Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 22
  1. #1
    Speechless
    Points: 335,044, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    SocialVeteran50000 Experience Points
    ISUFan22's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Grimes, IA
    Posts
    31,730
    Points
    335,044
    Level
    100
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 73
    Given: 152

    Common sense vs. the NBA rule book

    ESPN link

    A very good read...long...but very good.



  2. #2
    Pro
    Points: 36,917, Level: 59
    Level completed: 23%, Points required for next Level: 933
    Overall activity: 5.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialVeteran25000 Experience Points
    wonkadog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Ames, IA
    Posts
    3,351
    Points
    36,917
    Level
    59
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 70
    Given: 86

    Re: Common sense vs. the NBA rule book

    I'm so sick of the apologists for the Suns guys. They came off the bench. Period. You can't have a "gray area" where the league suspends some guys and not others. That's why the rule is like it is. Now I haven't watched any of the playoffs but if the NBA didn't enforce this rule earlier in that same game with Duncan(?) then THAT'S what people should be mad about.

    It's instinct to go out on the floor and help your guy out, come on. That's a lame excuse. What do they think is going to happen...it's not like he's out on the street getting robbed or something. The refs are going to break it up and the guy who decked your guy is going to get in trouble.



  3. #3
    Addict
    Points: 94,763, Level: 95
    Level completed: 85%, Points required for next Level: 287
    Overall activity: 19.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran50000 Experience Points
    CYdTracked's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Des Moines, IA
    Posts
    8,686
    Points
    94,763
    Level
    95
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 7
    Given: 6

    Re: Common sense vs. the NBA rule book

    Quote Originally Posted by wonkadog View Post
    I'm so sick of the apologists for the Suns guys. They came off the bench. Period. You can't have a "gray area" where the league suspends some guys and not others. That's why the rule is like it is. Now I haven't watched any of the playoffs but if the NBA didn't enforce this rule earlier in that same game with Duncan(?) then THAT'S what people should be mad about.

    It's instinct to go out on the floor and help your guy out, come on. That's a lame excuse. What do they think is going to happen...it's not like he's out on the street getting robbed or something. The refs are going to break it up and the guy who decked your guy is going to get in trouble.
    Great post and I agree 100%. This is not a new rule, the players are aware of it so I really don't see what the big deal is. Common sense = knowing that if you leave the bench you will be suspended 1 game. It's a clear cut rule and not one open for interpretation.

    Plus the less people on the court the quicker the incident will be broke up. The refs, players already on the floor, and coaches are more than enough to break up 2 guys who are getting into it. The more people on the court the more potential chaos there could be.



  4. #4
    Addict
    Points: 126,756, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 4.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialVeteran50000 Experience Points
    tim_redd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Ankeny
    Posts
    7,362
    Points
    126,756
    Level
    100
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 96
    Given: 41

    Re: Common sense vs. the NBA rule book

    The wording of the rule is very vague. You can't come on the court during an "incident". First off, what is an incident. Wasn't it an incident earlier in the game when a few Spurs came on the floor?

    The way I saw it was a hard foul, the two guys came off the bench, where the entire team was standing, toward their own guy before there was any pushing, shoving, tough guy talk. I.E. before it was an "incident". After it became an "incident" both guys backed down and went to the bench.



  5. #5
    Pro
    Points: 36,917, Level: 59
    Level completed: 23%, Points required for next Level: 933
    Overall activity: 5.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialVeteran25000 Experience Points
    wonkadog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Ames, IA
    Posts
    3,351
    Points
    36,917
    Level
    59
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 70
    Given: 86

    Re: Common sense vs. the NBA rule book

    They should change the rule and word it a different way where basically if you leave the bench for any reason other than celebrating at the start of a timeout or subbing in, you are suspended. Still, how stupid can you be to leave the bench. There's no way I would leave the definition of "incident" up to the league...I'd stay put and assure myself no penalty.



  6. #6
    Speechless
    Points: 253,166, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 17.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialVeteran50000 Experience Points
    BryceC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    16,557
    Points
    253,166
    Level
    100
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 89
    Given: 0

    Re: Common sense vs. the NBA rule book

    I guess the problem I have with it is just that the rule HAS been open to interpretation before, and now it's screwing the only good basketball happening right now. The Spurs are going to win the next game and everybody knows it, giving them a home game for game 6 and their ticket is pretty much stamped.

    Yes, Amare and Boris were dumb for leaving the bench. The fact that they were suspended and guys like freaking Bowen are allowed to continue their rampage like Simmons pointed out is what's wrong here. The fact is that the team of thugs just made out like bandits and everybody that actually wanted to watch some compelling basketball is screwed.

    Spurs/Jazz and Cavs/Pistons... the NBA... it's FAAAANNNN-TASTIC!

    *yawn*




  7. #7
    Speechless
    Points: 392,609, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 100.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialOverdriveVeteran50000 Experience Points
    Wesley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Omaha
    Posts
    57,353
    Points
    392,609
    Level
    100
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 342
    Given: 268

    Re: Common sense vs. the NBA rule book

    I cannot believe how stupid the NBA head shed was to not fix the rulle so it made sense or ghad some discretion. Spurs will win the championship due to the suspension. Just wait and see.


    CFH HMagic bball season next year.
    Let my Fred's Four Horsemen ride: Georges, Hogue, Nader, and McKay.

  8. #8
    Rookie Achievements:
    SocialVeteran5000 Experience Points
    jparker22's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Ames
    Posts
    481
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    Re: Common sense vs. the NBA rule book

    I can't believe the people that claim they would stay on the bench after your pg is slammed down by the opposing teams' power forward.
    I would at a minimum do what Stoudemire did and if you are going to get a game for what he did then you might as well go shove Horry down. Below the shoulders of course b/c above the shoulders is a 2 game suspension.

    Question for those that think Stoudemire and Diaw were wrong. What was your take on the Homan-Colorado incident his freshman year?


    Cy Created by MC Doder

  9. #9
    Addict
    Points: 126,756, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 4.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialVeteran50000 Experience Points
    tim_redd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Ankeny
    Posts
    7,362
    Points
    126,756
    Level
    100
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 96
    Given: 41

    Re: Common sense vs. the NBA rule book

    I saw Stu Jackson on SportsCenter, he said that Duncan and Bowen were not suspended because they were coming to the aid of a teammate who they thought might be hurt. Isn't that what Stoudemire and Diaw were doing? It shouldn't be their fault that a ruckus occured afterward.

    A Sun player should have sucker-punched a Spur when Duncan and Bowen were on the court.



  10. #10
    All-Star
    Points: 15,940, Level: 38
    Level completed: 37%, Points required for next Level: 510
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    SocialVeteran10000 Experience Points
    isuarch80's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    1,311
    Points
    15,940
    Level
    38
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    Re: Common sense vs. the NBA rule book

    You guys area all backing up Simmons on this - 1. The rule is absolutely stupid because of it's literal translation - and it being in place in its current state is what's wrong. 2 - You're dead or lifeless if you don't have a reaction to your friend/teammate/etc getting bowled over.

    So LIKE THE ARTICLE STATES: the NBA did the right thing based on the letter of the law, and the law is what is absolutely stupid in these things (also Stemming from Jeff Van Gundy clawing and hanging onto Alonzo Mourning's leg a while back)...

    Totally don't believe there should have been suspensions, FYI...


    Vitte, Dulcedo, Sipes

  11. #11
    Pro
    Points: 25,083, Level: 48
    Level completed: 54%, Points required for next Level: 467
    Overall activity: 2.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialVeteran25000 Experience Points
    Skyh13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    2,835
    Points
    25,083
    Level
    48
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 15
    Given: 1

    Re: Common sense vs. the NBA rule book

    There is a rule.

    The players know this rule.

    The players are PROFESSIONAL athletes.

    Somewhere along the line, these PROFESSIONAL athletes have to be held accountable for doing something.

    They broke the rule. Period. Who cares what their "intention" was? It doesn't matter! They didn't need to be there, and that is EXACTLY why the rule is in place. Can the players react? Sure! Anyone would! I guarantee everyone in that arena watching the game reacted to it! But does that mean a player needs to leave the bench? No! If a fan left the stands to "help", think they'd get in trouble? Hell yes!!

    The league doesn't want guys going on to the court to "help their teammate". That's when fights happen, and it makes it that much harder to keep things under control.

    Like I said, these guys are professional athletes, and they need to follow the rules and maintain control over themselves! This kind of stuff can't be open to interpretation! It's there, and the players know it! It's like stepping out of bounds! Would anyone consider that to be open to interpretation? No!

    Not to mention that, as soon as one rule like this gets "thrown to interpretation", it's a slippery slope for plenty of other things that should not be open to interpretation.



  12. #12
    Rookie
    Points: 8,260, Level: 27
    Level completed: 19%, Points required for next Level: 490
    Overall activity: 1.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points
    thakeepa14's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    St. Paul, MN
    Posts
    540
    Points
    8,260
    Level
    27
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    Re: Common sense vs. the NBA rule book

    I'm a huge proponent of the NBA...I love it. But this, what a soap opera......play the $%& game!!!!

    Only good thing about something like this in the NBA is at least we don't have to hear about it for 2 weeks like the NFL....



  13. #13
    Pro
    Points: 36,917, Level: 59
    Level completed: 23%, Points required for next Level: 933
    Overall activity: 5.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialVeteran25000 Experience Points
    wonkadog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Ames, IA
    Posts
    3,351
    Points
    36,917
    Level
    59
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 70
    Given: 86

    Re: Common sense vs. the NBA rule book

    Quote Originally Posted by jparker22 View Post
    I can't believe the people that claim they would stay on the bench after your pg is slammed down by the opposing teams' power forward.
    I would at a minimum do what Stoudemire did and if you are going to get a game for what he did then you might as well go shove Horry down. Below the shoulders of course b/c above the shoulders is a 2 game suspension.

    Question for those that think Stoudemire and Diaw were wrong. What was your take on the Homan-Colorado incident his freshman year?
    I guess I don't come into this with the mentality to dish out my own brand of justice as I see fit just because one of my teammates got knocked down. Once again, none of us arguing that the suspensions were fair are saying we think the rule is foolproof, we just think that there's no room for complaining because the players knew about it beforehand and then violated it anyway.

    As for Homan, what exactly are you getting at? I hated Harrison with all my heart that day/night but that doesn't mean it justifies one of our players going after him just because they're on my team.



  14. #14
    All-Star
    Points: 13,644, Level: 35
    Level completed: 43%, Points required for next Level: 406
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    1,011
    Points
    13,644
    Level
    35
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    Re: Common sense vs. the NBA rule book

    Quote Originally Posted by Skyh13 View Post
    Like I said, these guys are professional athletes, and they need to follow the rules and maintain control over themselves! This kind of stuff can't be open to interpretation! It's there, and the players know it! It's like stepping out of bounds! Would anyone consider that to be open to interpretation? No!
    The issue here is the rule is being enforced as if it's black and white, but in reality it isn't. The rule is open to interpretation, and the league has the ability to use their judgement in enforcing it. .

    The rule claims they can stand up, but not leave the immediate vicinity of the bench. (Vicinity: area or region near a place) Ok, so I can't leave an area near the bench. When am I no longer near the bench? (Near: Close in relation. At, within, or to a short distance.) One step? Two? 10 ft? 20? No idea. We could also get into the judgement required to decide if whats going on is an altercation or not.

    Granted, the player can make sure they don't violate the rule by staying seating in the bench at all times and scoot their chair to the scorers table to check in, but the rule doesn't say they must remain seated. If it did, then it would be black and white (and also rediculous).



  15. #15
    Addict
    Points: 94,763, Level: 95
    Level completed: 85%, Points required for next Level: 287
    Overall activity: 19.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran50000 Experience Points
    CYdTracked's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Des Moines, IA
    Posts
    8,686
    Points
    94,763
    Level
    95
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 7
    Given: 6

    Re: Common sense vs. the NBA rule book

    ESPN.com: Stern defends suspensions of Stoudemire, Diaw

    I heard a clip of Dan Patrick's show yesterday where he had David Stern on. David Stern is probably the best commissioner in professional sports and Dan started to grill him with some tough questions. Stern didn't back down and even told Dan something like "look I came here to wrestle if that's what you want to do because I'm not going to back down." He explained that a rule is a rule, the players knew about it and there are 6 assistant coaches on the bench that could have restrained them but everyone got caught up in the moment and did not show restraint. He said if the owners want to get rid of the rule he'd gladly listen to them but the fact is up until now no one had a problem with this rule and everyone knows leaving the bench is a 1 game suspension regardless.

    I've alwayed liked David Stern, he's had to deal with some big black eyes and the 1 thing he's been is consistent and does not back down regardless of public opinion. The stiff penalties from the Pacers/Pistons mess a few years ago was probably his biggest incident to deal with and he did not go easy nor get soft on his suspensions once he handed them out.

    Even without Amare and Diaw the Suns led for most of the game and 3 points was the difference so it's not like they were not competitive in the game without them. The Spurs will be without Horry for another game and while he's not those 2 guys he's always a threat to hit a big shot in a playoff game so it's not like the Spurs got of easy either.



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
  • Football
  • Iowa State vs. North Dakota State
  • August 30, 2014
  • 11:00 AM