Diaw/Amare suspended 1 game, Horry suspended 2 games

[EvanJC]

Oh my god, Skip Bayless is making sense on cold pizza.

[EvanJC]

[ QUOTE ]
Where was the outrage last year when the NBA injected itself into the competitive balance of last year's Western semi by suspending Jason Terry for game 6, when Stu Jackson said, "There was no option here. The rule is very clear cut." Michael Finley jumped on Jason Terry after the whistle blew in a competitive game w/ 3 seconds left, Terry then gives him a nice little closed fist tap in the junk.

Maybe we should change that rule too.

I honestly have no idea how this thing has blown up in the way that it has other than casual fans have taken a liking to the Suns (for better or worse-- actually almost certainly for worse), come in, watch games, don't understand the dynamics of the game, the rules, and disciplinary measures the league has put into place, then whine.

David Stern is absolutely 100% correct. The league owners have time and again decided this is the way they want the rules enforced. He is doing what he has been told to do. Him NOT suspending Amare and Diaw would have been a grave miscarriage of justice and the most egregious injection of the league office into the competitive dynamics of the game since he froze the Knicks envelope back in the day.

[/ QUOTE ]

that's fine. why isnt' timmy d suspended, as well?

[Aloysius]

I think Stern is being neurotic also. He's clearly deathly afraid of being called out for lenience in this series concerning the rule, and being attacked when the next bench-clearing brawl goes down.

Who, exactly, will attack him? If he noted that the rule is somewhat open to interpretation, does Stern really have exposure going-forward?

I think he's missing the forest for the trees and I don't think he has a good feel for this particular situation and the fan's take on it (despite the fact there have been polls on every major sports website, and a majority of basketball talking heads think this is an idiotic decision).

-Al

[ThomasPHoolery]

[ QUOTE ]

that's fine. why isnt' timmy d suspended, as well?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because he didn't violate a rule? I've seen nothing in the video of him coming onto the court that an any way applies to the NBA rulebook's stance on altercations. Nothing. At all.

[Artdogg]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Where was the outrage last year when the NBA injected itself into the competitive balance of last year's Western semi by suspending Jason Terry for game 6, when Stu Jackson said, "There was no option here. The rule is very clear cut." Michael Finley jumped on Jason Terry after the whistle blew in a competitive game w/ 3 seconds left, Terry then gives him a nice little closed fist tap in the junk.

Maybe we should change that rule too.

I honestly have no idea how this thing has blown up in the way that it has other than casual fans have taken a liking to the Suns (for better or worse-- actually almost certainly for worse), come in, watch games, don't understand the dynamics of the game, the rules, and disciplinary measures the league has put into place, then whine.

David Stern is absolutely 100% correct. The league owners have time and again decided this is the way they want the rules enforced. He is doing what he has been told to do. Him NOT suspending Amare and Diaw would have been a grave miscarriage of justice and the most egregious injection of the league office into the competitive dynamics of the game since he froze the Knicks envelope back in the day.




[/ QUOTE ]
that's fine. why isnt' timmy d suspended, as well?

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly please explain this. And if you say it is because there was no altercation then please explain how it makes sense that Duncan would have been suspended if Jones punched Elson but he isnt now.

[CharlieDontSurf]

[ QUOTE ]
Where was the outrage last year when the NBA injected itself into the competitive balance of last year's Western semi by suspending Jason Terry for game 6, when Stu Jackson said, "There was no option here. The rule is very clear cut." Michael Finley jumped on Jason Terry after the whistle blew in a competitive game w/ 3 seconds left, Terry then gives him a nice little closed fist tap in the junk.

Maybe we should change that rule too.

I honestly have no idea how this thing has blown up in the way that it has other than casual fans have taken a liking to the Suns (for better or worse-- actually almost certainly for worse), come in, watch games, don't understand the dynamics of the game, the rules, and disciplinary measures the league has put into place, then whine.

David Stern is absolutely 100% correct. The league owners have time and again decided this is the way they want the rules enforced. He is doing what he has been told to do. Him NOT suspending Amare and Diaw would have been a grave miscarriage of justice and the most egregious injection of the league office into the competitive dynamics of the game since he froze the Knicks envelope back in the day.

[/ QUOTE ]

the difference is Jason Terry did something and Amare and Boris did nothing. You can't compare punching a guy in the balls with standing up and walking 10 feet.

Also if Stern wanted to he could have chosen NOT to suspend Terry...like he did with Baron Davis.
Stern is saying he has no choice in this matter when he does...he's the commissioner--he's just to much of a pussy to show some real leadership

[ThomasPHoolery]

[ QUOTE ]

Exactly please explain this. And if you say it is because there was no altercation then please explain how it makes sense that Duncan would have been suspended if Jones punched Elson but he isnt now.

[/ QUOTE ]

During an altercation, all players not participating in the game must remain in the immediate vicinity of their bench.

If player is at point A, which is within the immediate vicinity of the bench but may actually be on the floor, an altercation starts, and a player remains at point A, player has not violated the rule.

[EvanJC]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

that's fine. why isnt' timmy d suspended, as well?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because he didn't violate a rule? I've seen nothing in the video of him coming onto the court that an any way applies to the NBA rulebook's stance on altercations. Nothing. At all.

[/ QUOTE ]

what exactly did you see from amare and diaw that does make that rule applicable?

[EvanJC]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Exactly please explain this. And if you say it is because there was no altercation then please explain how it makes sense that Duncan would have been suspended if Jones punched Elson but he isnt now.

[/ QUOTE ]

During an altercation, all players not participating in the game must remain in the immediate vicinity of their bench.

If player is at point A, which is within the immediate vicinity of the bench but may actually be on the floor, an altercation starts, and a player remains at point A, player has not violated the rule.

[/ QUOTE ]

nm, don't respond to my last one. you're delusional.

[kidcolin]

Yeah, Fisher had those clothes on. Not completely relevant, but I agree with questioning Stu Jackson's job.

As far as the incorrect conclusion, I just hate that line of thinking. I like Stern's. It's not rewarding the perpetrator, it's punishing those that broke the rules. If you want to use the "reward the perpetrator" argument, word it in its simplest terms. If player( A goads player B into breaking the rules, and player B gets punished in accordance with the rules, then essentially player A is rewarded for the goad. In much simpler scenarios, you see this kind of thing when a player goads a hothead into blowing up for a tech. However, I still say the fault is on player B.

To me, it's a matter of if the rule makes sense. To me, it doesn't. It's absurdly draconian.