Tim Duncan gets ejected (worst call of the year?)

[Mike80]

i'm in Joey's corner here, he felt like he was being mocked and dropped the T on Timmy. Good Call IMO (the first was weak, but the second was justified.)

If they are going to call that on Duncan, I wonder what Rasheed Wallace would've ended up getting.....

 

[SanAntonioBuck]

NBA.com

NBA Referee Joey Crawford Suspended

NEW YORK, April 17, 2007 ? NBA referee Joey Crawford has been indefinitely suspended for improper conduct toward Tim Duncan during the San Antonio Spurs at Dallas Mavericks game on April 15, it was announced today by NBA Commissioner David Stern. The conduct included Crawford's assessment of a second technical foul and ejection of Duncan following laughter by the player while he was seated on the bench, and inappropriate comments made to Duncan during the game.

Crawford's suspension will cover at least the remainder of the 2006-07 season, including the NBA Playoffs and Finals.

Continued...

Have a nice vacation, Joey!

Edit: Tim Duncan fined $25,000

 

[BB73]

Good move by Stern to suspend Crawford through the playoffs.

He's had the deserved reputation as the quickest 'T' in the league. Giving Duncan two technicals for what I saw (I was watching the game) was just ludicrous. Crawford is often on what appears to be a power trip.

Fining Duncan was necessary in order to be consistent with other comments critical of referees, but I think he'll gladly pay this fine, knowing he won't see Joey in the playoffs.

 

[Bleed S & G]

i'm in Joey's corner here, he felt like he was being mocked and dropped the T on Timmy. Good Call IMO (the first was weak, but the second was justified.)

completly disagree, any ref who listens to what players or fans think is not doing his job. especially one who makes the game about themselves.

 

[exhawg]

I don't know how you can bring him back. Any time he makes a call a player will be well within their right to complain to the league. A ref needs a thick skin and Crawford doesn't have it.

 

[OSU_Buckguy]

completly disagree, any ref who listens to what players or fans think is not doing his job.

that's simply not true. as i stated before, one of the officials' responsibilities is to penalize benches for their rules infractions. though officials cannot be expected to watch closely what fans do, it is also fully in their right to enforce correct fan behavior. it is their job. they are expected to do many things, one of which is calling technicals on benches when they break the rules. crawford's call on duncan was not warranted; however, crawford was fully warranted for at least noting his behavior.

although, it would be rather cool if refs could listen to players and fans think.

 

[OSUsushichic]

 

[akronbuck]

that's simply not true. as i stated before, one of the officials' responsibilities is to penalize benches for their rules infractions. though officials cannot be expected to watch closely what fans do, it is also fully in their right to enforce correct fan behavior. it is their job. they are expected to do many things, one of which is calling technicals on benches when they break the rules. crawford's call on duncan was not warranted; however, crawford was fully warranted for at least noting his behavior.

although, it would be rather cool if refs could listen to players and fans think.

Stern gave those weak officials to much power to mess with the players heads. I still can't believe if any player ask the official about the foul he called that can be a technical. That not being an official in my book. I did it for 5 years and I'm waiting for one of those old fucks to have a heart attack because, the game is way to fast for those old idiots.

Asking about foul is onething but, being an idiot in the officials face is a technical call. They need to re-train them as what is and what not

 

[OSU_Buckguy]

i agree, but it is wrong to claim that officials shouldn't even concern themselves with what goes on with the bench.

 

[akronbuck]

i agree, but it is wrong to claim that officials shouldn't even concern themselves with what goes on with the bench.

people go to games to watch the players not some idiot officiating or coaching. If Duncan was pointing to him I would agree with you but, he wasn't so , that was a power move by the official for no reason.

 

[Bleed S & G]

that's simply not true. as i stated before, one of the officials' responsibilities is to penalize benches for their rules infractions. though officials cannot be expected to watch closely what fans do, it is also fully in their right to enforce correct fan behavior. it is their job. they are expected to do many things, one of which is calling technicals on benches when they break the rules. crawford's call on duncan was not warranted; however, crawford was fully warranted for at least noting his behavior.

although, it would be rather cool if refs could listen to players and fans think.

i wasn;t saying he isn't allowed to penalize when the break the rules on the bench.. he had "rabbit ears" and was offended that duncan looked at his call as a joke.. as a professional ref you are taught to put it out of mind and focus and the game, not be a bitch.

 

[OSU_Buckguy]

people go to games to watch the players not some idiot officiating or coaching. If Duncan was pointing to him I would agree with you but, he wasn't so , that was a power move by the official for no reason.

sheesh... are you having trouble understanding my points? i think you are. i have repeatedly stated that crawford made a boneheaded call. there was no excuse for it. however, one of the officials' responsibilities is to call bench technicals when they are warranted. again, this one was not warranted. this inexcusable call does not, however, mean that officials should disregard how those on the bench act. just because crawford called a technical on duncan doesn't necessarily mean that he wasn't paying attention to the game. what part of the game is the official supposed to be paying attention to when he is walking back to the scorer's table to address his call?

i don't know why you quoted my comment when there was nothing about your post that refuted or even added to my comment. it has been discussed ad nauseum that crawford made a bad call.

 

[Bleed S & G]

completly disagree, any ref who listens to what players or fans think is not doing his job.

how is this statement, in the context of this thread, "simply untrue"

a ref who lets a players actions (when he's not breaking the rules, thought that was obvious.. maybe not, i mean logically if someone breaks the rules they should be penalized) effect his play calling is not doing his/her job.

For example, lets pretend for a second Tim Duncan laughs at a call by lets say... Crawford (for arguments sake).. Crawford ejecting him (Duncan) from the game, due to himself (crawford) being a bitch (in this case "rabbit ears") and letting duncans laughter affect him, is Crawford not doing his job as a NBA offical.. right? Or is it simply untrue?

 

[OSU_Buckguy]

how is this statement, in the context of this thread, "simply untrue"

considering that a previous poster made a comment about officials paying too attention much to things other than the game, i thought your phrasing was ambiguous and possibly meaning the same thing (that is, officials should not concern themselves with anything else but what happens on the court). if i had known that what you intended was that officials should not (overly) concern themselves with the intent of the players' behaviors on the bench, then i wouldn't have responded. i would have implicitly agreed. then again, officials must often divine intent when administering technicals. in this case, it is obvious that crawford got it all wrong.

 

[Jeffcat]

duncan was suspended 5 games because..........?