Call Me Crazy, But I Smell a Conspiracy

Mark Cuban is one of the most polarizing owners (and figures) in professional sports; people either love him or hate him and there seems to be no in between. (Can you guess which camp I fall into?) Among fans, athletes, and media, intense dislike or disdain for Cuban and, by association, his basketball team, the Dallas Mavericks, is perfectly understandable, even acceptable. But when that distaste for Cuban spills over into the NBA hierarchy, from officials (Dan Crawford and Bennett Salvatore) to the seemingly untouchable NBA Commissioner David Stern himself, something is inherently wrong with the system and it definitely warrants review. And unlike NBA coaches and players, the almighty David Stern's threats of fines and suspension don't extend to fans like me -- at least not yet-- so let's examine a few factors that have led me to believe that both Dan Crawford and Commissioner Stern have it out for Mark Cuban and the Dallas Mavericks.

1. Since Mark Cuban purchased the Mavericks in 2000, Dallas has won approximately 60% of their playoff games. However, during that same time frame, in games which Dan Crawford has officiated, the Mavericks are 1-17. While I realize there could be room for some discrepancy (for instance, if Crawford only officiated games where Dallas played superior teams, such as the Lakers, Celtics, etc.), there is no excuse nor reasonable explanation for Dallas winning only 5.8% of its playoff games when Dan Crawford was a member of the officiating team.

2. I find it more than a little coincidental that once it was announced that Dan Crawford, who is publicly known as Mark Cuban's least favorite official, for obvious reasons, would be officiating Game 3 between the Mavs and Spurs, that is when Commissioner Stern decided to speak out against players and coaches criticizing officials. Stern declared that now, rather than just fining players and coaches, he would consider suspensions as well if the criticisms continued. (Read the full story here: http://www.nba.com/2010/news/04/22/stern.refs.ap/index.html?ls=iref:nbahpt2).

While it's true that refereeing an NBA game is the most difficult of all pro sports, and there will always be some degree of human error as a result of the quick pace of the game, players and coaches have been complaining about calls and non-calls for years now. Some of them, such as Spurs Coach Gregg Popovich, just know how to play the game in the media. For instance, after Game 1, in which the Mavs attempted 34 free throws to the Spurs 20, Popovich made it a point in his post-game comments to draw attention to the number of free throws attempted by Dirk Nowitzki in particular. Since Game 1, the Spurs have attempted 46 free throws, the Mavs just 35. It's all too convenient that Popovich was able to get his point across prior to Stern's edict, but now that Dallas has a legitimate gripe, they are prohibited from speaking publicly about it.

3. When Dan Crawford, who has been officiating NBA games for roughly 25 years, is on the floor with Dick Bavetta, the all-time leader in NBA games officiated, how is it that Crawford is chosen to be the "lead official"? Shouldn't that job go to the man with the most experience, the most seniority, and most importantly, no known bias against either team playing in a particular game? Bavetta has been an NBA referee for 32 seasons and has never missed an assigned game, Yet, somehow, Crawford was named lead official, giving him the right to overturn any calls made by the other two on-court officials.

4. Crawford exercised his right to overturn calls on several crucial plays that actually helped turn the tide in Game 3 to favor the Spurs. Early in the second quarter, Dick Bavetta declared that Eddie Najera had drawn an offensive foul against the Spurs, which meant the Mavs would regain possession of the basketball. However, Crawford, who was near midcourt and not at an angle to properly judge the play, like Bavetta, the nearest official to the action, had been when he made the initial call, Crawford reversed the call, giving the Spurs the ball back and charging Najera with a blocking foul, claiming his heel was on the circle of the restricted area. Regardless of whether or not Crawford was the lead official, how should he be allowed to overturn a call by a referee who has more experience and basketball knowledge and clearly had a better angle on the play?

A few minutes later, Dirk was driving to the basket and was fouled. The whistle blew as Dirk released the ball in a shooting motion, and the ball proceeded to bounce around the basket before finally falling through -- at which time Crawford ruled that the foul had been on the floor, prior to Dirk going into his shooting motion, which it clearly was not. The Mavs were given the ball side out of bounds and no score resulted from the possession, which should have been at minimum a two point gain, most likely a three point turnaround for Dallas, as Dirk surely would have nailed the resulting free throw had the foul been called in the act of shooting.

5. The most telling pair of plays came late in the game, when Crawford again proved how inconsistent he can be with his whistle. When the Mavs had the ball and Dirk drove the lane, Matt Bonner moved over in front of him, never completely getting his feet set on the floor, and the call was an offensive foul on Dirk. The very next play, down at the Spurs end of the floor, the same exact scenario played out, except it was Ginobili with the ball, and the Mavs were called for the blocking foul! It was an identical situation, yet the outcome -- a five point turnaround, considering Ginobili nailed the basket and the foul shot as well -- would have been enough to change the final score to read Mavericks 95, Spurs 94. But it just didn't happen that way.

Apparently, Mavs' center Erick Dampier was unaware of the Stern edict handed down prior to Game 3, and Dampier, usually a quiet soul, had a few choice words when it came to the officiating of the game. (Read the full story here: http://sports.espn.go.com/dallas/nba/news/story?id=5132345). Although he didn't single out any one official, he did say that all the Mavericks were wanting was a fair shake; call it the same way on both ends of the floor. At the end of the article, it's mentioned that the league and "NBA officials" will be reviewing Dampier's comments to decide what action, if any, will be taken against him.

And if, somehow, the league finds a way to suspend Dampier over his comments, count me among the fans who won't be the least bit surprised. Is there a conspiracy against Mark Cuban and the Dallas Mavericks? Do David Stern and his cronies really have it out for the boys in blue? I believe I've made my position perfectly clear. You've read the stories and seen the evidence; YOU DECIDE.