Tim Donaghy Strikes Back
Thursday, October 29, 2009 17:18
Considering how Deep Into Sports has recently been criticizing the plague of poor calls by umpires during the 2009 Major League Baseball playoffs (both in comments and in Gairzo’s article, “Umpires”), I thought our readers would be interested in checking out the excerpts from Tim Donaghy’s hitherto unpublished book, Blowing the Whistle, on deadspin.com (if they haven’t already).
If even a fraction of what Donaghy claims National Basketball Association referees have done during games–even manipulating games–is true, the situation in the NBA is far worse than anybody imagined.
To be fair, the convicted gambler Donaghy is hardly the most trustworthy of sources. His book could be nothing more than a fraudulent attempt to avenge himself on the league… or it could be the true memoirs of someone with nothing more to lose laying it all on the line.
Regardless, what does it say about the state of NBA refereeing that a vast majority of sports fans are at least willing to consider the possibility that Donaghy is speaking the truth, if not outright believe him?
Gairzo
says:
October 30th, 2009 at 4:17 pm
A great, sad, disappointing post, Nate. I read the excerpts and now all those calls going the Yankees way–the double play, last night–make a lot more sense, don't they?
I stopped watching baseball long ago, when I saw the Great Pumpkin taking root on Barry Bonds' head. MLB allowed players to cheat the game and they've always allowed umps to do it.
The "roving strike zone" proves the point. Balls pitched above the waist are seldom called. The reason: 2-1 games are boring. You allow the high strike, home run totals fall.
It used to be the umpire's union wouldn't allow the networks to show the strike zone or a "close call. Now the technology is too good; they can't hide.
I was thinking about your point on Donaghy's credibility, and of course, it's a valid one. But I believe every word he wrote; here's why: 1. It's sounds too genuine. 2.) Donaghy's naming names and he's betting not every referee sides with the league if it came to court. 3. The NBA threatened a lawsuit if the book was published. Usually in such a case, the publisher will recheck the facts in the book. If they pan out, they publish anyway.
4. And most importantly, Tim Donaghy knew the hell that would reign over him from this book, and, as you imply, knew it would be a best seller.
Imagine this converse scenario: Timmy Boy writes a mea culpa, his father touched him in the bad place, his mother beat him, neighborhood bullies picked on him. This horror created an anger and an irrational control complex…But, now, he's sorry, and wants to help people who allow the hell of their early years to burn through their life.
The book he publishes–titled "Tim Donaghy: How I Gambled Away My Life in a Great Sports League"–lauds the NBA hierarchy for giving him a chance to earn a living and he breaks down on "Oprah", the "Today Show", and on "60 Minutes"
That book earns just as much as the one he wrote.
I believe every word.
Finally, maybe the NFL is onto something–not having unionized refs. I think the tripping call on Minnesota's touchdown was a blatant make-up call on Heath Millers phantom pass interference that cost the Steelers a TD. Refs are human, they feel guilt and anger, and pride like everyone else. To a degree, such calls are acceptable.
At least the NFL admits it changed rules after Mel Blount mauled receivers to generate more offense. New "player safety rules" are designed to favor the league's most skilled and important players–and the league seems to police it's refs more than any other sport.
Jesus, I hope I'm right. If the NFL were exposed as cheaters, it would kill me to stop being a Steeler fan.
Nate Barlow
says:
October 30th, 2009 at 7:35 pm
I believe every word of it, too. The way it's written since absolutely genuine–either it's true or we have to give Donaghy credit for being a hell of a writer. And if you've seen any of the NBA games in question, the questions were already in one's mind.
But I also absolutely believe the NFL is in the manipulation and/or cover-up game. No doubt in my mind. It won't stop me from being a fan any more than it has stopped me from being a baseball fan. But I'd stake a heavy penny that the NFL is guilty of things on the same level as the MLB, NBA, and (perhaps the worst) the NCAA. The only question in my mind is will it ever be exposed.
Gairzo
says:
October 30th, 2009 at 7:45 pm
Let's say I accept the NFL " is guilty of things on the same level as the MLB, NBA, and (perhaps the worst) the NCAA. "
Can you give me a specific game?
I mean James Harrison should have been ejected from the Super Bowl for throwing a punch. Seriously, Peyton & Brady probably get some calls Shaun Hill or Matt Stafford won't—and they could probably call holding on every play. But they have their head official on NFLN every week and he calls his guys out or backs them up via the rule book.
Does these, in your mind, rise to the level described by Donaghy?
Nate Barlow
says:
October 30th, 2009 at 8:22 pm
Not necessarily on the referee level, but on the league level, akin to MLB turning it's head on the steroid issue. For all the bad calls we've seen in the current playoffs, truly bad calls in baseball that have truly changed the outcome of games–especially important games–have been few and far between (kids snagging bs home runs from Oriole outfielders notwithstanding).
Same with the NCAA–I don't see the refs acting at an questionably bad level, but the BCS system as a whole is institutionalized corruption to protect the big money interests of the major conferences. Throw in academic scandals and unequal application of penalties… you get the picture.
The NBA referees as described by Donaghy take that element to a new level.
Here's an (unproven) possibility as the NFL. I have always thought (as I believe you know) that there are only two reasons Goodell destroyed the evidence turned over by Belichick. 1. There was nothing in it (which the Belichick haters refuse to believe). 2. There was everything in it, meaning Belichick threw the ultimate trump card proving videotaping, audio pumping (a la Indy), et al were systemic violations across the league, and Goodell decided he had to eliminate the proof to avoid a major scandal.
Gairzo
says:
October 31st, 2009 at 12:39 am
Nate, c'mon…
If Goodell found the evidence to have "nothing in it (which the Belichick haters refuse to believe)." what would be his motivation for not sharing that info with the world?
The more likely reason is the evidence was systemic to Bellidick and his team—i.e. much more damning than the league let on. My bet is there was truth to the Pats taping the Rams practice prior to the Super Bowl.
The fact BB read and signed the statement admitting his breaking of the rules supports that position. Do you really believe Bellichick would fall on the sword for other coaches? Does he really strike you as that kind of guy?
When you make the statement "there was everything in the destroyed evidence), meaning Belichick threw the ultimate trump card proving videotaping, audio pumping (a la Indy), et al were systemic violations across the league." You have to have solid proof. No one's an angel, and maybe Bellidick was the unfortunate or stupid one to get caught. Because he did, does not mean the rest of the league, or any other individual, is guilty.
Pumping in crowd noise was a recognized practice by dome teams going back many years. The league dealt with it by making excessive crowd noise a potential, although seldom enforced, penalty. Coaches dealt with it via the "horse step" and various other silent signals. It’s been a non-issue for over a decade.
I know you are a Pats fan, but how does 10 more decibels of noise rise to the level of taping, analyzing, and then game planning, (KNOWING), another teams defensive signals?
There are national publications that back up what’s in this Pittsburgh paper:
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07259/817966-66.st...
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07255/816844-360.s...
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07255/816713-13.st...
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07270/820883-150.s...
Just to be clear, there actual news stories where Steeler, Eagle, Lion, and Buffalo player all, in some form say “It was like they knew what we were doing.” Or “that explains a lot.” Bouchette summarizes what players had told him and what had been reported in several publications.
In Pittsburgh, Cowher, detractors complained about him being out-coached. When players at first said—very respectfully—that it was like “they knew what we were running”, a lot of people pinned it on Cowher’s poor coaching.
Bellichick made his bed. He'll never be on the top tier of coaches because he got busted for cheating.
Embrace it, brother. 'Tain't never gonna change.
Nate Barlow
says:
October 31st, 2009 at 1:53 am
And I say to you, Gairzo, c'mon.
If you honestly believe the other 31 coaches are all so innocent, I've got a bridge I want to sell you.
These are competitive people with huge egos. They all will take whatever advantage they can get. I would not put anything past any of them, at least in the modern day. Reflecting back on your article about what it means to build a successful franchise, the previous generation of coaches who were under a different breed of owners, I can believe they might not have pulled such stunts. But the current crop? No way they don't. There's too much at stake, financially and for their inflated sense of selves.
As to falling on the sword… there was no escaping for Belichick when he was caught in the act. But when the league asked for all his notes, why would he turn actually over anything damning unless there was a get-out-of-jail free card included, i.e. an even more damaging scandal for the NFL as a whole, that everyone is doing it? He could easily get rid of any of his personal evidence; the league would not be able to prove otherwise.
Which goes back to my original point–either there was nothing in what he gave Goodell or there was everything on everybody else, too.
It's a brilliant move towards a Pyrrhic victory. You can take me down, but it's going to cost you everything. It's exactly what I would do if I were going to break the rules. Always make sure that anyone who can punish you has more to lose than you.
It's a great place to reflect back on the NCAA. How many big-time programs do you think are actually clean? Again, you have competitive people with huge egos with too much to lose by losing. Time and again we see programs we thought were clean hit with sanctions for violations.
You're right, 'taint never gonna change… until the league is willing to expose itself. There's no wool over my eyes.
(By the way, we had this discussion before, at the end of which you conceded that this was a valid and plausible argument. I tried to find the exact post, but have come to realize that the search functionality sucks–a search on NFL brings up only ten listings! Let alone the dearth of results on a more targeted term. I even tried searching on Noll and Shula, since you tossed them out as counterexamples to "everybody"–and then admitted Shula doing anything wouldn't surprise you.)
Gairzo
says:
October 31st, 2009 at 5:53 am
NATE: If you honestly believe the other 31 coaches are all so innocent, I've got a bridge I want to sell you.
GP: Not buying it, dude. I never said the other 31 coaches are innocent. The citations I gave you repeatedly claim Bellichick was known to cheat when he was head man at Cleveland. Before you label people as cheaters, you need to have some evidence to back it up.
NATE: These are competitive people with huge egos. They all will take whatever advantage they can get. I would not put anything past any of them, at least in the modern day. Reflecting back on your article about what it means to build a successful franchise, the previous generation of coaches who were under a different breed of owners, I can believe they might not have pulled such stunts. But the current crop? No way they don't. There's too much at stake, financially and for their inflated sense of selves.
GP: That is pure speculation that may be 0 to 100% right. That’s the point. It is a fact NE cheated, repeatedly and deliberately. They were repeatedly warned. And, like the articles I cited argue, if it was no big advantage, why would NE risk being exposed as cheaters?
NATE: As to falling on the sword… there was no escaping for Belichick when he was caught in the act. But when the league asked for all his notes, why would he turn actually over anything damning unless there was a get-out-of-jail free card included, i.e. an even more damaging scandal for the NFL as a whole, that everyone is doing it? He could easily get rid of any of his personal evidence; the league would not be able to prove otherwise.
GP: He would turn it over because he was, no doubt, threatened with much harsher sanctions. You’re conjecturing here without foundation. The reasoning that Goodell destroyed the goods because Bill Bellichick had the drop on 31 other coaches is ridiculous. But, let’s say you’re right and BB could have busted 31 other coaches. Why wouldn’t he? His reputation would be seen as the same as his brethren. He was coaching on an even playing field. In fact, he becomes a hero for exposing the sinister nature of NFL coaches and execs. His legacy is stain free.
If Bellidick held the cards you say he must have held, he has three aces in the hole in a game of seven-card stud. He wouldn’t have to negotiate anything. He could tell Roger to kiss his ass and Roger would have puckered up. If the evidence Goodell destroyed had nothing—which is the only other possibility you offer—then why does Bellichick have to accept a fine, and other sanctions?
Your scenario doesn’t make sense either way.
NATE: Which goes back to my original point–either there was nothing in what he gave Goodell or there was everything on everybody else, too.
GP: It still doesn’t make sense.
NATE: It's a brilliant move towards a Pyrrhic victory. You can take me down, but it's going to cost you everything. It's exactly what I would do if I were going to break the rules. Always make sure that anyone who can punish you has more to lose than you.
GP: Pyrrhic for whom? Goodell? Doesn’t matter. If BB had that evidence you believe he had, why would he take the fall and forever be known as a cheater? It doesn’t make sense.
(Reply continues in the next post)
Gairzo
says:
October 31st, 2009 at 6:06 am
Continued from previous reply…
NATE: It's a great place to reflect back on the NCAA. How many big-time programs do you think are actually clean?
GP: Not many. But, you make my point. You don’t see Michigan busting on Ohio State because they know it could come back to haunt them, or, as you say, most big time schools. When we read of any school breaking the rules to gain an edge, we shrug our shoulders and say, “Lots of schools do it.”
Name me one instance where any pro coach besides BB, was ever accused of videotaping signals or similar offenses before or after NE got busted. Because Bellichick got caught, does not mean any or all of his colleagues are guilty too.
NATE: Again, you have competitive people with huge egos with too much to lose by losing. Time and again we see programs we thought were clean hit with sanctions for violations.
GP: Schools break rules recruiting. I'll concede that. Give me one example of any college coach videotaping an opponent’s signals before a game. If you make that blanket accusation, you need some facts to back it up and I just don’t see them anywhere in your argument.
NATE: You're right, 'taint never gonna change… until the league is willing to expose itself. There's no wool over my eyes.
GP: So what you’re saying is that like Tim Donaghy’s picture of the NBA, the NFL is a league full of coaches who lie, cheat, and steal to win?
I just can’t believe men like Mike Smith in Atlanta and Marvin Lewis, and Lovie Smith have cheated. I believe Jerry Jones, if given the opportunity, will end up doing to the NFL what Steinbrenner did to MLB—maybe there are two other people in the league I could see as possibly cheating. I won't name them until I have proof.
I believe Sparano and Jauron and fifteen or twenty other NFL coaches are obsessed with winning. I guess they have to be. BUT, THAT DOESN’T MEAN THEY ARE CHEATERS!
I just can’t think of anyone but Bill Bellichick as a cheater until I see proof.
NATE: (By the way, we had this discussion before, at the end of which you conceded that this was a valid and plausible argument. I tried to find the exact post, but have come to realize that the search functionality sucks–a search on NFL brings up only ten listings! Let alone the dearth of results on a more targeted term. I even tried searching on Noll and Shula, since you tossed them out as counterexamples to "everybody"–and then admitted Shula doing anything wouldn't surprise you.)
GP: I may have said it was plausible, that doesn’t mean your position is supported by any fact. Anything is possible. We might learn tomorrow Mike Tomlin had GPS recordings of Arizona practices before last year's Super Bowl.
Until we have facts that say otherwise, it is not fair to label people as cheaters.
Any negative thing I say about Shula stems from his condescending attitude toward Chuck Noll, (or my perception of such.)
Shula’s record speaks for itself, as does Noll’s. Neither of them, or any other coach, except Bellichick, deserves to be labeled a cheater until tangible evidence proves otherwise.
Nate Barlow
says:
October 31st, 2009 at 5:46 pm
You're right, I can't officially label anyone a cheater without evidence. But I honestly believe that the only difference between Belichick and many other coaches is that he was caught. I don't think all coaches cheat, but there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that many have and many are. To believe otherwise in my mind is to live in a delusional fantasyland that all coaches are pure and innocent and that the NFL is a cleaner organization than the other sports leagues. Please. Belichick is the only NFL coach that has ever cheated, of all the people that have ever coached in the NFL? To me that kind of mindset screams of insecurities or a need to justify one's own sanctimonious high ground upon which to pass judgement. I wouldn't be surprised if there was some kind of statistical analysis that could prove otherwise, even if it couldn't prove whom.
I don't condone what Belichick did, I just think is naivete to think he's alone. Sooner or later someone else will be revealed. It's only a matter of time.
Nate Barlow
says:
October 31st, 2009 at 5:49 pm
Something you should know–I believed this was the case BEFORE Belichick was caught. That just proved my suspicions all along. I just wonder who will be next.
Gairzo
says:
October 31st, 2009 at 6:46 pm
Here's where I found our previous discussion:
http://www.deepintosports.com/2008/12/21/hate-lis...
It was my first post!
Here’s what I wrote in response to your post which you referenced that Belidick can’t be the only cheater,.
“On the other hand, you raise an intriguing question: What did Roger destroy? If it were me and I knew Belichick cheated, beating my team en route to a Super Bowl, I would have made an “asterisk” my life’s work.
Why was Rooney so non-chalant about it? Maybe you’re right…”
Let me answer my own question why Rooney let it go…Class, (that’s what I want to believe.)
The real answer is the Rooneys have always been team players.
When the league merged, Pittsburghj made the move to the AFC from the old NFL along with the Browns and Colts. That was, then, a very risky, contioversial, move. I believe Rooney convinced Cleveland to move too so they would maintain their rivalry.
Also, no one in the Steelers’ building said a word when Gooodell instructed NBC not to show the sea of Steeler fans at last year’s SB.
You can believe anything, and, again you are very likely correct that BB wasn't the first or last coach to cheat.
There have been draft day stories of teams circulating rumors about a player, to precipitate a fall to their spot.
I vaguely recall a flash fire controversy maybe twenty years ago where one or more teams hired lip readers to interpret what plays head coaches yelled from the sideline.
That's why you see a lot of coaches covering their mouths with various charts, etc. If memory serves some coaches started calling dummy plays and some defenses were getting badly burned and the practice ended.
Nothing I've heard, historically, or more recently rises to the level of video taping signals of your opponent, thereby having a good idea what play they are running
The FACT remains NE is the only team ever to be sanctioned by the NFL for cheating–at least as far as I know.
Nate Barlow
says:
October 31st, 2009 at 10:48 pm
Great job finding the post! I searched for a long time.
You say, "Nothing I've heard, historically, or more recently rises to the level of video taping signals of your opponent, thereby having a good idea what play they are running." At the same time you admit, "… you are very likely correct that BB wasn't the first or last coach to cheat."
That being the case, why should we have any reason to believe other teams haven't done the exact same thing, or something equivalent? Television rose the profile of the NFL more than anything. Considering we're looking at 40 years or so of the NFL on video, is it really a stretch to think Belichick was the first to try to gain an illegal edge using it?
If that's so, then I guess the only baseball steroid cheats are the 103 on the mysterious list.
As far as I know, you're right about NE being the only team sanctioned for a violation in that manner. But several teams have been penalized for tampering, which by all accounts is rampant across the league. So penalties on franchises aren't unprecedented, and the NFL is at best selective in application.
Speaking of very questionable play calling, did you catch any of Indiana-Iowa today? I missed the fourth quarter, but prior to that it felt like the refs were doing anything in the power to give Iowa a chance to come back and win. Considering that the Big Ten commish is the most foul defender of the BCS (probably because his league is ridiculously overrated and embarrassed in every major inter-conference game–the only way the Big Ten can maintain power is because of the BCS), it sure felt like the mandate came down from the conference office to find a way for the Hawkeyes to be victorious and protect the Big Ten's BCS standing.
Gairzo
says:
November 1st, 2009 at 2:08 am
First, I only allow for the possibility because I know you can never say never.
Like everything else there are degrees of "cheating". When New England had the snow guy come out and plow a swath clear for a game winning field goal, was that cheating? I call it home field advantage; similar to dome teams pumping up the volume.
When the Steelers insist on hosting four championship high school games AND Pitt football–thereby ruining the Heinz Field turf and slowing dome teams down–is that cheating?
If a team hires someone to listen to Sirius Satellite radio to glean strategy via player interviews, is that cheating?
The point is we can argue the nuances of what constitutes cheating forever.
What cannot be argued is Bill Belichick video-taped opponents for the express purpose of deciphering their signals to gain a significant, tangible, competitive advantage.
If you believe the comments of NE opponents who, at the time, did not know they were being spied on, we can logically deduce NE gained that advantage during two AFC Championship games. As a fan of the team he beat in those two games, I'm pissed off.
In any analysis what NE did constitutes a degree of cheating unprecedented in pro football. Goodell, with the help of league personnel, including the Rooneys, covered it up for "the good of the game."
As fans, we have to accept that outcome.
I'll always believe BB deserved a much more severe punishment than what he got.
Now, onto college football. Right on about the Iowa game and the Big Ten. They'll manipulate it so two big name teams play the "championship' game. What a joke.
Did you see Houston and TCU win their games…Boise State?
Wouldn't it be great to have a real NCAA football champion?
Nate Barlow
says:
November 1st, 2009 at 3:24 am
Ah, a real NCAA champion would be great. Saw some of both TCU and Boise State, but not Houston.
My thoughts on those three… Houston has a spectacular offense, but so many games are shoot-outs; the defense is suspect.
Boise State is constantly being knocked for its schedule (not really their fault), but personally I think they are a great team, a fact that, surprisingly, the voters have been recognizing, even though the computers do not. Their one major victory, over Oregon, looks bigger and bigger every week; even more so with the Ducks delivering a smack down to the Trojans tonight.
As for TCU, I thoroughly believe the Horned Frogs would be legitimate contenders if given a chance. Their defense is absolutely stifling, as it was last year when it was one of the top-ranked in the country. The difference is this year they have the offense to back it up. I've seen some or all of their games the last three weeks and the Frogs are for real. They can play with anyone in the country. Speaking of which, did you see my post about the TCU-BYU game last week?
It would be great if Boise and TCU both received BCS bowls, but while I suppose it's not inconceivable, it's of course still highly unlikely. TCU should get the nod because of the strength of the Mountain West. I would love, love, love to see them sneak into the title game. It's not entirely impossible. USC losing today is one slot they could move up. At lease one of Florida and Alabama must lose, and both have shown some weaknesses, as have Iowa, so it's possible all three could lose. Texas crushed Oklahoma State and should have an easy road the rest of the way. TCU has one other Top 20 game, Utah at home. Another dominating victory… Texas-TCU, anyone? :-) I can dream.