Ugh huh, because something like this has never happened in the history of the NBA, it is so unprecedented that it will forever remain a mystery as to why Amare and Diaw were suspended by the league. They never could have predicted that by STEPPING ON TO THE COURT DURING A FIGHT WOULD COST THEM A GAME....I mean its so bloody unfair.
And never has a team been able to come back from a one game suspension to a key player to go on and win the series. No team has ever lost a player and still won the series.
There have been exceptions to the rule in the past, so it's not completely black-and-white. The fact is, these suspensions are a result of actions that had no effect on the "altercation." The punishment does not fit the crime at all.
They've put a black mark on a series that would otherwise be the best of the playoffs.
But any player leaving the bench area give control of the suspension to the league, which will decide whatever it wants using whatever criteria it chooses. Why give them that power? Show some self-control and stay in the ing bench area.
Rules committee meetings are the time to whine about this, not the playoffs.I agree. Amare and Boris were stupid.They've put a black mark on a series that would otherwise be the best of the playoffs.
this year, with everything being black and white as far as player conduct, this was the only way it would happen. everyone knew it, but was hoping it wouldn't happen.
Where's the snooze button?
Can't speak for others, but I'm not looking for some nail biting 7 game series like last year. i prefer to sweep you out the door. Sorry, but I'm excited as heel they won't be playing.
I tend to agree. The rules are known by everyone. Amare chose to leave the bench. He secured his own fate pure and simple.
WTF? How does a tainted topic get some run in here? Geeze.
I agree that what Amare and Boris did wasn't smart, but that still doesn't justify the league's ruling, in my opinion.
The ing Nba Sucks For Just Surprising Everyone With This Brand New Rule Sterns A Lol
What ruling? They broke a zero tolerance rule. The only ruling is if they left the bench. They did. Game over.
So? It was the league's call. There's no vote. Everyone knows that. Even Amare and Boris.
Look, I know how big these suspensions seem right now, and how you, as a Suns fan, will never ever forget how much this hurts but, don't be delusional. Try to take a realistic perspective.
The Suns' plight won't come anywhere near sticking in the public consciousness. Two years from now, the general public and the vast majority of casual fans (representing probably better than 90% of all NBA fans) won't even really remember these suspensions. Only that the Spurs won a championship around this time.
You're giving this ordeal far too much credit.
The numbers, outside the city of Phoenix, who are going to care how the Spurs won are insignificant. We can argue whether it is some sort of testament on society but, short of cheating for your advantage (see: Barry Bonds), a win is a win.
The only wiggle room is the definition of an altercation and bench vicinity.
But guess who decides that?
The league!
Not players or fans or columnists!
No there haven't. When an altercation takes place on the court the rule has been consistently enforced.
Last edited by Obstructed_View; 05-15-2007 at 11:52 PM. Reason: I cant spehul good
Had it been Oberto and Elson, Suns fans would be lecturing us on how stupid we are on the rules, how huge of homers we are, how were not looking at it objectively.
Maybe I should have prefaced my argument by saying that the rule is complete bollocks. :p
I wouldn't be surprised to see an amendment to the rule before next season.
for the record, look up timvp's posts and he also said it was tainted
but whatever, on to game 5 I suppose
Again,
The Suns only brought this upon themselves... They played the refs, they willingly and deviously played the 'dirty' card, they instigated instead of simply playing the game, and ultimately their players broke a rule.
The Spurs players didn't leave the bench. The Spurs players did not gripe about the officiating in the media. They simply played. Robert was the only one to lose his cool. And he will do time for his crime.
God damn kid, did you even read the rules? You're spewing such bull it's not funny.
The exact rule:
Was there an altercation? Yes. Did the players who left the immediate vicinity of the bench get suspended? Yes.During an altercation, all players not participating in the game must remain in the immediate vicinity of their bench. Violators will be suspended, without pay, for a minimum of one game and fined up to $35,000.
It's that damn simple.
I doubt it. The ambiguous parts of it seem necessary to allow for the exceptions you mentioned. Can't really get any more specific. If anything the league probably regrets not suspending GS or NJ players earlier for hard fouls.
I commend your effort, but it's pointless. Apparently they are suffering from a case of the Amares.
It is up to ones own personal opinion on whether or not this series is tainted.
There might be an amendment to the rules, but the fact that you don't like it doesn't make it any less clear. I have a feeling that the rule would have been just fine with you if your team were benefitting from it.
The President of the United States decides we should go to war in Iraq and most of the country supports his decision at the time--doesn't mean I have to agree with it.
Why are we here but to discuss the actions of others?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
