Reply With Quote
yeah, but the suns weren't at full force in game 5
I mean, that's what I'd expect to retort with.
I didn't see this posted anywhere. If I missed it my apologies.
Stern defends Suns suspensions
At a breakfast at US Airways Center on Thursday to officially announce Phoenix had been awarded the 2009 All-Star game, Suns president Rick Welts joked from a podium on stage, “If an altercation breaks out up here, you are not to leave the immediate vicinity of your assigned table.”
The comment drew chuckles from the crowd of mostly corporate sponsors and media members and even a smile from NBA Commissioner David Stern, sitting two chairs to the left of where Welts was speaking.
But about an hour later, when Stern was asked about his decision to stick to the letter of the law during last season’s playoffs and suspend Phoenix’s Amaré Stoudemire and Boris Diaw after they left the bench area in Game 4 of the Suns-Spurs series on May 14, the commissioner was not laughing.
Often defensive and even smug at times in his explanation, Stern admitted at one point he wished “that I could get past this” before adding, “I think it’s constructive for me to answer the questions here.”
Despite the opinion there should be a gray area open to interpretation within the rule, Stern said he will not change or modify it because “the idea that we’re supposed to determine the intent of somebody is a problem” and the rule has been “consistently announced and persistently enforced.”
“My determination at that time not to make a special exception for the Suns was something that I can’t apologize for, but I can understand how people would feel,” said Stern, making his first appearance in the Valley since Game 4.
“I’m sorry it happened. I think games should be decided on their merits … with teams at full force if they can, but part of playing in the NBA is knowing what the rules are.”
That explanation correlates with why the league is changing its rules regarding referees and gambling, said Stern, who dismissed the notion of a double standard.
“The rule had never been enforced and these guys (referees) have been behaving in this way (gambling legally) for as many years as I can remember. I said, 'OK, I’m in charge of this organization. … I’m not going to make a mockery out of it by trying to take a couple of people down with a rule that’s overly broad and poorly enforced.’ Now if you’d like to compare that to the rule about coming off the bench, I think it speaks for itself.”
When it was suggested that his former decision cost the Suns the series, Stern responded, “People seem to forget what actually happened after this. There were two more games right? And the Suns lost both of them? Right?”
Stern said he consulted with the league’s compe ion committee before announcing the suspensions and was told he was doing the right thing.
“This is a serious issue with large men coming off the bench. I put the issue squarely to our compe ion committee, and the players who played at the meeting thought I had lost my mind for even raising the issue. They said, 'When you’re out there, you just don’t know. It’s a scary place to be. People come at you and they’re liable to do almost anything.’ … That is what Hall of Famers were telling me. I was trying to be fair because there was some suggestion that the rule needed to be modified. I said, 'Guys, talk to me.’ They said, 'Shut up and go on to the next subject.’ ”
As for his last-minute change of plans to skip Game 5 in Phoenix, Stern said, “I thought it was the better part of valor not to come right to the face of that and seemingly stir up more sort of in your face. … I thought that might be viewed as trying to make a point I wasn’t trying to make.”
http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/story/101551
yeah, but the suns weren't at full force in game 5
I mean, that's what I'd expect to retort with.
1 at home.When it was suggested that his former decision cost the Suns the series, Stern responded, “People seem to forget what actually happened after this. There were two more games right? And the Suns lost both of them? Right?”
Also, what was the Suns's excuse for losing Game 1, At home, with everyone?
I'm still waiting for that answer.
BECAUSE TONY PARKER BROKE NASH's NOSE
/excuse
The general excuse is that Nash had the bloody nose, taking him out several times during the last critical moments.
Whatever.
There are a million excuses to everything, but ultimately, it boils down to the other team simply being better in a 7-game series. We have a million reasons why we didn't win in 2000 (TD's knee), 2001 (D.A.'s shoulder), 2004 (0.4), and 2006 (Manu's foul). But ultimately, each of those times there were equally valid reasons why we lost and strong reasons why if those tangibles don't occur we still would have lost. Tangibles occur in every series. True champions win despite those. Ultimately, Suns fan need to figure out what they need to overcome the tangibles (defense).
Beat me to it, haha.
Stern is once again a main....I loved this:
“People seem to forget what actually happened after this. There were two more games right? And the Suns lost both of them? Right?”
I saw that too, but it's slightly inaccurate... They only lost one with Diaw and Amare back, so I would accept this comment more freely if there were a 7th game.
The issue should have been put to rest a while ago but I think it's funny that he basically gave a multi-million dollar gift (in tourism, etc) to the city by giving them their 2nd ASG in 16 years.
Has a city even received two in the last 20 years? (This is completely from memory, so correct me if I'm wrong):
1990 - Miami
1991 - Charlotte
1992 - Orlando
1993 - Utah
1994 - Minnesota
1995 - Phoenix
1996 - San Antonio
1997 - Cleveland
1998 - New York
1999 - None (Lockout)
2000 - Oakland
2001 - Washington
2002 - Philly
2003 - Atlanta
2004 - LA
2005 - Denver
2006 - Houston
2007 - Vegas
2008 - New Orleans
2009 - Phoenix
I can't remember who was supposed to host it in 1999, but I'm pretty sure they got skipped over and the original plan was kept for Okland to host it. Still, you have to think that Phoenix might have gotten handed the ASG as a consolation prize. At least I think that's what it is and I might try to fly back home and go to it in '09 if I can.
Houston also had it in '88 I believe..... And PHX getting the ASG as a consolation prize????? You are reaching.
Horry received 2 games in the playoffs for something that was only worth one I believe. The Suns have one of the older arenas in the league (even though it was only built in 1993), so I doubt they were even much on the radar for another ASG before this year. If you're doubting the political side of Stern, then I fear you're missing a large part of his personality (i.e. the guy who puts a dress code on his players).
And I'm pretty sure it was Chicago in '88, but I could be wrong.
Chicago was 88, Houston was 89
And, akin, to my previous statement, the Rockets were in a new arena when they got it the 2nd time.
What are you talking about? The "altercation" happened in Game 4. Diaw and Stoudamaire were suspended in Game 5. They were back for Game 6. Regardless of whether or not they were suspended, Suns still would have had to win a Game 6 in San Antonio to advance. And they still had their full team for Game 6 and Game 7 if it had gone to that....
I think that Stern would love for SA and Phoenix to hook up again in the playoffs this year and he would be exstatic if SA beat them again, sans any controversy. Then he would say: "See, it did not matter....get the over it"
And the Spurs were without Robert Horry (first option off the bench at the 4) for Game 6. So, yeah.
And let's not forget that Robert Horry was suspended for 2 games for something that other players in similar situations in teh WCSF were not suspended for at all. Talk about make-ups. It was ludicrous that a body check, with arms and elbows in delivered to Nash's body (rather than his ankles, legs, head) got him suspended for 2 games, when elbows flying in the GS series didn't warrant a single suspension.
I do think that changing the other rule for officials and gambling was unfortuante though. It weakened his case, even if the rule was never enforced.
For me, the final and most telling point is that the rule was submitted to the owners for review and change and not one owner outside of Sarver wanted it amended or altered or revoked.
Whats the Spurs exuse for losing Game 4, at home, with everyone?
Suns aren't suppose to win EVERY game to prove that theyre the better team.
They won game four. Game one is moot since they won back HCA.
The Spurs were able to win with one fewer player than the Suns and the Suns couldn't win with one fewer player than the Spurs. The Suns were given an advantage in game 6 with Horry's bull extra game suspension and they still got handled. That's the end of the story, Suns were the worse team and they know it.
No, but they're supposed to win four out of seven to do so.
Everyone can put the sticks away...
A) What difference does it make?
B) If you want an excuse, then why don't we just use the old referree excuse? The officials were terrible in that game.
C) I'm not making excuses. They dropped a lead they should have held, and let the Suns back in. Again, what difference does it make, since the Spurs won when it mattered most? If the Suns were the better team, they should have forced a game 7 when the Spurs were still down a man.
Exactly. Just ask Tony Kornheiser about that one
Horry >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Diaw
Spurs were clearly at the disadvantage
Kudos to the Phoenix media for giving him :
http://www.azcentral.com/members/Blog/PaolaBoivin/10334Stern gets an earful at press conference
If NBA Commissioner David Stern thought Phoenix had a short memory, he thought wrong.
Stern's press conference at US Airways Center that followed the announcement of the 2009 NBA All-Star Game coming here was tense and at times almost uncomfortable. By the end, when someone mentioned "this joyous day" in Phoenix, Stern said,"You could have fooled me."
Hey, we still had questions. The first two came from Channel 15's Craig Fouhy and Channel 10's Jude LaCava. Both asked pointed, stern questions about why the commissioner took a tougher stand with Amaré Stoudemire and Boris Diaw for leaving the bench area after a brief altercation in Game 4 of the Western Conference Finals than he did with with his own officials, whom he recently acknowledged have all violated the contractual prohibition against engaging in gambling.
Stern said it was because the language related to gambling in the NBA bylaws are not specific, unlike the language for leaving the bench.
Stern knew he would be grilled, but I doubt he expected this much. By the end, before a reporter asked a question, he smiled and said, "Are you friend or foe?"
Another interested tidbit: Security was definitely heightened. Two policemen were posted outside the entrance to the press conference and security guards repeatedly checked to make sure the doors were locked.
The little coward.
It was a move to have the ASG in PHX again in the first place. It makes him look like he owes AZ something.
Friend or foe? STFU and tell them how it is Stern. Pay me millions of dollars a season and I would have wtfpwn all those cali-wannabe reporters.
Yeah, I suppose everyone who locks their doors at night, or has an alarm, or has a gun for protection is a coward...whatever...
It's not cowardice, it's common sense. It's a dangerous world out there, and it's better to be safe than sorry.
Oh, BTW...
NOT YOURS!!!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
