I asked a ref if he could give me a technical foul for thinking
I asked a ref if he could give me a technical foul for thinking bad things about him. He said, of course not. I said, well, I think you stink. And he gave me a technical. You can't trust em.
Hear now the words of Jim Valvano, a man whose laughter was as great as his courage: “I asked a ref if he could give me a technical foul for thinking bad things about him. He said, of course not. I said, well, I think you stink. And he gave me a technical. You can’t trust ’em.” At first, these words appear lighthearted, a jest in the world of sport. Yet beneath the humor lies a truth about trust, authority, and human nature. Valvano, a coach whose fiery spirit led ordinary teams to greatness, reveals in this tale the dance between honesty and discretion, between thought and speech, between the heart’s mischief and the rules of the game.
The origin of this quote comes from the heat of the basketball court, where tempers flare and passions burn bright. Coaches, referees, and players live in a world of intensity, where every call can shape destiny. In such moments, humor becomes a shield and a weapon. Valvano, known for his wit, tested the boundaries of fairness itself. Could a man be punished for mere thoughts? Surely not. But when he spoke his thoughts aloud—“you stink”—judgment fell. And so he laughed, and with laughter, he taught.
History shows us that this paradox is not confined to the basketball court. Consider Socrates, who in ancient Athens challenged the authority of the powerful by speaking the thoughts others dared not utter. Though he claimed to be only a seeker of truth, his words stirred discomfort, and in the end, he was condemned. His thoughts alone were harmless, but his words, like Valvano’s jest, carried consequences. Both men show us that authority often tolerates silent dissent but punishes outspoken challenge.
Yet Valvano’s tale is not one of bitterness but of humor. He did not curse the referee, nor rage at the unfairness. Instead, he turned the moment into a story, one that lives beyond the court. Here lies the deeper wisdom: when confronted with the limits of fairness, when caught in the clash between freedom and authority, laughter can preserve dignity and teach truth without leaving behind bitterness. His technical foul became not a wound but a parable, passed down with joy rather than anger.
Still, his words “you can’t trust ’em” carry weight. They remind us that those in positions of judgment are human, and as such, imperfect. A referee, a judge, a leader—each may declare themselves neutral, but bias, pride, or simple mischief may guide their hand. Trust in human authority, then, must always be tempered with wisdom. Blind faith in men is folly; true security lies in justice, transparency, and accountability.
The lesson is this: be mindful of what you think, but even more mindful of what you say. Thoughts may be free, but words carry consequences. Choose your words with care, and if you must speak boldly, know that truth often comes at a price. Yet also learn from Valvano’s example—do not carry bitterness when authority falls heavy upon you. Wear it lightly, with humor, and let your spirit rise above the moment.
Therefore, remember this teaching: laughter is a shield, and wisdom is a compass. Do not place your trust wholly in human judges, for they are fallible. Instead, trust in principles, in truth, in your own integrity. And when you find yourself punished for honesty, do not despair—turn it into a story, a lesson, a spark of joy for those who come after you. In this way, like Valvano, you will transform even your defeats into victories of the spirit, and your life will be remembered not for the fouls you received, but for the laughter and courage you inspired.
–––
DHDuyen Hang
This quote is hilarious, but it also makes me wonder about the role of humor in tense moments like sports games. How often do players and coaches use humor or sarcasm to push boundaries or challenge authority, like Valvano did with the ref? Is this kind of playful pushback just part of the culture, or should there be a clearer boundary between acceptable behavior and unsportsmanlike conduct?
TTHoang Thi Thanh Thuy
Valvano’s quick wit about the technical foul is a great reminder of how competitive sports bring out the personalities of players and coaches. But in a serious sense, how often do we see calls that feel more about personal judgment than the actual game? Should there be stricter guidelines for technical fouls, or is this just part of the unpredictable nature of sports officiating?
TTThao Hoang thi thu
Jim Valvano's story highlights the playful tension between athletes and referees, but I wonder—how often do these small moments impact the outcome of a game? Could a technical foul for something as trivial as a comment really change the course of a game, or is it just part of the drama? Should players be more mindful of how they interact with refs, or is it just all in good fun?
Aabc
Valvano’s quote about the technical foul is a funny example of how sports are full of unexpected moments. But in a broader sense, it also makes me think about how authority figures—whether refs or others—can sometimes act in ways that don’t seem fair or justified. Do you think the rules should be more consistent, or is the unpredictability part of what makes sports interesting? Should we be more understanding of referees' decisions?
NATrinh Nguyet Anh
This quote from Valvano perfectly captures the humor and frustration that often comes with sports. Referees have a tough job, but isn’t it funny how they can take something as small as a sarcastic comment and turn it into a penalty? Should there be more room for players to express frustration without risking a penalty, or is this just part of the game? How much leeway should referees have in making judgment calls?