Joined
·
52 Posts
What is everyone's opinions on referees having to take lie detector tests for sports that bring in large amounts of money? Such as NCAA,NBA,NFL,Boxing and ect?
With what happened last year to the Suns I think all referees should take a lie detector test pertaining to their sport.
I don't think they should be asked questions about their personal lives but they should be asked questions that could effect a games outcome or the over all sport.
If some of you don't know what happened to the Phoenix Suns last year, basic story short, a ref fouled out most of their major players because he bet against them. They found out that he placed bets against the Suns and was found guilty. He's now in jail serving time.
I'm not going to argue and say all refs do what he did because they don't. But if they don't then they don't have anything to worry about, as long as they ref their sport fairly and from their own judgment.
Along side with the lie detector tests, I think in some sports the ref's shouldn't know which game their going to referee until a day before hand.
But in some sports, such as boxing, they need to know before hand so they can study the participants and know what to look out for and what type of distance they need to keep.
What is everyone else's thoughts on this? This is just my opinion and would like to hear everyone else's because I could have missed something and my point of view could be way off.
With what happened last year to the Suns I think all referees should take a lie detector test pertaining to their sport.
I don't think they should be asked questions about their personal lives but they should be asked questions that could effect a games outcome or the over all sport.
If some of you don't know what happened to the Phoenix Suns last year, basic story short, a ref fouled out most of their major players because he bet against them. They found out that he placed bets against the Suns and was found guilty. He's now in jail serving time.
I'm not going to argue and say all refs do what he did because they don't. But if they don't then they don't have anything to worry about, as long as they ref their sport fairly and from their own judgment.
Along side with the lie detector tests, I think in some sports the ref's shouldn't know which game their going to referee until a day before hand.
But in some sports, such as boxing, they need to know before hand so they can study the participants and know what to look out for and what type of distance they need to keep.
What is everyone else's thoughts on this? This is just my opinion and would like to hear everyone else's because I could have missed something and my point of view could be way off.