Forgive me while I rant.

I'm sure that I am not alone in being outraged with Stern's decision to alter the course of NBA history and hand a very important playoff series to the Spurs by suspending Stoudamire/Diaw and rewarding the Spurs for Horry's cheap shot. Yes, I understand that he was just enforcing the rule that is on the books, and yes, I understand that there would be concerns over setting bad precedent, but sometimes, you just have to do what is right, and I don't think that is what happened here.

I strongly feel that the NBA will lose fans over this ruling. I can't even imagine being a Suns fan this morning. They must be totally pissed. I'm sure it was just a coincidence that Stern was supposed to be at the game last night in PHX and he ended up cancelling at the last minute. (He was sick! Riiiight.) Is it any wonder why people believe so many conspiracy theories about the NBA? Why wouldn't they?

There are other recent actions/rulings that make me think that Stern has lost it.

First, there is the whole "new ball" fiasco. In an attempt to appease a sponsor, Spaulding, he goes ahead and rolls out a totally new ball without getting the input of the players or the union. Embarrassingly, he ends up having to do a 180 and bring the old ball back halfway through the year when the new ball starts cutting up the hands of the players.

That is a total emabarrassment.

And then you have the "zero tolerance" mandate that they gave the refs this year before the season. You know, the one that led to players being tee'd up and even ejected for things like smiling, or clapping.

Joke.

How's that dress code going? Not only did that get debated two years ago ad naseum (not really the kind of publicity that you want), but the players aren't even paying attention to it anymore.

Joke.

Stern has never really bothered me much in the past, but over the past two years, he's really lost it IMO. Hearing him on the Dan Patrick Show yesterday really made me sick.

This man has a God complex, and I think he's doing a poor job running the league.

That's my rant, chime in if you agree/disagree.

Here's something fun to think about.

How much different/better/worse would the NBA be if:

1. Stern resigned
2. Cuban sold the Mavs and became Commissioner

?

I think he sucks and should step down, but not for the Suns/Spurs thing.

I think they should have been suspended. They knew the rules. You don't see NHL players jumping over the boards to join a fight, why should NBA players be allowed to rush the court? After the Knicks lost all those players in the 97 playoffs everyone should have learned their lesson. No good can come from players rushing into a melee. It only makes it worse. If you have 10 players on the court and 3 refs you can probably control those skirmishes. Add another dozen players into the fray and it's total chaos. Even more than any other sport because there are no railings/glass or other barriers to keep fans off the court either (as we all know).

I suppose the Avalanche bench should have jumped on the ice when McCarty pounded Lemeuix as well?

Playoff game or not, they know the rules. Suns fans should be pissed, at Amare and Diaw. Everyone else knew to stay on the bench. Everyone else had their head in the game.

And you can't hold the suspension until the regular season either. Players wouldn't care about the ramifications if they miss an early season game. Plus they could be on another team by then.

Can you explain why you think he should step down then?

I sorta wanted this to be more "big picture" than just about the Suns/Spurs thing, but you've got me intrigued by saying that you think he needs to go but not for this. What are your other reasons?


edit: added a poll

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that if I were commish, and the rules in the NBA are what they are now, I probably would have to go ahead with the suspensions of Stoudemire and Diaw.

I know that sounds shitty, but the rule clearly says what it says, and you have to be a man of your word and do your job. But that would not be the only thing I would do: I would also suspend Tim Duncan for doing the exact same goddamn thing, and I would publicly comment that the rule is not a very good one and should be changed.

Rules are very clumsy things. They are not precise instruments. They have language that can't be changed at a moments notice, and they do not adapt to every unique situation. Think of the rules as being a sledgehammer. Don't make a rule unless you want to hit someone with a sledgehammer. If you want to bitch-slap someone, do it with a rule. If you want to "encourage" or "discourage" certain subtle behaviors, you are going to need something more sophisticated than a sledgehammer.

In addition to that, you're placing great strain on a staff of officials that's already confirmed that they are struggling with competency. The more rule violations they're supposed to enforce, the more they're likely to take a dump all over a game.

So what I think the NBA needs is a lot fewer rules, a lot more judgment calls, and a little more flexibility. A good rule for the NBA would be like: if you intentionally injure another player or try to injure another player, you're out for the rest of the season. A bad rule would be...the defensive hand-checking thing, for example. If you want to stop overagressive defenders, you need a better idea than just inventing a new rule. That's just lazy and uncreative.

I just realized I completely failed to answer the question of the thread. So I will say that it does seem like Stern has...let's put this kindly...developed some priorities over the years that are not compatible with being the commissioner of a major sport. I think he should go.

I think he sucks and should step down, but not for the Suns/Spurs thing.

I think they should have been suspended. They knew the rules. You don't see NHL players jumping over the boards to join a fight, why should NBA players be allowed to rush the court? After the Knicks lost all those players in the 97 playoffs everyone should have learned their lesson. No good can come from players rushing into a melee. It only makes it worse. If you have 10 players on the court and 3 refs you can probably control those skirmishes. Add another dozen players into the fray and it's total chaos. Even more than any other sport because there are no railings/glass or other barriers to keep fans off the court either (as we all know).

I suppose the Avalanche bench should have jumped on the ice when McCarty pounded Lemeuix as well?

Playoff game or not, they know the rules. Suns fans should be pissed, at Amare and Diaw. Everyone else knew to stay on the bench. Everyone else had their head in the game.

And you can't hold the suspension until the regular season either. Players wouldn't care about the ramifications if they miss an early season game. Plus they could be on another team by then.

I have to disagree with you there Chris. Your hockey example is accurate but what about football and baseball? Heck, in baseball you will see guys run from the bullpen! Not to take a personal attack on you or anyone on this board but I feel that "the rule is the rule" statement is horrible. It is the basic idea and the essence of the rule that should be upheld.

If you want to cross the street but there is a two foot deep puddle at the cross walk, do you: a) Cross legally and step in the puddle -or- b) walk around the puddle and cross illegally (jaywalk)??????

If someone is choking in a restaurant and you smack them on the back to dislodge the food that they are choking on effectively saving their life did you: a) Save their life by doing a good deed -or- b) Commit battery which according to the law is striking someone's person. If you go by the letter of the law, you just commited a crime!

Stern is a joke of a commish and should step down. He botched this as well as the other things that Glenn mentioned. I also want to put forth something to once and for all end the suspension question:

If you look at the tape, Amare and Diaw left the bench right when Nash was hit. There was no altercation at that point. It wasn't until a second or two later that the pushing and shoving started as the players on the court gathered around where Horry was. If you want to go "by the rule", Amare and Diaw didn't leave the bench during an altercation. Watch the tape and then call me a liar. You can't becasue i'm right.

Now on the other hand, Duncan did the exact same thing. He left the bench as soon as Elson hit the floor. There really wasn't an altercation but that should have no bearing if the league truely was simply following the rules to the letter. It was exactly the same thing that Diaw and Amare did but it just happens that an altercation began after the second incident. How is this Amare's or Diaw's fault?

Either way the league screwed up and now basketball in the NBA sucks!

To answer Glen, besides what you mentioned their are other things that Stern has allowed to happen that are hurting the game.

Flopping. God I hate it and the league has done nothing about it. They should do what hockey does with diving penalties.

Favoritism. The league is becoming so shitty that they keep giving there golden boys favoritism with foul calls (ex. Wade). Make refs be more objective.....PLEASE!

Thuggery. After watching guys like Bowen repeatedly knock around other players, and seeing the league do nothing about it is just wrong.

The league just needs a new commish. I thought that basketball was supposed to be safe, fun, and fair. Apparently Stern disagrees!

I have to disagree with you there Chris. Your hockey example is accurate but what about football and baseball? Heck, in baseball you will see guys run from the bullpen! Not to take a personal attack on you or anyone on this board but I feel that "the rule is the rule" statement is horrible. It is the basic idea and the essence of the rule that should be upheld.

If you want to cross the street but there is a two foot deep puddle at the cross walk, do you: a) Cross legally and step in the puddle -or- b) walk around the puddle and cross illegally (jaywalk)??????

If someone is choking in a restaurant and you smack them on the back to dislodge the food that they are choking on effectively saving their life did you: a) Save their life by doing a good deed -or- b) Commit battery which according to the law is striking someone's person. If you go by the letter of the law, you just commited a crime!


I was saying rules are rules in sports, not everyday life. Obviously we have a jury system in place for everyday life because our country is founded on the principle of being judged by your peers. Sports is a seperate issue.

I also think MLB players should be suspended for coming out. Why should the benches be allowed to rush the field and scrum? That's stupid. I'd suspend batters for running at the pitcher too. What good does that ever do anyway? In a perfect world, I'd eliminate the DH and make the pitchers bat. That way if they throw at a guys head they are going to get some inside heat themselves. The reason why guys run the mound is probably largely due to the fact that they cannot get retribution with their own pitcher.

And you can't run on the field in football either. They are pretty strict in the NFL. If you take your helmet off to celebrate you get a penalty. I can't remember seing many scrums in football anyway. It's more talk than anything. And that sport is set up to where you can level the guy anyway withing the context of the game.

The players aren't paying attention to the dress code? How's that?

Not to get too far off the topic, because I think it's a good one (the job that Stern is doing) but I think you have to let the players come on the field in baseball.

Baseball is different because, on the field, it's 9 on 1. If there is a scuffle, you can't expect the dugout to sit and watch their teammate get pummelled by 9 guys. Baseball has always worked through this because in addition to a few guys that come off the bench to thrown down, there are always a few "peacemakers" that, along with the umps, can help temper the situation.

To answer Glen, besides what you mentioned their are other things that Stern has allowed to happen that are hurting the game.

Flopping. God I hate it and the league has done nothing about it. They should do what hockey does with diving penalties.

Favoritism. The league is becoming so shitty that they keep giving there golden boys favoritism with foul calls (ex. Wade). Make refs be more objective.....PLEASE!

Thuggery. After watching guys like Bowen repeatedly knock around other players, and seeing the league do nothing about it is just wrong.

The league just needs a new commish. I thought that basketball was supposed to be safe, fun, and fair. Apparently Stern disagrees!

These are reasons why I think he sucks. The league is a total superstar league where team play is limited to a handful of teams that aren't built around stars that shoot free throws all day. It's terrible basketball. It's the only sport people talk about "home town whistles" as well. You get different calls based on where you are playing. That's rediculous. You should expect the same calls, regardless of the arena, and regardless of player skill level. Period.

The players aren't paying attention to the dress code? How's that?

I've seen a bunch of recent video (and read a few things elsewhere) where players are entering the buildings wearing the same stuff that they used to, throwbacks, gold chains and other "bling", scuzzy looking t-shirts, etc.

Perhaps the rule isn't being enforced as much as it once was and the players are sensing that there is slack? Maybe there will be backlash and the NBA will crack down again?

Just relaying what I have seen for myself and read.

My problem with the dress code is that, IMO, it accomplished exactly the opposite of what it was supposed to accomplish.

Instead of changing the "thug image" to a "professional" image, it threw a spotlight on the fact that the "thug image" existed in the first place, and that became a discussion topic for what seemed like months.

Not to get too far off the topic, because I think it's a good one (the job that Stern is doing) but I think you have to let the players come on the field in baseball.

Baseball is different because, on the field, it's 9 on 1. If there is a scuffle, you can't expect the dugout to sit and watch their teammate get pummelled by 9 guys. Baseball has always worked through this because in addition to a few guys that come off the bench to thrown down, there are always a few "peacemakers" that, along with the umps, can help temper the situation.

I disagree. It's only 9 on 1 if you let the other players enter the scrum. You should either suspend the batter for running the mound -OR- suspend anyone that enters the fight as a second party. Now it's no longer 9 on 1. just because you can't control the 9 on 1 doesn't mean you should allow it to be 30 on 30 (or whatever the number is). The solution to an altercation is not to simply allow more people into it just to make it even. The solution is to eliminate it all together. The reason they happen is because there are no enforcers like hockey has.

I agree many players are peacemakers, but many are not. What happens when somoene comes off the bench and clocks someone upside the head with a bat? Somoene could get killed that way. It hasn't happened (that I know of), but it could. I don't think it's impossible either with people like Young throwing his bat at the ump. it's only a matter of time before someone gets seriously injured in one of those scrums.

Too much gray area IMO. If a batter is hit by a pitch and starts to charge the mound, there are many times when the opposing catcher is able to corrall him and calm things down. Do you suspend the catcher for entering into the melee?

I think "the code" in baseball helps keep things in check.

They do suspend players that charge the mound, btw.

Sorry, looks like we have two good topics going here at once.

Like I said - all these new rules are just trying to prevent the work it would take to give every situation the necessary scrutiny. It's just laziness combined with an unnecessarily adversarial attitude toward the players, which is probably because of racial bias.

When that report came out saying that white refs were tougher on black players, I could understand if Stern thought the study was bullshit, and if he thought so, he had every right to say so. I don't have the statistics so I didn't pick a side in that argument. But when he went on to say "Racism doesn't exist in the NBA" he completely lost me. That's just an utterly ridiculous and unprovable thing to say, and it's an obvious knee-jerk reaction by someone who knows he has a problem.

This league has suffered greatly in the last 5 years or so due to Stern's attitude. I understand that his goal is to make more money for everyone in the league by making basketball more popular around the world. But if you have to do that by taking the b-ball out of b-ball, it ain't worth it.

As long as the batter stays within the basline, no. He can posture all he wants as long as it's within the baseline.

I didn't know they suspended those players. What do you think of suspending other players into the skirmish? Why can't the 4 refs simply separate the two players? The batter would probably get a good tackle in there before they could get there, but at least nobody would suffer a searious injury. You're begging for something more letting everyone come out. And why is the bullpen allowed to come out? What purpose does that serve? I can see your 9 on 1 arguement, but why do relief pitchers need to join the fray?

The bullpen is usually way out in the outfield, meaning they have a LONG way to come to get in on things. I could understand guys coming out of the dugout so it isn't 9 on 1, they're right there by the scrum. But coming all the way from the bullpen is too much.

Detroit is by far the largest market of any of the possible Finals teams.

Stern is probably shitting himself.

Ill admit that I didnt read this whole thread (lazy) and am not going to say much. But I voted no. I dont like how he has changed the game to offense, effectively trying to keep the Pistons and Spurs out of the finals. But, he is the most fair commish of the four leagues to the rules. I didnt like that Suns/Spurs decision but he kept it fair to the rule. I also didn't like the new T foul emphasis this year but if we didn't have Sheed on our team I dont think any of us would have complained. His interviews are always well spoken and after watching them I always understand where he is coming from and his standpoint.

Just look to MLB for ignoring steriods, or the new NFL guy for suspending PacMan for a year without any convictions. Yes PM is probably deserving, but so far they are all just accusations.

its stu jackson that hands out penalties.

stern has resided over the league during its greatest growth rate, which is what it boils down to. penny pinchers innitial investment has grown like 5000% since he bought it, most of which occurred under stern.

people way overplay the dress code. we're talking about a multi billiondollar business, a few (very few) disgruntled employees are irrelivent. any talk, even negative talk about how the guys are thugs cuz they dont want to wear suits, is beneficial to the league.

the ball is overplayed too. they tried to introduce a ball that they believed to be equivalent quality (but cost about 1/5) didnt work out, so they switched back. i doubt more than a handful of people even remember that they switched balls. i wouldnt say im thrilled with the job hes done, but i know hes not going anywhere. people who mock the ball are probably the same people that mock stephon and ben for introducing 15 $ sneakers, so that maybe parents can put a little money in the bank rather than spending 1/3 a paycheck to buy their kid sneakers.

Detroit is by far the largest market of any of the possible Finals teams.

Stern is probably shitting himself.
Look for new rules to be implemented over the off-season that will give Phoenix the title next season.

As someone who became an NBA fan during the Larry O'Brien era, a lot of what Stern did right as Commissioner was execution -- filling out the vision that Larry O'Brien laid out, not getting into the way of inevitable forces like globalization, the Internet, etc. He presided over the cable and satellite waves of prosperity and mostly didn't screw the pooch.

When it comes to stuff on his own, his record is decidedly mixed -- lockouts, the WNBA, image management initiatives, the new ball, etc. Black and foreign teams with no American "Great White Hope" leads to Red State viewership problems. His biggest single positive mark on the league will likely be NBA Cares, but it has been overshadowed by retarded dress code stuff.

As for the recent suspension business, the easiest way to settle this in the future is to form a "bilateral commission" consisting of literate folks prominent in the "art" of confrontation -- Rudy Tomjanovich, Kermit Washington, Bill Laimbeer, and Michael Jordan. Lock them in a room and don't let them out until either:

1) Laimbeer walks out with MJ's head saying "NOW I know what they mean by a fatality bonus", or
2) They come up with a report suggesting some confrontation rules for Stern's consideration.

stern has resided over the league during its greatest growth rate, which is what it boils down to. penny pinchers innitial investment has grown like 5000% since he bought it, most of which occurred under stern.


That may be so, but more growth doesn't equate to better basketball. It just means more popular. Is Justin Timberlake better because he's more popular than a lot of bands?

I personally think Stern has just benifited from the nature of basketball being marketable. Basketball has the fewest players on the playing surface, so it's easier for fans to know the stars. Also, they are not wearing helmets, which makes them more recognizable. Plus, every kid wears sneakers. They don't clammer for Mike Vick's cleats, or Sidney Crosby's stick, or A Rod's bat. The people watching bball today grew up wanting a pair of air Jordans. Kids can play bball by themselves and all they need is a 10 dollar ball. It's the easiest sport to play (not skill wise, but economically and in terms of players needed), which means it's a lot easier to attract new fans than most sports.

Stern became commish the same year that Jordan, Hakim, Barkley and Stockton entered the league. Magic and Bird had only been there a few years. I'm not saying he always sucked, but certainly those players helped him out a TON.

its stu jackson that hands out penalties.

That's why David Stern was on every talk show he could find after the Suns/Spurs penalty was handed out claiming that the decision was all his. When Dan Patrick asked who made the decision to suspend Amre/Diaw, Stern emphatically said , "I make every decision".

That is what I mean by "god complex".



stern has resided over the league during its greatest growth rate, which is what it boils down to. penny pinchers innitial investment has grown like 5000% since he bought it, most of which occurred under stern.

What you are saying is true, but it's also ancient history. I'm not judging Stern on his career achievements here, which are without a doubt, substantial. I'm talking about the last 3 years or so, where he has completely lost his mind IMO.

Bad decision after bad decision.

Stern became commish the same year that Jordan, Hakim, Barkley and Stockton entered the league. Magic and Bird had only been there a few years. I'm not saying he always sucked, but certainly those players helped him out a TON.
He was #2 to Larry O'Brien before then. He's been with the NBA since the '60s as a legal eagle. He was making far more than most athletes during the '70s arguing against their free agency, while trying hard to squash the ABA before it spurred competition on player salaries (never mind all the good aspects that the ABA brought). You won't find such failed efforts on his list of accomplishments.

I really have no expertise on that era having been born in '79. I started watching NBA in the late 80's really.

As for the recent suspension business, the easiest way to settle this in the future is to form a "bilateral commission" consisting of literate folks prominent in the "art" of confrontation -- Rudy Tomjanovich, Kermit Washington, Bill Laimbeer, and Michael Jordan. Lock them in a room and don't let them out until either:

1) Laimbeer walks out with MJ's head saying "NOW I know what they mean by a fatality bonus", or
2) They come up with a report suggesting some confrontation rules for Stern's consideration.

Great idea, but I doubt you could get Jordan and Laimbeer into the same room. I'm pretty sure they hate each other, or at least Jordan hates Laimbeer.

My first basketball was an ABA ball, and my appreciation for pro basketball began right around when Dr. J was being absorbed by the NBA. The late '70s/early '80s had a whole lot of positive stuff going on, radical changes in the game (the three point shot, younger players), and a lot of stuff was starting to form into shape.

By the time Stern was anointed, he had Bird and Magic coming in like LeBron and Wade (behind a fading Dr. J.) as the leading lights of the league, and much more was on the way. He already had a salary cap as a % of revenue, an anti-drug program, and a cable deal on day one, because O'Brien had a good read on what was right. Stern mostly rode the wave throughout much of the '80s. Life was good. His big global push became widely accepted after the '88 Olympics, and all he had to do was sit tight.

But, around the time the Bad Boys emerged, money became big enough where the owners, represented by Stern, started hiding revenues. Revenues were going up of course, and there was already some resentment at the rookies getting more than the veterans who signed contracts only a couple years back. But it got worse when it came out that the owners were holding back. That's really what instigated all of the pissing contests in the '90s, ultimately leading to rookie scale contracts not paying players what they're worth when they're worth it, and the '99 lockout.

All this under Stern's watch...

Great idea, but I doubt you could get Jordan and Laimbeer into the same room. I'm pretty sure they hate each other, or at least Jordan hates Laimbeer.
They both play golf at a high level. There's common ground (or a chance to nail each other with golf clubs). Seriously, getting respected players, coaches, etc. involved in the policy here would be a good thing. Add Larry Brown -- whatever you may feel about him, it was clear that he was sickened by that damn brawl.

i couldnt care less about the game 5 suspensions. big deal. these guys should have a better grasp on the rules. what good would come of a gray area in the rule? wht good would come of amare and boris running over there? a clear cut rule lets the players know there is absolutely no reason or situation for them to get off the bench. notice that all the vets on the bench were smart enough to stay put?

another thing thats being ignored is the globalization of the nba, which is probably stern's crown jewel of his entire tenure. an nba presence in china, which actually extends beyond yao, is a remarkable achievement, and something that really is going to pay off i think.

We're obviously not going to agree on this one b-diddy, and that's okay.

A few more points, though.

Although it was not my intention to have the Amare/Diaw suspensions as the focal point of this thread, they're still integral, and they demonstrate my assertion that Stern is doing the NBA wrong.

Nearly a full week after the fact, the two major sports radio networks (ESPN & FOX) were still leading their top of the hour broadcasts with this story. ESPN's Mike Greenberg contends that Stern's decision to "hand the series to the Spurs" has "taken all of the fun out of this year's playoffs" and "a black cloud is kind of lingering over it now". He said this while explaining that Stern has been nominated for the show's weekly "Just shut up" award.

I flip over to Fox Sports Radio and the discussion is about having an asterisk next to the Spurs name in the record books if they go on to win the title. A discussion ensues about the "biggest asterisks" in sports, and they debate whether the 2007 Spurs or Barry Bonds will have a more significant *

This decision, in particular, has caused significant harm to the league. Add it to the others that have been discussed here and I don't know how you can put a positive spin on Stern's RECENT job performance.

As far as China goes, how popular was the NBA in China before Yao Ming? So Stern gets the credit for that now? How important to the owners of current NBA teams is success in China? Do you think they care about that more than filling their arenas, which many of them are struggling to do?

I've never been this disgruntled with the NBA, and it all started with Stern mandating that teams can't play defense anymore after we won the title in 2004.

Hope you enjoy seeing Dwyane Wade shoot 35 free throws a game, b-diddy.

I still agree with b-diddy on the gray area. You can't leave that open to interpretation. How close can you get to an altercation? 10 feet? 5 feet? Even if you don't join the melee your proximity will result in the other team assuming hostile actions. What if the altercation is along the sideline like Horry/Nash? Do you apply the same distance? What if it's near a bench?

I just don't think you can assign qualifyers like that. It has to be cut and dry to make sure everyone stays at their bench.

Well, look for the rule to be changed after the Finals to make it open to interpretation. Gotta have some wiggle room in there to allow for judgement of intent/severity (maybe a suspension is only warranted if a player makes contact with an opponent?).

Bowen's stepping on people's feet, kneeing guys in the balls and he plays on. Two guys take three steps onto the court, never get closer than 30 feet from some pushing and shoving, and the course of playoff history changes. That's fucked up.

Again, I know that he just interpreted the rule as written, but if he was truly this great "leader" I think he would have stuck his neck out and said "this is not right" and maybe substituted some fines instead.

If you aren't going to suspend guys like Bowen, you pretty much need to "swallow the whistle" and let the teams play with all of their guys IMO (that includes Horry).

Which is exactly what they did with Haslem/Hinrich. Last year, Haslem throws his mouthpiece into the first row and he gets a game suspension. This year, Hinrich does the exact same thing and only gets a fine. Perfect example of just "doing the right thing".

Suspensions in the playoffs should be reserved for homicidal offenses only IMO.

There's already a grey area and ambiguity here.

What's an altercation? What makes Cheap Shot Bob administering a flagrant 2 to Nash an "altercation" but James Jones undercutting Francisco Elson not?

Remember, Bell, Nash and Horry didn't get into it to the point where it looked like a real ruckus until -after- Amare and Diaw had left the bench and were held back by Iavaroni. It's not like they had a crowd of people to react to.

How are all players supposed to judge a fight or "altercation" in an instantaneous way? Amare was checking in as part of a lineup change at the next stoppage of play, so he likely would've been on the court in any event.

Stern should've fixed this a long time ago. The problem isn't "what Stern did now", but "what he didn't do 10 years ago".

As for for Stern and globalization, he rode the wave... nothing more or less. Olajuwon was #1 in '84, Sabonis was drafted in '85. The few people who weren't sold on international players were convinced after the '88 Olympics. The European teams were Stern made the wise choice of not discouraging it, but that wasn't hard. It's like saying "the Internet is good" in the late '90s. It's not -that- visionary if everyone's doing it to profitable effect.

bumping this in light of recent events

If it comes to light that Stern knew about this ref fixing games for a significant amount of time and allowed it to continue, could this be the end for him?

That's a pretty big "if" Glenn.

Well, there are reports that the NBA hired an investigator to follow him more than a year ago and continued to let him call games.

That doesn't look good.

its a mighty big leep from concern over eratic behavior to knowing he's betting on and fixing games.

i think darth stern is innocent on this one, glenn.

Which is why I said...


If it comes to light that Stern knew about this ref fixing games for a significant amount of time and allowed it to continue, could this be the end for him?

If makes you feel better, consider it a hypothetical.

More info on the NBA's private investigator: http://www.philly.com/inquirer/sports/20070723_Donaghy_may_blow_whistle.html

I'm sure the owners will love this image.

http://assets.espn.go.com/photo/2007/0723/nba_dirty_ref_412.jpg

That makes it look like Stern's got his back....

Stern has an 11 am presser today.

Without a doubt the most important press conference in his career, maybe in NBA history.

Anybody know where I can stream (audio or video) the Stern presser?

I'm interested to see if he comes off as smug as he normally does.

Got it.

http://sports.yahoo.com/

I heard a lot of it while I was fixing the tranny on my car. Half the time he sounded like he wasn't sure what he was saying.

Stern believes betting allegations an isolated case
By BRIAN MAHONEY, AP Basketball Writer


NEW YORK (AP) -- David Stern insisted allegations a former referee bet on games was an isolated case and called it the worst situation he had experienced during his tenure as commissioner.
"Mr. Donaghy is the only referee alleged to have bet on NBA games and disclosed confidential information to others," Stern said Tuesday during a packed news conference. "I'll say it again, I understand this is an isolated case."
The FBI is investigating former referee Tim Donaghy for allegedly betting on games he officiated during the last two seasons. He is expected to turn himself in at U.S. District Court in Brooklyn later this week or early next week, according to a person familiar with the investigation.
"We understand he's accused of betting on games in the NBA," Stern said. "We're not positive it's games he worked."
However, he said, there still was the possibility that Donaghy did gamble on games he worked and that was part of the investigation.
"I understand that he will likely be accused of providing information to others for the purpose of allowing them to profit by betting on NBA games," he said.
Stern called it the "worst situation I've every experienced either as fan of the NBA, a lawyer for the NBA or commissioner of the NBA."
The FBI first contacted the NBA on June 20 to talk about a referee alleged to be gambling on games, and the two sides met on June 21, Stern said. Donaghy resigned July 9.
"Suffice to say, we would have liked to have terminated him earlier, but our understanding was the investigation would best be aided if we did not terminate Mr. Donaghy," Stern said.
The June call from the FBI was not the first time Donaghy faced gambling allegations.
In January 2005, Stern said the NBA investigated a dispute between Donaghy and a West Chester, Pa., neighbor. During the investigation, there were allegations that Donaghy was gambling -- not on sports -- in Atlantic City. Stern said the league contacted every casino in Atlantic City and Las Vegas and found no evidence of gambling by Donaghy.
Authorities are examining whether Donaghy made calls to affect the point spread in games on which he or associates had wagered thousands of dollars over the past two seasons, according to a law enforcement official. The referee had a gambling problem and was approached by low-level mob associates through an acquaintance, the official said.
"We take our obligation to fans in this matter very seriously," Stern said. "I can stand here today and pledge that we will do every look back possible to analyze our processes and seek the best advice possible to see if there are changes that should be made and procedures that should be implemented to continue to assure fans we're doing the best we possibly can."
Stern said league officials observed no inappropriate behavior by Donaghy the last two seasons.
Those familiar with the investigation and the law enforcement official spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren't authorized to discuss the ongoing probe.
Stern said league officials had been following the officiating scandal that rocked a German soccer league.
"My reaction is I can't believe it's happening to us," Stern said.
Associated Press Writer Pat Milton contributed to this report.

I heard a lot of it while I was fixing the tranny on my car. Half the time he sounded like he wasn't sure what he was saying.

Dude, I know you just broke up but drug use and transvestites over that chick? Step your game up player.

Dude, I know you just broke up but drug use and transvestites over that chick? Step your game up player.
I wasn't having SEX with the tranny, I was FIXING the tranny. Got out the scalpal and did some minor surgery in a dirty alley in the back of a van with no windows, ya know?

I can't imagine Stern getting booted over this. Stern's been anti-gambling to a fault. Donaghy got under his radar, and I expect Stern will be allowed to refine his approach toward eliminating gambling.

I wasn't having SEX with the tranny, I was FIXING the tranny. Got out the scalpal and did some minor surgery in a dirty alley in the back of a van with no windows, ya know?

What did you do with the spare parts?

What did you do with the spare parts?
And why might you be asking?

I can't imagine Stern getting booted over this. Stern's been anti-gambling to a fault. Donaghy got under his radar, and I expect Stern will be allowed to refine his approach toward eliminating gambling.


Will Stern resign? No, but still all this happened on his watch, so I could see a couple of owners (maybe Cuban) calling for him to step down when all the dust settles.

He's been there a long time. I'm sure there are tons of peeps that would love to have that job.

Lastly, a lot prolly depends on how ugly this thing gets.

a lot prolly depends on how ugly this thing gets.

Good call. I think this is my main point also. If it turns out that there was a major game-calling scandal going on right underneath Stern's nose and it took the FBI to figure it out for him, even though many people have been rightly complaining about the increase in questionable calls, I think it could hurt him badly.

Or if he knew there was something going on and didn't act soon enough.

I'd expect Stern to resign only if he didn't -want- to deal with all the bullshit associated with this. I wouldn't expect him to be forced out. Among the long time owners are a U.S. Senator in charge of racketeering enforcement and an owner of Vegas casinos. If this turns out to be some widespread issue and neither of them caught onto it with their spider senses, Stern isn't gonna get booted over his actions/inactions here.