I’ve never thought of it as being “lazy” cluing. I just assumed that it was a symptom of wanting to be bring a themeless together in an overly eager manner.

Some months ago I made a puzzle with TICTAC as one entry and TOE as another. I still wish that I’d resisted the impulse to connect them. TICTAC is a perfectly fine entry as a breath mint, and TOE is a fine entry as a digit (or in some other context). But I “cross-clued” them because I could. And I still regret it.

In my opinion, every entry should stand alone and have it’s own clue. Perhaps it’s only because I’ve seen it abused so much, but I think that cross-referencing clues are either too clever by half, clued as afterthoughts, and/or downright annoying.

Quote puzzles notwithstanding, of course.

All that being said: You’re cross references weren’t annoying because they were so close together. Only 10-Across connecting with 54-Across were seperated in the grid; and that was quite a difficult connection for any constructor to ignore. (And probably the reason you wanted to ask for feedback in the first place.)

So the general answer is: Cross-refereneces, generally, suck.

But you did a good job of having cross-references that don’t suck.

I hope that clears thing up for ya.