Perkins Ejection

[CLH]

[QUOTE=AustinRef;678708]
Anyway, my thoughts...how good of a look to Eddie Rush have on the foul? From his angle I would think he would see the push, but he certainly signaled otherwise. He obviously did not realize that was the second T on Perkins as they did not eject him right away (where was the table crew on this one ). Does he let that go if he does know he had one already? It was an interesting sequence that I think is the first time I can remember a crew botching administration procedures, which leads me to think it caught everyone off guard.QUOTE]


How is it obvious he did not realize it was the 2nd T? A second technical foul does not need be accompanied by the "heave ho" signal. It's still just another technical foul. I'm sure the table crew was sitting somewhere courtside Why would you let something go just because you've already given one technical foul. There is nothing in our rules that say the 2nd T has to be any more eggregrious sp? than the first one. In fact, I feel if you let them keep pushing you past what you have established as your line, it only shows that you don't have to guts to "man up" and handle business. Also, what administration did they botch? There was a foul, a technical foul, they shot the T, then played on from the original foul. Sounds like they handled it pretty well. Every official in that game has worked the NBA Finals, I'm pretty sure they can handle a simple foul/technical sequence. I don't really understand your reasoning behind all this. Please expound

[MathReferee]

Originally Posted by CLH

I don't really understand your reasoning behind all this. Please expound

I based that off the fact that they shot the technical, then ejected Perkins from the game. Unless I am completely mistaken there. From what I saw, Rush signaled the foul, signaled the technical, then turned around as Crawford administered the free throw. Then it looked like Washington walked up to Rush and they realized it was the second T on Perkins, and then ejected him from the game. So, the sequence was telling me he was not aware it was his second, hence the comment about assistance from the table crew .

As far as a second T needing to be more egregious than the first, I completely agree with you that it should not matter at all. A T is a T, no matter what the end result. However, seeing that this is the NBA, it has always appeared to me that the threshold for behaviour that earns a T is much higher. There is also a perceived pressure from the league to keep players in the game during playoffs (hence why I believe the T(s) will be rescinded today). That's all I meant by that.