Does anything think the Rule will / should be Changed?

So the rule says you get a mandatory suspension for stepping one foot on the court regardless of intentions, but if you take someone's head off you may not get a suspension.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Booyah30

They should do like the NFL, give out a mandatory fine and suspensions based on actions once they are on the court.

---

:wtf

The rule is ironclad and that's the only way it will work. Ambiguity makes for more discontent and controversy. It won't change. Cuban has gone on record that he'd vote against a change and he's gotten this right. Owners have hundreds of millions tied up in this product and they don't want to encourage some 80 IQ numbskull like Amare to screw up their investment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Borosai

The rule is fine, and it's there for a reason. There is no need for players on the bench to get up and help their teammates. There are 5 of them on the court, and 3 refs. The whole purpose is to avoid brawls with 30 players on the court. Once you blur the line of what's acceptable and what's not, players will start coming out onto the court again. Whether or not they get involved isn't the issue...their presence escalates the situation. You can be sure that neither Amare nor Boris will leave their bench again (well, at least Boris won't. Amare might not think quickly enough). Problem solved.

---

Exactly...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Booyah30

So the rule says you get a mandatory suspension for stepping one foot on the court regardless of intentions, but if you take someone's head off you may not get a suspension.

---

Whose head got taken off? Really, the way you guys characterize a hip check to try to make it more dramatic is just a joke.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Booyah30

So the rule says you get a mandatory suspension for stepping one foot on the court regardless of intentions, but if you take someone's head off you may not get a suspension.

---

Actually the rule says nothing of the sort.

And there is no specific rule for decapitation. I can't think of one written for any sport.

Thanks for showing your ignorance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by picnroll

The rule is ironclad and that's the only way it will work. Ambiguity makes for more discontent and controversy. It won't change. Cuban has gone on record that he'd vote against a change and he's gotten this right. Owners have hundreds of millions tied up in this product and they don't want to encourage some 80 IQ numbskull like Amare to screw up their investment.

---

He says that now but I can totally see Cuban having a fit if Dirk gets suspended for the same thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Amare_32

He says that now but I can totally see Cuban having a fit if Dirk gets suspended for the same thing.

---

Just like you can see intent of all basketball players on tv.

I think it should be changed to allow for reaction as long as the bench player does not approach or interact with opposing players during the altercation.

Aka, they should be allowed to check on their own players as long as they keep out of the way and don't escalate it.

If anything, the rule won't be changed, but will leave more room for interpretation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fyatuk

I think it should be changed to allow for reaction as long as the bench player does not approach or interact with opposing players during the altercation.

Aka, they should be allowed to check on their own players as long as they keep out of the way and don't escalate it.

---

That makes absolutely no sense. Having bench players rush the court escalates the situation by itself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fyatuk

I think it should be changed to allow for reaction as long as the bench player does not approach or interact with opposing players during the altercation.

Aka, they should be allowed to check on their own players as long as they keep out of the way and don't escalate it.

---

That's why teams have trainers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Amare_32

He says that now but I can totally see Cuban having a fit if Dirk gets suspended for the same thing.

---

Dirk isnt an idiot so I doubt we would see that. Bottom line is that if this suspension had come down on the last 2 guys on the bench, no one would care and the media would say it was justified being "the rule". But since 2 key guys did it, its "unfair".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Amare_32

He says that now but I can totally see Cuban having a fit if Dirk gets suspended for the same thing.

---

Dirk isn't stupid enough to run onto the court. Maybe Shithouse. What surprises me is Diaw. I didn't think he was that stupid. Amare I would have bet big money that dimwit would run out. Do nothing, fugazzi-style, but still run out.

I think it should be changed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fyatuk

I think it should be changed to allow for reaction as long as the bench player does not approach or interact with opposing players during the altercation.

Aka, they should be allowed to check on their own players as long as they keep out of the way and don't escalate it.

---

They escalate it simply with their presence. There are only three officials, usually old white men and ten players, usually gigantic, testosterone fueled athletes in their twenties. Simply introducing 14 more gigantic, testosterone fueled athletes to what is an emotional situation just makes the job of breaking it up that much harder. Stay where you are. That's the rule. An NBA player in the middle of an altercation doesn't need guys from the other team running at him to calm him down.

BTW, Does anyone have video of when Rudy T decided to play peacemaker?

I swear, some of you guys must never have been in a fight.

Changed to what?

I think there should be a pen full of those plastic balls that kids play in so guys like Amare can jump into them and writhe around and throw a tantrum until he is no longer driven by "instinct" that the great majority of his teammates simply don't seem to have.

Who's with me?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Obstructed_View

They escalate it simply with their presence. There are only three officials, usually old white men and ten players, usually gigantic, testosterone fueled athletes in their twenties. Simply introducing 14 more gigantic, testosterone fueled athletes to what is an emotional situation just makes the job of breaking it up that much harder. Stay where you are. That's the rule. An NBA player in the middle of an altercation doesn't need guys from the other team running at him to calm him down.

BTW, Does anyone have video of when Rudy T decided to play peacemaker?

I swear, some of you guys must never have been in a fight.

---

there'd be nothing more tempting in a playoff series than to allow players to come off the bench and ambush another team's star.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChumpDumper

Changed to what?

I think there should be a pen full of those plastic balls that kids play in so guys like Amare can jump into them and writhe around and throw a tantrum until he is no longer driven by "instinct" that the great majority of his teammates simply don't seem to have.

Who's with me?

---

I'm more for putting Amare in restraints on the sideline, maybe a straight jacket and a muzzle. Take them off when he goes in the game.

Maybe the Suns' staff should use these:

http://www.tommiguard.com/images/FBasic_Navy.jpg

I'm gonna have to GIMP some images now. Good ideas ChumpDumper. :lol

new Phoenix bench seat

http://www.healthacres.com/childheal...1.mzzzzzzz.jpg

Here's a double so Amare and Boris can be photoshopped onto them.

http://www.survivingtwins.com/wp-con...oads/leash.jpg

I think what sucks about the rule is that it's a player's natural reaction to get up when you see a teammate get a hard foul. Like Duncan reacting to Elson falling in game 4, you may just want to see if they're ok.


Just imagine if an altercation had started just at that moment?


Also, imagine if you step on the court (for whatever reason) and a fight breaks out on the complete opposite corner of the court. By the letter of the law, you'd have to be suspended, but it just doesn't make a lot of sense, IMO.


I don't know what the right answer is, but the current rule sucks, IMO.

Quote:

---

I think what sucks about the rule is that it's a player's natural reaction to get up when you see a teammate get a hard foul. Like Duncan reacting to Elson falling in game 4, you may just want to see if they're ok.

---

There is no penalty for standing up.

Quote:

---

Just imagine if an altercation had started just at that moment?

---

They'd be suspended. Rightly so. The Spurs know the rules as well as Amare and Boris.

Quote:

---

Also, imagine if you step on the court (for whatever reason) and a fight breaks out on the complete opposite corner of the court. By the letter of the law, you'd have to be suspended

---

False.