http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/l...Referee-World-Series-of-Poker--165669096.html According to reports Thursday by the website profootballtalk.com, Eastin played in the World Series of Poker. "Gambling is an unacceptable activity for Game Officials in the National Football League," league policy states. "Such activity constitutes conduct detrimental to the integrity of, and public trust in, the NFL. Because it is the responsibility of the Game Officials to ensure the fairness of NFL play, including the complete confidence of the fans in the legitimacy of the game, it is critical that NFL Game Officials maintain the appearance of the highest ethical conduct." http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-s...sh-were-background-checks-010552861--nfl.html Through the first day of the 2012 NFL preseason, the league's replacement refs have made several questionable calls -- our favorite was the guy in the Atlanta Falcons-Baltimore Ravens games who said that the Arizona Cardinals would not be charged with a timeout -- but that's to be expected. After all, we're also seeing some "replacement" players in these preseason games, and things aren't always going to be pretty. What is inexcusable on the NFL's part is that one of the replacement refs seems to have a pretty shady past, and another was part of the worst conference officiating crews in the history of college football. This was revealed by CBS Sports' Mike Freeman on his Twitter account, and the details are disturbing, to say the least. One of the replacement refs, a line judge working a game tonight, was fired from his job as a teacher after it was discovered he sent letters that contained scrawled threats and racist hate messages to co-workers. It was determined this line judge actually sent the racist cards to himself and others, so he could be transferred. Eventually, the school used a handwriting expert to determine the teacher wrote the notes, according to a published report. Great. Another official, per Freeman, was part of the Pac-10's officiating crew before former NFL ref apologist Mike Pereira was named the conference's officiating czar and fired several of the incompetent refs then working. A second replacement official was at the center of what is considered one of the worst officiated Pac-10 games in that league's history. USC-Stanford game in 2010. Late in the game, USC ahead. Close game. Official, now a replacement ref, forgot to start the clock. This allowed Stanford to get ball back sooner than it should have and they won the game. Writers covering the contest called it one of the worst officiated games they had ever seen. So, that's one guy who was involved in written hate speech, and another who doesn't know when to start the game clock and was fired as a college official for his own incompetence. We know that the Pac-10 official was fired, because Division-I officials aren't allowed to moonlight as refs anywhere else.
I understand why you don't want refs gambling, but the World Series of Poker is not gambling. That's like charging a football player with battery for tackling a guy in a game.
it's held in a casino and the whole idea is they don't want refs hanging around with gamblers. Additionally, how is playing poker for money not gambling?
The refs in the Pats-Saints game last night were awful. Just awful. They made bad calls both ways, and were clearly influenced by the crowd on a running into the kicker call on a flag that came in late. It's quite hypocritical of the NFL to go all balls to the wall on player safety but then to put scab referees out there officiating games. As much as the "usual" zebras catch shit for making occasional mistakes, I saw last night how much worse it could really be.
Because it's a game of skill. You aren't playing the house, you are playing against the other players.
You are paying a fee to participate in a game with the chance to win a far larger amount. Playing the Lotto is gambling, too, but some people justify it otherwise. The argument against the WSOP being gambling is idiotic.
I don't see what playing against other players has to do with anything. If I bet you $500 that the Devils beat the Flyers, it isn't gambling?
Not even close to the same thing. You don't use any skill for that. You are just making a guess about a future event, and nothing YOU do (short of injuring players) makes a difference in the outcome. You are playing the odds and have no way to determine any part of the result. Good poker players can win regardless of the cards they hold based on how skillfully they play. They have a DIRECT effect on the outcome of each hand. Players aren't playing the odds, they are playing other players, and the more skillful player will usually win, just like in sports. Yes, sometimes luck plays a part in it, but that is true in any competitive situation. You can hit a scorching line drive right at a guy in one at bat, and barely make contact the next and end up with a hit. A QB can throw a perfect pass that the WR tips into the hands of a DB and end up with an INT, or he can throw up a prayer that happens to fall to the TE trailing the play for a TD. The mere presence of luck doesn't automatically make something gambling.
Oh, because the outcome of the Lotto is determined by how well you give the clerk your money? Or anything else you do? Poker is a complete 180 from the lotto, since it takes actual ability and you have a direct impact on the outcome based on how good you are at it.
I responded about betting a person because I don't think it matters whether you're going against the house or not.
I used house to mean odds. In poker you play against a person, and the more skillful person usually wins. Other games like craps or slots are against the house/odds, and there is no skill involved.
So now that the pre-season is OVER and the scab refs are diffenitely doing OPENING DAY what are your thoughts??? Me my ownself, thinking many blown calls, many pissed of fans and in the long run an embarrassed commissioner who should be ashamed of his self by now anyway. Horrible job NOT getting the refs contract done boooooooooooooooooooooooo . . . . . .
