Duncan vs. KG facts.

[ChumpDumper]

Looked like it to me. The rule uses the undefined term, "bench area." Stern didn't have any discretion in determining what cons utes the "bench area," I suppose?

The term was introduced because Patrick Ewing got suspended for standing next to the bench with his big ass feet partially over the side line during an altercation.

Had Amare stood near the bench with his feet over the sideline, he would not have been suspended. Guaranteed.

Stay near the bench.

[samikeyp]

Nothing's 100%, which is why they (usually) play the game on the court. However, I will say it was more likely than not.

Fair enough. I will respectfully disagree but that is what makes these boards fun.

I would still like to see that rule amended. Something like the coaches box thing I think should be more defined and I would like to see rules on what defines an altercation.

[ChumpDumper]

So why couldn't Stern have said they returned to the "bench area" in time? Problem solved. But he had to flex his muscles....

Anyway, now that I have at least a few Spur fans who will no longer engage in the "Stoudemire is a dumbass with no basketball sense," at least I have made some headway here.

Amare was a dumbass.

[ChumpDumper]

Fair enough. I will respectfully disagree but that is what makes these boards fun.

I would still like to see that rule amended. Something like the coaches box thing I think should be more defined and I would like to see rules on what defines an altercation.

I would like to see players stay near the bench.

[da_suns_fan__]

Serious question.

Shred...do you believe 100%, without a doubt that if there were no suspensions that the Suns would have won the series and that the Spurs would have had no shot at all?

Other Phx fans feel this way....I am curious about your take.

Do you believe the Spurs would have won if the Suspensions never took place even after the Suns took control of the series?

We'll never know...hence the asterick.

[Shred]

Had Amare stood near the bench with his feet over the sideline, he would not have been suspended. Guaranteed.

Stay near the bench.

This begs the question, what is "near the bench?" If it's not defined in the rules, does the commissioner have any discretion in making that determination? Is the light starting to go on for you?

[ChumpDumper]

Do you believe the Spurs would have won if the Suspensions never took place even after the Suns took control of the series?

No reason not to.

[samikeyp]

Anyway, now that I have at least a few Spur fans who will no longer engage in the "Stoudemire is a dumbass with no basketball sense," at least I have made some headway here.

I never have and can't comment on his basketball sense because he is way better than I but IMO any player that leaves his bench except to go to the locker room or into the game is a dumbass.

[Shred]

Amare was a dumbass.

"Duncan was a dumbass." Sincerely, ChumpDumper.

[ChumpDumper]

This begs the question, what is "near the bench?" If it's not defined in the rules, does the commissioner have any discretion in making that determination? Is the light starting to go on for you?

As I said, the term was introduced to keep from suspending players whose feet may have been over the sideline when they stood up from the bench. Had Amare done that, he would not have been suspended. Guaranteed.

[samikeyp]

Do you believe the Spurs would have won if the Suspensions never took place even after the Suns took control of the series?

We'll never know...hence the asterick.

The only asterisk is made up by fans not the league and is therefore does not exist.

At the time of the suspensions....the series was 2-2. No one was in control.

[ChumpDumper]

"Duncan was a dumbass." Sincerely, ChumpDumper.

He was. I've said that many times before today. Do a search.

[Shred]

As I said, the term was introduced to keep from suspending players whose feet may have been over the sideline when they stood up from the bench. Had Amare done that, he would not have been suspended. Guaranteed.

So you're saying the spirit of the rule should have some place in how it is interpreted and implied? I think I just brought you around to my way of thinking.

[ChumpDumper]

So you're saying the spirit of the rule should have some place in how it is interpreted and implied? I think I just brought you around to my way of thinking.

No. Ewing was suspended. They changed the rule afterwards. That was the correct course of action. If they want to change the rule now, fine. I think it's pretty clear -- stay near the bench. The precedents are clear enough for non-dumbasses to follow.

[ambchang]

Stoudemire and Diaw had already turned back toward the bench at the time of the "altercation" involving Bell.

That is untrue.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yp4UF4Av_g0
Go to the 1:10 - 1:15 mark, Horry was shoving Bell, and Amare was clearly seen going towards Horry, but being restrained by teammates in the background.

[Spurminator]

Already back within the coach's box.

Hard to argue with a blind basketball fan.

[ambchang]

Such is the power of the asterisk, Spur fan will deny reality as long as it means in his own sick little mind he can justify what happened.

*

I am sure the Spurs fans are justifying what actually happened is reality, while the Suns fans (read: you) is justifying what did not happen had should happen is reality.
In reality, the Suns won the championship.
In reality, the Suns should not be penalized for a rule that the owners have not overturned in 10 years.

[da_suns_fan__]

This is crazy.

Sending youtube clips to try and find the slightest bit of evidence that Amare and Diaw left the bench area.

Steve Kerr, Charles Barkley and Kenny Smith and the rest of the MEDIA are as much to blame as everyone else. They're the ones who brought immediate attention and debate to something INSIGNIFICANT. They basically called out Stern....said "What are you going to do? Be the enforcer or swallow your pride.?"

All of us (the fans) are the ones who suffered cuz they wanted something interesting to write about.

[Shred]

No. Ewing was suspended. They changed the rule afterwards. That was the correct course of action. If they want to change the rule now, fine. I think it's pretty clear -- stay near the bench. The precedents are clear enough for non-dumbasses to follow.

What is "near the bench?"

[samikeyp]

All of us (the fans) are the ones who suffered cuz they wanted something interesting to write about.

On that...we agree.

[ChumpDumper]

What is "near the bench?"

Not the timeline. I'll just keep pasting this until you understand it.

As I said, the term was introduced to keep from suspending players whose feet may have been over the sideline when they stood up from the bench. Had Amare done that, he would not have been suspended. Guaranteed.

[ambchang]

This begs the question, what is "near the bench?" If it's not defined in the rules, does the commissioner have any discretion in making that determination? Is the light starting to go on for you?

Any reasonable person would guess that a good 15 feet away from the bench on a 90-foot court is definitely not "near the bench", but then you will start arguing what a "reasonable person" is. I mean, that is too vague.

[ambchang]

Do you believe the Spurs would have won if the Suspensions never took place even after the Suns took control of the series?

We'll never know...hence the asterick.

What we do know is that the Spurs did win the championship this year with what actually happened in this universe, and the Suns did not.
I suppose the Suns should have an asterix next to their team in the 2007 record books.
* - hypothetical NBA champions in alternate universe.

[ambchang]

This is crazy.

Sending youtube clips to try and find the slightest bit of evidence that Amare and Diaw left the bench area.

Steve Kerr, Charles Barkley and Kenny Smith and the rest of the MEDIA are as much to blame as everyone else. They're the ones who brought immediate attention and debate to something INSIGNIFICANT. They basically called out Stern....said "What are you going to do? Be the enforcer or swallow your pride.?"

All of us (the fans) are the ones who suffered cuz they wanted something interesting to write about.

Let's see, Kerr is a part owner of the Suns, Barkley is a Suns icon, yeah, lets go with the opinions of the media instead of looking at youtube clips, becaues youtube clips clearly showed the Suns violating the rules and does not help my argument.

[da_suns_fan__]

Let's see, Kerr is a part owner of the Suns, Barkley is a Suns icon, yeah, lets go with the opinions of the media instead of looking at youtube clips, becaues youtube clips clearly showed the Suns violating the rules and does not help my argument.

I dont think you are understanding my argument.