JWest596
05-29-2008, 11:12 AM
Buck Harvey: NBA tries to diminish its creation
Buck Harvey, San Antonio Express-News
LOS ANGELES — According to the NBA league office, Joey Crawford was wrong.
So was Gregg Popovich.
There should have been a foul after all.
That’s what the league said Wednesday, and such a statement was unexpected. What Crawford and his fellow officials chose to do at the end of Game 4 was a judgment call, not a rules violation. Since when has anything like this been discussed and released to the public?
Since now. Since the Lakers and Celtics are on the cusp of television nirvana. Since the post-Tim Donaghy world has produced a conspiracy behind every bad call. Since Crawford was assigned to another pivotal Spurs playoff game — and botched the last call.
Given that, the NBA thought it needed to address this no-call that added to the perception of a conspiracy.
When the league had created the perception.
There is no conspiracy. David Stern would love to see the Lakers and Celtics in the Finals, and he would love more revenue. But any businessman would, and Stern would be risking everything for short-term profit.
Besides, if Stern were so determined to fix it so that only large markets made it to the Finals, he’s failed miserably over the past 10 years. The franchise with the most championships comes from one of the smallest markets.
But there are a lot of people who don’t believe that about Stern. And so Wednesday, with replays so clear that even sportswriters understood a foul should have been called, the league admitted something that won’t change a thing.
Brent Barry won’t shoot two foul shots, and the Spurs will still face elimination tonight. If the Spurs lose Game 5, what is their recourse? Put an asterisk on the Lakers’ championship?
If anything, the league’s acknowledgement is nothing more than an irritant. “With the benefit of instant replay,” a league spokesman said, “it appears a foul call should have been made.”
It appears? Nearly everyone not on the floor Tuesday night thought the same.
In hindsight, Tuesday night’s reaction is funny. The Lakers, for example, were certainly convinced Derek Fisher had landed on Barry in such a way that nothing should have been called. Had they argued, sure, a call could have been made, then that stance would have been understandable. Instead they were certain of themselves, and that’s the Phil Jackson way.
Jackson actually talked about officiating before, during and after Tuesday’s game. The before was the normal stuff, when he again referred to Bruce Bowen as Edward Scissorhands. The during came after the first quarter, when Jackson was asked by TNT’s Craig Sager what keyed a Spurs run. Jackson said, “To be honest with you, the guys with the whistles.”
The after was about Fisher and Barry. Jackson acknowledged there was a bump, but he agreed with the no-call. Then Jackson launched into a lengthy critique of the shot-clock call that had gone against him.
Jackson had talked about refs more in one day than Popovich has for a career. He whined once during the New Orleans series, and that’s why the moment was newsworthy. It was a first.
It also came after a Crawford game. Given that, no one would have blamed Popovich had he questioned everything about Game 4. Popovich, instead, tamped down his frustration. Asked about the no-call, he said, “If I was the official, I wouldn’t have called that a foul.”
Popovich didn’t do this just to be noble. He’s never seen the upside in postgame spin, and his staff stuck by the story Wednesday. It has a lot to do with getting the players to approach the next game the right way.
By doing this, Popovich helped the league. He took the steam out of those ready to rage. Jackson, in the same position, would have heightened the firestorm.
But the league is responsible. Crawford didn’t have to work another Spurs game, not after New Orleans, and when he did, the perception of a conspiracy crystallized about the time Fisher landed on Barry.
Now the league has a response.
Sorry.
http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/columnists/bharvey/stories/MYSA0529.BuckHarvey.EN.3c82acaf.html
Buck Harvey, San Antonio Express-News
LOS ANGELES — According to the NBA league office, Joey Crawford was wrong.
So was Gregg Popovich.
There should have been a foul after all.
That’s what the league said Wednesday, and such a statement was unexpected. What Crawford and his fellow officials chose to do at the end of Game 4 was a judgment call, not a rules violation. Since when has anything like this been discussed and released to the public?
Since now. Since the Lakers and Celtics are on the cusp of television nirvana. Since the post-Tim Donaghy world has produced a conspiracy behind every bad call. Since Crawford was assigned to another pivotal Spurs playoff game — and botched the last call.
Given that, the NBA thought it needed to address this no-call that added to the perception of a conspiracy.
When the league had created the perception.
There is no conspiracy. David Stern would love to see the Lakers and Celtics in the Finals, and he would love more revenue. But any businessman would, and Stern would be risking everything for short-term profit.
Besides, if Stern were so determined to fix it so that only large markets made it to the Finals, he’s failed miserably over the past 10 years. The franchise with the most championships comes from one of the smallest markets.
But there are a lot of people who don’t believe that about Stern. And so Wednesday, with replays so clear that even sportswriters understood a foul should have been called, the league admitted something that won’t change a thing.
Brent Barry won’t shoot two foul shots, and the Spurs will still face elimination tonight. If the Spurs lose Game 5, what is their recourse? Put an asterisk on the Lakers’ championship?
If anything, the league’s acknowledgement is nothing more than an irritant. “With the benefit of instant replay,” a league spokesman said, “it appears a foul call should have been made.”
It appears? Nearly everyone not on the floor Tuesday night thought the same.
In hindsight, Tuesday night’s reaction is funny. The Lakers, for example, were certainly convinced Derek Fisher had landed on Barry in such a way that nothing should have been called. Had they argued, sure, a call could have been made, then that stance would have been understandable. Instead they were certain of themselves, and that’s the Phil Jackson way.
Jackson actually talked about officiating before, during and after Tuesday’s game. The before was the normal stuff, when he again referred to Bruce Bowen as Edward Scissorhands. The during came after the first quarter, when Jackson was asked by TNT’s Craig Sager what keyed a Spurs run. Jackson said, “To be honest with you, the guys with the whistles.”
The after was about Fisher and Barry. Jackson acknowledged there was a bump, but he agreed with the no-call. Then Jackson launched into a lengthy critique of the shot-clock call that had gone against him.
Jackson had talked about refs more in one day than Popovich has for a career. He whined once during the New Orleans series, and that’s why the moment was newsworthy. It was a first.
It also came after a Crawford game. Given that, no one would have blamed Popovich had he questioned everything about Game 4. Popovich, instead, tamped down his frustration. Asked about the no-call, he said, “If I was the official, I wouldn’t have called that a foul.”
Popovich didn’t do this just to be noble. He’s never seen the upside in postgame spin, and his staff stuck by the story Wednesday. It has a lot to do with getting the players to approach the next game the right way.
By doing this, Popovich helped the league. He took the steam out of those ready to rage. Jackson, in the same position, would have heightened the firestorm.
But the league is responsible. Crawford didn’t have to work another Spurs game, not after New Orleans, and when he did, the perception of a conspiracy crystallized about the time Fisher landed on Barry.
Now the league has a response.
Sorry.
http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/columnists/bharvey/stories/MYSA0529.BuckHarvey.EN.3c82acaf.html