick Bavetta is raising his arm to start to make the foul call BEFORE SHAQ EVEN FINISHES TURNING AROUND FOR THE SHOT. And, again, from the camera you can see the POLLARD never touches him. Not with a body, arm anything. That call was coming no matter what.........

"Referees A, F and G were officiating a playoff series between Teams 5 and 6 in May of 2002. It was the sixth game of a seven-game series, and a Team 5 victory that night would have ended the series. However, Tim learned from Referee A that Referees A and F wanted to extend the series to seven games. Tim knew referees A and F to be 'company men,' always acting in the interest of the NBA, and that night, it was in the NBA's interest to add another game to the series. Referees A and F heavily favored Team 6. Personal fouls [resulting in obviously injured players] were ignored even when they occurred in full view of the referees. Conversely, the referees called made-up fouls on Team 5 in order to give additional free throw opportunities for Team 6. Their foul-calling also led to the ejection of two Team 5 players. The referees' favoring of Team 6 led to that team's victory that night, and Team 6 came back from behind to win that series."

Look Laker fans, you have won 10 championships in the last 30 years. You average one every 3 years, you are one of the most storied franchises in all of sports but for the love of God I don't understand why you guys defend 2002. All the Kings wanted (and their fans) was an even chance to show that they were the better team, and they didn't get that. And that pisses off some Kings fans to this day. I mean, Laker fans are really the only ones in the country (except the NBA, of course) that claims that 2002 was not fixed.

Anyhoo, Go Giants!!!!