David Stern Talks Cuban/Kenyon, Instant Replay, Ron Artest

HOUSTON -- You stand in front of NBA commissioner David Stern just a couple seconds and you are sure to get an earful about how solid of a footing his game is on these days. The playoffs and the exciting regular-season the NBA is coming off of seems to bring out the best in Stern. But when pressed, the long time commissioner will shoot you straight on some of his and the league's shortcomings and what can be done better.

Stern met briefly with media members just before Thursday night's Rockets-Lakers Game 6 in Houston, answering questions about everything from the possibility of instant replay during NBA games to the explosive Western Conference semifinal playoff series between the Mavericks and Nuggets, in which Dallas owner Mark Cuban told the mother of Nuggets forward Kenyon Martin that her son is a thug.

The league took a hit because Cuban received no punishment for his actions and Stern seemed fine with the emotional owner's suggestion he would apologize to Martin's family via his blog instead of in person.

Stern also discussed the brewing debate about determining a flagrant 1 foul and a flagrant 2, and he addressed the possibility controversial Rockets' forward Ron Artest could be a victim of profiling while on the court.

Here is a sampling of Stern's exchange with the media Thursday night:

Q: Can you address some of the problems that have taken place during the playoffs, particularly in the Nuggets-Mavericks series?

A: "I take full responsibility for the non-league action. I've spoken to Billy Hunter, I've spoken to Mark Cuban. I had suggested that a phone call would be the appropriate thing. Mark told me he was in the process of trying to do that.

"I called Billy and said what went on there wasn't anything that I was proud of, but I thought there was an attempt at an apology in the blog which is the way Mark communicates. But Billy and I agreed that more was called for so I called Mark and suggested that he reach out.

"Then there was some to and fro where Kenyon said some things he wish he hadn't. Honestly, I thought it was done to make cooler heads prevail because this is a league that I think takes justifiable pride in its diversity and inclusiveness. This was something I was not particularly proud of and it's going to cause me to re-examine some things that I wont go into in the course of the summer and the way we conduct ourselves. But it's a wakeup call to tread carefully and show a lot more respect for each other."

Q: Can you talk about what constitutes a flagrant 1 versus flagrant 2 foul?

A: "Honestly I am depending on my broadcasters to take care of that. Let them put it up on the screen rather than have the color commentator say 'I don't care what the rule says, that shouldn't be a flagrant.' That's a terrific way to try to train 60 members of the staff that have a good call. But we need to do a better job.

"People are confused but we would hope our broadcast partners would put the rule up, understand it and then indicate the difficult job referees have in doing it."

Q: What about when a difference of opinion comes into play?

A: "We'll talk to them at the Competition Committee [meetings] in a few weeks."

Q: So do you feel it's all clear?

A: "Is it clear in our sport? Refereeing in the paint. Trying to give a consistent interpretation, it's the most difficult sport to ref. Replay makes it that much more difficult and we try to do the best we can.

"We try to review it and do the best we can to add clarity and whether something should or should not be called a flagrant fouls. We take the paints because we undertook to our fans to have more transparency. But it's quite difficult. But our guys give it their best shot and they are the best of any sport, I believe."

Q: Do believe Ron Artest's past was a factor in his flagrant calls?

A: "No, not in our decision. You try to give it your best shot at calling it fair.

"I think that there may be a human element to it if you are the ref and you have somebody who has gone off, you worry that may go off. That's human and I understand. I don't know that it's profiling but what we try to do is call it the way the rules require us to call it."

Q: What are some of the changes you anticipate coming?

A: "I'm a little disappointed the Competition Committee hasn't been a little bit bolder on instant replay, though I recognize the difficulties. The other thing I want to study is the security in the broadest context and how we on one hand maintain the intimacy that is our game, which I think sets us apart in a good a way and brings our fans closer with making sure our fans can come and continue to enjoy our game the way they have. We've put in a lot
of rules and procedures that are not evident to our fans like where we stack up security, how we serve alcohol and things like that because on a global scale we take great pride that basketball is a family sport and one that you should feel comfortable bringing your entire family. That places a certain responsibility on us and causes us to re-evaluate what we do.

"We are going to re-evaluate it and re-evaluate it because I want keep the special-ness of our game."

Q: Do you feel that the news of suspensions and debates of flagrant fouls in between games takes away from the competition on the floor?

A: "You can't have it both ways. You want us to do the reviews, be forthright, have the transparency. That just becomes the subject of conversation, but we are happy to engage in it because that's the undertaking that we make."

Q: Are you concerned in this economy that some families may be priced out and that ticket sales might go down?

A: "No. I think I am concerned on behalf of the business of sports because there is no business that I know that hasn't been subject to pressure, because if Americans decide to spend four percent less because they are going to save four percent rather than nothing. That's those who can save, then others who are unemployed are going to put pressure on all businesses.

"Right now our renewals are pretty much on pace with last year. I think we are going to have very good attendance next year, but because we have teams that either held price or dropped price through promotions, our revenue may be down a bit but that's okay. I think the sport itself will okay."

Q: How would you like to see instant replay adjusted?

A: "I don't want to present the target, but I'm a big fan of tennis and I envy a sport where the action stops after every point so you can make sure it's correct. We can't do that and ours would be subject to terrible abuse and it would slow down and we can't go there.

"But I think as we have continued to take baby steps in this direction we may be getting closer to a time where the NBA has some kind of a challenge system that can be considered. I expect to be voted down 30 to nothing."

Q: Could that apply to fouls, goaltending, blocks, 3-point shooting?

A: "I don't know the answer, but what we are struggling with is we want to have a set of rules, we want to call it the way they are written, we want to have a game called the same no matter who is refereeing it. We want to assure that we get it right. Against that, we struggle with the problem to get it perfectly right, you put 16 cameras and it would take four hours to play the game. We can't do that, we won't do that. So what you have seen is us move slowly to more replay and I think this is a good time to look at it again. It may happen or it may not happen."