:down: guys, i didn't see the game and just saw it on sportscenter and i agree this was a pathetic display of officiating. i think a suspension (of crawford) is more warrented than a fine and i'm thinking the duration should be the entire postseason. think about it, as he should be suspended about 10 games, which would put us well into the second round of the playoffs, when you should be using your better crews, so there's no reason to have crawford and this side show out there.
the commissioner does, in my opinion, treat referees favorably, but this looks like an act of (verbal) agression by crawford, i mean he asked the guy if he wanted to fight. the point is this is a blatent and aggregous abuse of his authority as an offical of the game and in a day and age where extracuricular violance is not tolerated.
Stern knows that "image is everything" and the one thing you have to give the guy credit for is he knows how to deal with violance and bad publicity. crawford will be dealt with.
btw, yah i lost money on the game too. :hairout: so maybe it's whining, but SA was definetly the right side and the determining factor in that game was without question the ejection of duncan.
if you want to defend crawford's action of the 2 technical fouls on duncan (both poor calls, particularly the 2nd) under the umbrella of "0 tolerance league policy" then fine. but a fine or suspension is what crawford deserves then for his "do you want to fight" comments which would, ironically been the more deserving of a technical foul call than what duncan did to get EITHER of his.:down: