David Stern on the Dan Patrick show today 5/16

anyone have access to it online and post a transcript??

Dan Patrick and Keith Olbermann were discussing the ruling against the suns.
Dan Patrick was discussing the ruling and brought up the harshness of the ruling and how it was going to affect the series.

David Stern replies, "No Dan you know what is going to AFFECT the series, players knowing the rules, not being able to have self-control and their coaches not being able to control them either, thats whats going to hurt the series, AND DON'T YOU FORGET IT!!"

David Stern also mentioned that he was open to having discussions of having the rule changed but it stands the way it is now.

anyone else hear it this morning? Thats priceless!!

Its done, deal with it people!!

Please see exact quote below

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by judaspriestess

"No Dan you know what is going to AFFECT the series, players knowing the rules, not being able to have self-control and their coaches not being able to control them either, thats whats going to hurt the series,[B] AND DON'T YOU FORGET IT!!"

---

Yeah, something that isn't being mentioned is D'Antoni and the assistant coaches shouldn't have sprinted to the action. Every other coaching staff in the league knows that the first thing you do is make sure no player moves from the bench area.

D'Antoni and the rest of the assistant coaches choked when they didn't follow rule number one.

wow

I have this much.

Posted on True Hoop a little while ago.

http://myespn.go.com/nba/truehoop

David Stern on Dan Patrick's Show

May 16, 2007 2:45 PM


ESPN Insiders can hear the whole thing here. Stern is not charming -- always been a bully, that one -- but he is not, it strikes me, wrong, either.

Some key Stern quotes:

There is no way to know if someone is running out on the court as friend or foe. When Rudy Tomjanovich was running out to see what was going on and trying to break up a fight, his face was forever changed. ...

It's not being decided by [Robert Horry]. It's being decided by two Phoenix Suns who knew about the rule, forgot about it, couldn't control themselves, and didn't have coaches who could control them. And don't you forget it. Now, is it exactly fair? Probably not. Is it a red letter rule? Absolutely. Did cost other players and teams their playoffs and championships? Yes. So, I guess there's no way for us to get the message through. Do you think next year the players will understand it?

I'm unhappy with the result. If the owners would like to change it, I'm happy to do it, believe me. I'd be very happy to do it. But to listen to the palaver that Robert Horry changed the series is just silly. What changed the series is that Amare and Boris ran out onto the court.

Stern also later added "I guess it's a shame that I have a rule that I have to enforce," although he also adds that in the decade that rule has been in effect, no owner has ever suggested a change. Finally, he does not volunteer that the rule has anything to do with the image of the league, but says that it is about making sure players don't get hurt or killed.

Yeah, just heard the replay of it. Regardless of who you think is right or not, Stern really came across as a dick.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by duncan22805

I have this much.

Posted on True Hoop a little while ago.

http://myespn.go.com/nba/truehoop

David Stern on Dan Patrick's Show

May 16, 2007 2:45 PM


ESPN Insiders can hear the whole thing here. Stern is not charming -- always been a bully, that one -- but he is not, it strikes me, wrong, either.

Some key Stern quotes:

There is no way to know if someone is running out on the court as friend or foe. When Rudy Tomjanovich was running out to see what was going on and trying to break up a fight, his face was forever changed. ...

It's not being decided by [Robert Horry]. It's being decided by two Phoenix Suns who knew about the rule, forgot about it, couldn't control themselves, and didn't have coaches who could control them. And don't you forget it. Now, is it exactly fair? Probably not. Is it a red letter rule? Absolutely. Did cost other players and teams their playoffs and championships? Yes. So, I guess there's no way for us to get the message through. Do you think next year the players will understand it?
I'm unhappy with the result. If the owners would like to change it, I'm happy to do it, believe me. I'd be very happy to do it. But to listen to the palaver that Robert Horry changed the series is just silly. What changed the series is that Amare and Boris ran out onto the court.

Stern also later added "I guess it's a shame that I have a rule that I have to enforce," although he also adds that in the decade that rule has been in effect, no owner has ever suggested a change. Finally, he does not volunteer that the rule has anything to do with the image of the league, but says that it is about making sure players don't get hurt or killed.

---

:clap Thanks for posting this is important!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp

Yeah, something that isn't being mentioned is D'Antoni and the assistant coaches shouldn't have sprinted to the action. Every other coaching staff in the league knows that the first thing you do is make sure no player moves from the bench area.

D'Antoni and the rest of the assistant coaches choked when they didn't follow rule number one.

---

the assistant coaches were caught up in the game.

if you watch Mark Iavaroni's face...he starts to smile when he knows Nash is going to get fouled and go to the line (game over, he's thinking)...

then the fucker's eyes and mouth open like the Red Sea when Horry knocks Nash into the table....

he starts walking over to Nash before he catches himself and only then turns to look for players coming off the bench.

all i heard was a defensive bumbling idiot admitting they were wrong yet sticking to the rule. the guy is so scared of his ruling he cancled his courtside to phx because of a "cold" and he was "tired".

lol

Stern is a dick.

And Stern is the man.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by duncan22805

I have this much.

Posted on True Hoop a little while ago.

http://myespn.go.com/nba/truehoop

David Stern on Dan Patrick's Show

May 16, 2007 2:45 PM


ESPN Insiders can hear the whole thing here. Stern is not charming -- always been a bully, that one -- but he is not, it strikes me, wrong, either.

Some key Stern quotes:

There is no way to know if someone is running out on the court as friend or foe. When Rudy Tomjanovich was running out to see what was going on and trying to break up a fight, his face was forever changed. ...

It's not being decided by [Robert Horry]. It's being decided by two Phoenix Suns who knew about the rule, forgot about it, couldn't control themselves, and didn't have coaches who could control them. And don't you forget it. Now, is it exactly fair? Probably not. Is it a red letter rule? Absolutely. Did cost other players and teams their playoffs and championships? Yes. So, I guess there's no way for us to get the message through. Do you think next year the players will understand it?

I'm unhappy with the result. If the owners would like to change it, I'm happy to do it, believe me. I'd be very happy to do it. But to listen to the palaver that Robert Horry changed the series is just silly. What changed the series is that Amare and Boris ran out onto the court.

Stern also later added "I guess it's a shame that I have a rule that I have to enforce," although he also adds that in the decade that rule has been in effect, no owner has ever suggested a change. Finally, he does not volunteer that the rule has anything to do with the image of the league, but says that it is about making sure players don't get hurt or killed.

---

:lol Who is he trying to fool. It's all about the image of the league.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mabber

Yeah, just heard the replay of it. Regardless of who you think is right or not, Stern really came across as a dick.

---

he usually does...

a condescending, arrogant, defensive one at that.

Quote:

---

all i heard was a defensive bumbling idiot admitting they were wrong yet sticking to the rule

---

needs a hearing aid forum

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by degenerate_gambler

the assistant coaches were caught up in the game.

if you watch Mark Iavaroni's face...he starts to smile when he knows Nash is going to get fouled and go to the line (game over, he's thinking)...

then the fucker's eyes and mouth open like the Red Sea when Horry knocks Nash into the table....

he starts walking over to Nash before he catches himself and only then turns to look for players coming off the bench.

---

Exactly.

Watch what every other team does when there is an altercation on the court. Within a second, the assistant coaches jump up and hold the players back.

Instead, Nash pulled his spread eagle drama queen maneuver to sell it, D'Antoni runs over like he's going to do something and the assistant coaches join the fray.

The Suns have no one to blame but themselves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sunsbum

all i heard was a defensive bumbling idiot admitting they were wrong yet sticking to the rule. the guy is so scared of his ruling he cancled his courtside to phx because of a "cold" and he was "tired".

lol

---

dude take off your rose colored glasses!! :rolleyes

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by degenerate_gambler

he usually does...

a condescending, arrogant, defensive one at that.

---

Yeah, it's annoying that he takes all the credit for anything positive about the league but totally distances & deflects to the owners in situations like the suspensions. He must have mentioned that it's the owners rule at least 5 times during that interview :lol

Gosh, the Commissioner just demanded that players be accountable for their bad choices and applied a rule even-handedly, without regard to the identities of the players involved.

What a dick.

One thing I admire about Stern is his conviction. He does what he feels is right, even in the face of public scrutiny.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by judaspriestess

dude take off your rose colored glasses!! :rolleyes

---

GO LISTEN TO IT, HE ADMITTED THE RULING NEEDED CHANGES....i didnt say it HE DID. so maybe he should take of his.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sunsbum

GO LISTEN TO IT, HE ADMITTED THE RULING NEEDED CHANGES....i didnt say it HE DID. so maybe he should take of his.

---

Not really:

"If the owners would like to change it, I'm happy to do it, believe me."

Doubtful anyone but Sarver is going to give a shit this summer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FromWayDowntown

Gosh, the Commissioner just demanded that players be accountable for their bad choices and applied a rule even-handedly, without regard to the identities of the players involved.

What a dick.

---

Wasn't saying he came across as a dick because of what he said, but how he said it. He was a total dick to Dan Patrick the entire interview.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mabber

Wasn't saying he came across as a dick because of what he said, but how he said it. He was a total dick to Dan Patrick the entire interview.

---

People are questioning the integrity of the league which he has run for 20 years...would you be sunshine and lollipops?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FromWayDowntown

Gosh, the Commissioner just demanded that players be accountable for their bad choices and applied a rule even-handedly, without regard to the identities of the players involved.

What a dick.

---

yea that makes ALOT of sense now doesnt it?

baron davis can ELBOW someone in the side of the face causing them physical harm yet he is allowed to play next game when it was CLEARLY intentional.

bowen, wether it was on purpose or not had 2 incidents in a matter of 2 games, causing physical harm to nash and who knows what he was trying to do to amare.

and of course the horry checking nash ting.

then you have boris and amare who got off the bench...didnt engage in anything or even come close to it...yet they are the ones serving suspensions... does that make ANY SENSE to you at ALL?

i mean that has got to be the most assbackwards crap ive ever seen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Johnny_Blaze_47

People are questioning the integrity of the league which he has run for 20 years...would you be sunshine and lollipops?

---

What integrity?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sunsbum

yea that makes ALOT of sense now doesnt it?

baron davis can ELBOW someone in the side of the face causing them physical harm yet he is allowed to play next game when it was CLEARLY intentional.

bowen, wether it was on purpose or not had 2 incidents in a matter of 2 games, causing physical harm to nash and who knows what he was trying to do to amare.

and of course the horry checking nash ting.

then you have boris and amare who got off the bench...didnt engage in anything or even come close to it...yet they are the ones serving suspensions... does that make ANY SENSE to you at ALL?

i mean that has got to be the most assbackwards crap ive ever seen.

---

:clap

david stern proved again in a public interview why he needs to be let go

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mFFL03

david stern proved again in a public interview why he needs to be let go

---

Did you mention that as he was presenting Dirk his MVP trophy?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Amare_32

What integrity?

---

If the league is so bad, why do you support it or its advertisers?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sunsbum

yea that makes ALOT of sense now doesnt it?

baron davis can ELBOW someone in the side of the face causing them physical harm yet he is allowed to play next game when it was CLEARLY intentional.

bowen, wether it was on purpose or not had 2 incidents in a matter of 2 games, causing physical harm to nash and who knows what he was trying to do to amare.

and of course the horry checking nash ting.

then you have boris and amare who got off the bench...didnt engage in anything or even come close to it...yet they are the ones serving suspensions... does that make ANY SENSE to you at ALL?

i mean that has got to be the most assbackwards crap ive ever seen.

---

the players on the BENCH did not leave it during that foul. WTF don't you get. Your teams coaches SUCK. its not ass backwards you are

I don't buy for a second that he has no room for leeway with the rule. The Board of Govenors basically allow him and Jackson to do as they please. I doubt they would have said anything if he decided not to give suspensions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Johnny_Blaze_47

People are questioning the integrity of the league which he has run for 20 years...would you be sunshine and lollipops?

---

So that makes it ok to be a total dick to a guy just doing his job? Dan Patrick didn't ask anything that the entire nation didn't want to be asked. DP show much constraint as I'd have been pissed off if I was being talked to that way.

If he's bitch-slapping Dan Patrick, then he's my hero.

Stern may be a dick, but he just got done handing the biggest dick in sports journalism his ass on a platter. Go Stern.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by judaspriestess

the players on the BENCH did not leave it during that foul. WTF don't you get. Your teams coaches SUCK. its not ass backwards you are

---

keep looking the other way, ive conveniently placed the shit under your nose and you still pretend like you cant smell it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sunsbum

yea that makes ALOT of sense now doesnt it?

baron davis can ELBOW someone in the side of the face causing them physical harm yet he is allowed to play next game when it was CLEARLY intentional.

bowen, wether it was on purpose or not had 2 incidents in a matter of 2 games, causing physical harm to nash and who knows what he was trying to do to amare.

and of course the horry checking nash ting.

then you have boris and amare who got off the bench...didnt engage in anything or even come close to it...yet they are the ones serving suspensions... does that make ANY SENSE to you at ALL?

i mean that has got to be the most assbackwards crap ive ever seen.

---

The rule's inherent flaws are it wording and the fact that unlike flagrant fouls after it is broken it is an automatic suspension FF dont carry auto suspensions even Flag. 2. Here's a thought, next time somebody takes out your boy with a hard foul, don't vigilante and race the court, wait for the next time the offender is on the court hard foul him. That's the way it was done in the old days.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sunsbum

keep looking the other way, ive conveniently placed the shit under your nose and you still pretend like you cant smell it.

---

you handle poop.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sunsbum

GO LISTEN TO IT, HE ADMITTED THE RULING NEEDED CHANGES....i didnt say it HE DID. so maybe he should take of his.

---

I heard the interview and he never said the rule needed to be change you dummy. what he said was if the owners wanted to visit it after the season he would be more than willing to. he went on to say that EVRYONE knows the rule and it is very clear. Stern poked holes through arguments presented by Patrick. Patrick brought up that these were marquee players..so stern replied should they caveat the rule to include only scrubs? Patrick backed off. Then intent came up. The players did not intend to fight or escalate the situation. The Stern replied well then now we must caveat the rule to judge intent of players who leave the bench during a fight but then have to verify oif they are a scrub or a marquee player..

Stern also later added "I guess it's a shame that I have a rule that I have to enforce," although he also adds that in the decade that rule has been in effect, no owner has ever suggested a change.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mabber

So that makes it ok to be a total dick to a guy just doing his job?

---

Sure. It's not like there's a rule against it and he could be suspended if he knowingly disobeys it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mabber

DP show much constraint as I'd have been pissed off if I was being talked to that way.

---

That's probably why you're not a journalist.

They teach us to never become part of the story. We deal with crap attitudes all the time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by monosylab1k

If he's bitch-slapping Dan Patrick, then he's my hero.

Stern may be a dick, but he just got done handing the biggest dick in sports journalism his ass on a platter. Go Stern.

---

From what I understand, Dan Patrick was pretty stunned. :lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by judaspriestess

From what I understand, Dan Patrick was pretty stunned. :lol

---

Patrick backtracked at every turn..

That rule simply HAS to be changed! Stern talks about the rule making sure "no player gets hurt or killed" when there was nothing remotely close to that happening in this instance. Diaw and Stoudemire checked themselves quickly and didn't get near the altercation. Just a ridiculous ruling in my opinion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sunsbum

keep looking the other way, ive conveniently placed the shit under your nose and you still pretend like you cant smell it.

---

LOL :lol :drunk

The series is NOT over yet.

Quote:

---

That rule simply HAS to be changed!

---

To what?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mabber

So that makes it ok to be a total dick to a guy just doing his job? Dan Patrick didn't ask anything that the entire nation didn't want to be asked. DP show much constraint as I'd have been pissed off if I was being talked to that way.

---

i thought patrick sounded totally unprepared for any sort of counter argument. he should have had a better gameplan for dealing with someone way more intelligent than he is, and much better versed in league matters. i like patrick's show, but he really had no leg to stand on with his arguments.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mabber

Wasn't saying he came across as a dick because of what he said, but how he said it. He was a total dick to Dan Patrick the entire interview.

---

"Pretty please with sugar on top, shut the fuck up" would have been better, I guess?

Stern has every reason to be upset at this point. The media has adopted the Suns as darlings -- the only hope to avoid the tragedy of the Spurs reaching the Finals again -- and is chirping in near unanimity about the unfairness of this suspension.

The truth is, a contrary conclusion would have been more unfair, given the league's history in enforcing that rule.

In an era where Stern is having to refute more and more suggestions that his league is fixed, he's now taking on a media that, in essence, wants the league to change rules in midstream to accomplish something akin to a fix. If I was Commissioner Stern, I'd be pretty pissed too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FromWayDowntown

"Pretty please with sugar on top, shut the fuck up" would have been better, I guess?

Stern has every reason to be upset at this point. The media has adopted the Suns as darlings -- the only hope to avoid the tragedy of the Spurs reaching the Finals again -- and is chirping in near unanimity about the unfairness of this suspension.

The truth is, a contrary conclusion would have been more unfair, given the league's history in enforcing that rule.

In an era where Stern is having to refute more and more suggestions that his league is fixed, he's now taking on a media that, in essence, wants the league to change rules in midstream to accomplish something akin to a fix. If I was Commissioner Stern, I'd be pretty pissed too.

---

Stern got pissed and stopped Patrick when he said "Horry negatively" affected the series. Stern rightfully said to stop with the crap and reminded Patrick that the 2 Suns players affetced the series by getting up. Stern also refuted the "well their emotional guys who had seen Nash beaten up all series" by stating there were 7 people on the bench and 5 managed to stay of the court..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by judaspriestess

From what I understand, Dan Patrick was pretty stunned. :lol

---

Awesome! Seriously, I dunno how many times that asshole will launch baseless attacks at someone he's interviewing and then stand back and innocently wonder why they're getting upset. It's nice to see him get it shoved back in his face.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FromWayDowntown

"Pretty please with sugar on top, shut the fuck up" would have been better, I guess?

Stern has every reason to be upset at this point. The media has adopted the Suns as darlings -- the only hope to avoid the tragedy of the Spurs reaching the Finals again -- and is chirping in near unanimity about the unfairness of this suspension.

The truth is, a contrary conclusion would have been more unfair, given the league's history in enforcing that rule.

In an era where Stern is having to refute more and more suggestions that his league is fixed, he's now taking on a media that, in essence, wants the league to change rules in midstream to accomplish something akin to a fix. If I was Commissioner Stern, I'd be pretty pissed too.

---

No Stern brought this on himself with his inconsistent rulings. JRich no suspension but Horry 2 games. Baron Davis avoids suspension for a cheapshot on Fisher but Amare and Diaw get suspended for a normal reaction to check on Nash. Bowen knees Amare and then kicks Nash in the groin and Stern does nothing. If he were consistent with it I would not have such a problem with any of this.

You can say a lot of things about David Stern, both positive and negative. One thing you cannot say about the man is that he is anything but brilliant. He's Clintonian in some senses with his intelligence -- I think he can be polarizing because he can draw some rather fine lines sometimes -- but he's undoubtedly the smartest guy in the room on most days of his existence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FromWayDowntown

"Pretty please with sugar on top, shut the fuck up" would have been better, I guess?

Stern has every reason to be upset at this point. The media has adopted the Suns as darlings -- the only hope to avoid the tragedy of the Spurs reaching the Finals again -- and is chirping in near unanimity about the unfairness of this suspension.

The truth is, a contrary conclusion would have been more unfair, given the league's history in enforcing that rule.

In an era where Stern is having to refute more and more suggestions that his league is fixed, he's now taking on a media that, in essence, wants the league to change rules in midstream to accomplish something akin to a fix. If I was Commissioner Stern, I'd be pretty pissed too.

---

It's somewhat funny that everyone on here is on Stern's side for the first time EVER. I wonder why? :lol

So since the norm is not to suspend people for F2s, are Suns fans now basing their attacks of unfairness by Stern on the fact that Horry was suspended two games?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Amare_32

No Stern brought this on himself with his inconsistent rulings. JRich no suspension but Horry 2 games. Baron Davis avoids suspension for a cheapshot on Fisher but Amare and Diaw get suspended for a normal reaction to check on Nash. Bowen knees Amare and then kicks Nash in the groin and Stern does nothing. If he were consistent with it I would not have such a problem with any of this.

---

Wait -- I thought Bowen kicked Amare and kneed Nash in the groin.

Can't you people keep your stories straight?

He was certainly consistent in the application of the "don't leave the benches if there's an altercation" rule. It's not remotely the same as the Davis incident, because the rule governing the Davis incident didn't compel a suspension. The rule governing the Amare/Diaw incident did compel a suspension. It's pretty simple.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mabber

It's somewhat funny that everyone on here is on Stern's side for the first time EVER. I wonder why? :lol

---

And its funny how everyone that hates the Spurs thinks that the Suns players got fucked, I wonder why? :lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Amare_32

No Stern brought this on himself with his inconsistent rulings. JRich no suspension but Horry 2 games. Baron Davis avoids suspension for a cheapshot on Fisher but Amare and Diaw get suspended for a normal reaction to check on Nash. Bowen knees Amare and then kicks Nash in the groin and Stern does nothing. If he were consistent with it I would not have such a problem with any of this.

---

Make sure Amare and Boris commit infractions that don't have zero tolerance enforcement next time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChumpDumper

Make sure Amare and Boris commit infractions that don't have zero tolerance enforcement next time.

---

Your right next time they should take a cheapshot on Parker. They might get off with no penalty.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mardigan

And its funny how everyone that hates the Spurs thinks that the Suns players got fucked, I wonder why? :lol

---

I'm pulling for the Spurs :rolleyes I have much money on the Spurs winning this series and the title.

The only people that don't think the Suns got screwed are the Spurs fans.

LMAO what will happen on this board if the Suns actually win tonight?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Amare_32

Your right next time they should take a cheapshot on Parker. They might get off with no penalty.

---

or a 2 game suspension

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Amare_32

Your right next time they should take a cheapshot on Parker. They might get off with no penalty.

---

Probably not now, but it is no surprise you are condoning cheap shots.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by monosylab1k

LMAO what will happen on this board if the Suns actually win tonight?

---

That's an easy one...it will be the refs fault. :lol

playoffs without the ref drama would be much appreciated

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mabber

It's somewhat funny that everyone on here is on Stern's side for the first time EVER. I wonder why? :lol

---

I'm almost always on the Commissioner's side. As I've watched more and more basketball, I've come to appreciate that the man generally does a great job with his league.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mabber

I'm pulling for the Spurs :rolleyes I have much money on the Spurs winning this series and the title.

The only people that don't think the Suns got screwed are the Spurs fans.

---

And respected journalists.

And former NBA Champions and MVPs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FromWayDowntown

I'm almost always on the Commissioner's side. As I've watched more and more basketball, I've come to appreciate that the man generally does a great job with his league.

---

Then you're in the minority. All I've ever read on this board is complete hatred for Stern (until today).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FromWayDowntown

I'm almost always on the Commissioner's side. As I've watched more and more basketball, I've come to appreciate that the man generally does a great job with his league.

---

Same here. He has made mistakes, but there hasn't been a more effective commissioner in pro sports in the past couple of decades.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Johnny_Blaze_47

And respected journalists.

And former NBA Champions and MVPs.

---

So there's only about 3 of those? 90% of the articles I've read have said the rule is ridiculous.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mabber

So there's only about 3 of those? 90% of the articles I've read have said the rule is ridiculous.

---

What is right is not always popular and what is popular is not always right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sunsbum

yea that makes ALOT of sense now doesnt it?

baron davis can ELBOW someone in the side of the face causing them physical harm yet he is allowed to play next game when it was CLEARLY intentional.

bowen, wether it was on purpose or not had 2 incidents in a matter of 2 games, causing physical harm to nash and who knows what he was trying to do to amare.

and of course the horry checking nash ting.

then you have boris and amare who got off the bench...didnt engage in anything or even come close to it...yet they are the ones serving suspensions... does that make ANY SENSE to you at ALL?

i mean that has got to be the most assbackwards crap ive ever seen.

---

I agree, it is a horrible rule and makes no sense. it is shitty that these guys are getting suspended. What I don't agree with is how everyone is blaming this on the spurs, maybe not you but the national media and others.The spurs did not make the rule, they did not enforce the rule. They did not petition the leauge to have them suspended. truth be told, if it was up to the spurs they would probably be playing. I am just sick of everyone making it sound like this was all master planned by the spurs and that they are the reason the players are suspended. They are not the reason the players not following the rule(a flawed horrible rule) are the reason.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mabber

So there's only about 3 of those? 90% of the articles I've read have said the rule is ridiculous.

---

Jemele Hill wrote an article in support of the suspensions.

But after she wrote the "Kobe is better than Jordan" article I think it's a major stretch to call her a respected journalist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChumpDumper

Same here. He has made mistakes, but there hasn't been a more effective commissioner in pro sports in the past couple of decades.

---

I've never had any problem with how the guy ran the league. I just pointed out earlier that he acted like a dick in that interview.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp

Exactly.

Watch what every other team does when there is an altercation on the court. Within a second, the assistant coaches jump up and hold the players back.

Instead, Nash pulled his spread eagle drama queen maneuver to sell it, D'Antoni runs over like he's going to do something and the assistant coaches join the fray.

The Suns have no one to blame but themselves.

---

like I said before, if you can watch frame by frame Avaroni's reaction to the hit on Nash. :lmao that face is priceless

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mabber

So there's only about 3 of those? 90% of the articles I've read have said the rule is ridiculous.

---

Where were all these journalists the decade before yesterday?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mabber

I've never had any problem with how the guy ran the league. I just pointed out earlier that he acted like a dick in that interview.

---

I have trouble recalling a time he didn't act like a dick.

99% of media might say rule is stupid. But 0% of owners will ever bring up the case to change it. no owner would do this, beleive me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Johnny_Blaze_47

What is right is not always popular and what is popular is not always right.

---

So you really like the way that rule is written? I'm not arguing the suspensions as they should have been suspended based on how that rule is written.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nkdlunch

99% of media might say rule is stupid. But 0% of owners will ever bring up the case to change it. no owner would do this, beleive me.

---

believe you? and what leg do you have to stand on?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mabber

So you really like the way that rule is written? I'm not arguing the suspensions as they should have been suspended based on how that rule is written.

---

I don't see a reason to change it anymore than it already has been.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mabber

So you really like the way that rule is written? I'm not arguing the suspensions as they should have been suspended based on how that rule is written.

---

It needs a provision for certain circumstances.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Amare_32

It needs a provision for certain circumstances.

---

What circumstances?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChumpDumper

To what?

---

As I've said before, the wording needs to be changed to allow for some leniency in the event that the player leaving the bench doesn't get involved in the "altercation". I don't see how this would diminish it's impact.

I highly doubt that Stoudemire and Diaw were initially intending to slug someone. More likely, they impulsively reacted to the hard foul, which then escalated into an "altercation".

In the space of a few seconds, it went from "WTF? He just clobbered my point guard!" to "Oh crap, it's a fight! I need to get out of here."

By then, it was too late.

As the rule stands now, it was correctly enforced.

Quote:

---

As I've said before, the wording needs to be changed to allow for some leniency in the event that the player leaving the bench doesn't get involved in the "altercation". I don't see how this would diminish it's impact.

I highly doubt that Stoudemire and Diaw were initially intending to slug someone. More likely, they impulsively reacted to the hard foul, which then escalated into an "altercation".

---

So how will players running onto the court signal their intent to the league?

Fax?

Email?

Candygram?

It would be a whole lot easier for coaches to make sure their players are smart enough to obey the rule as written than it would be to try and rewrite the rule into some nebulous mess.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChumpDumper

Same here. He has made mistakes, but there hasn't been a more effective commissioner in pro sports in the past couple of decades.

---

I still believe he's an arrogant little prick, but outside of Pete Rozelle, you're right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChumpDumper

I don't see a reason to change it anymore than it already has been.

---

So if Duncan & Bowen walk a few feet toward an altercation that they didn't start nor finish and get suspended for a key playoff game (or any game for that matter), you'd be fine with that? It wouldn't make you think that the rule is kinda silly is some instances? I just think they can write that rule to leave a little leeway for a more common sense interpretation? Maybe they can't...I'm not an attorney.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DePastino

As I've said before, the wording needs to be changed to allow for some leniency in the event that the player leaving the bench doesn't get involved in the "altercation". I don't see how this would diminish it's impact.

I highly doubt that Stoudemire and Diaw were initially intending to slug someone.

---

So, you don't have a problem with the way the rule was enforced, but you're in favor of amending the rule so that there is more room for interpretation, more subjectivity, correct?

Quote:

---

I highly doubt that Stoudemire and Diaw were initially intending to slug someone

---

How do you know? You live in their heads?

I propose the rule changes to allow the player to perhaps step onto the court during an altercation since it may be the natural result of jumping up or being pushed from behind a little, but if they move away from the bench area toward the altercation, they should be fined and suspended one game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mabber

So if Duncan & Bowen walk a few feet toward an altercation that they didn't start nor finish and get suspended for a key playoff game (or any game for that matter), you'd be fine with that? It wouldn't make you think that the rule is kinda silly is some instances? I just think they can write that rule to leave a little leeway for a more common sense interpretation? Maybe they can't...I'm not an attorney.

---

They could have written a rule that didn't impose an automatic one game suspension for its violation.

They could have, but they didn't.

Quote:

---

So if Duncan & Bowen walk a few feet toward an altercation that they didn't start nor finish and get suspended for a key playoff game (or any game for that matter), you'd be fine with that? It wouldn't make you think that the rule is kinda silly is some instances? I just think they can write that rule to leave a little leeway for a more common sense interpretation? Maybe they can't...I'm not an attorney

---

if they leave the bench during an altercation, then no I wouldn't be.

Rule is a rule.

Deal with it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mabber

So you really like the way that rule is written? I'm not arguing the suspensions as they should have been suspended based on how that rule is written.

---

Actually, I stand by my initial statement when this whole thing broke.

Letter of the rule: Suspensions.

Spirit of the rule: Talking to, minimal fine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mabber

So if Duncan & Bowen walk a few feet toward an altercation that they didn't start nor finish and get suspended for a key playoff game (or any game for that matter), you'd be fine with that?

---

Yes. They know the rules.

Quote:

---

It wouldn't make you think that the rule is kinda silly is some instances?

---

Considering why the rule is there in the first place, no.

Quote:

---

I just think they can write that rule to leave a little leeway for a more common sense interpretation?

---

I haven't heard one good suggestion yet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mabber

So if Duncan & Bowen walk a few feet toward an altercation that they didn't start nor finish and get suspended for a key playoff game (or any game for that matter), you'd be fine with that? It wouldn't make you think that the rule is kinda silly is some instances? I just think they can write that rule to leave a little leeway for a more common sense interpretation? Maybe they can't...I'm not an attorney.

---

If they were to break the rule, then yes, I'd be fine with that.

Now show me the altercation in the second quarter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ThomasGranger

So, you don't have a problem with the way the rule was enforced, but you're in favor of amending the rule so that there is more room for interpretation, more subjectivity, correct?

---

No it needs to be applied with more common sense. These players are not robots. They saw thier point guard go down with a cheapshot. At the very least the rule should allow for them to show some reaction. If they compose themselves and get back to the bench let it be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Amare_32

No it needs to be applied with more common sense. These players are not robots. They saw thier point guard go down with a cheapshot. At the very least the rule should allow for them to show some reaction.

---

It does.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChumpDumper

So how will players running onto the court signal their intent to the league?

Fax?

Email?

Candygram?

---

Doesn't matter. Amare was intending to do "something" but he was restrained and never made it out there.

The league can't assume that his intent was hostile any more than it can assume it was to be a peace maker or just see what had happened to Nash.

The player should be assumed to be a non-participant until he actually participates.

Of course most Spurs fans would be decrying the decision if the situation was reverse...

and most Suns fans would be supporting it.

Again, that would not change the fact: Stern runs the NBA tight. As basketball fans, we have to deal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Johnny_Blaze_47

If they were to break the rule, then yes, I'd be fine with that.

Now show me the altercation in the second quarter.

---

I never even brought that up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mabber

I never even brought that up.

---

You just happened to choose Duncan and Bowen?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChumpDumper

It does.

---

Stern said otherwise. He said the rule is automatic with the suspension.