Wojo's a moron. Nobody ever mentioned the fact that it was RAJA BELL who instigated the 'altercation.' Watch the video, Horry turned away and started heading upcourt after the foul. If Bell doesn't get into his face, the suspensions never happen.
Horry has the most rings for a reason. He knew what he was doing when he did it. Do i agree with it..maybe not.....did Nash Flop........ yes but who doesn't in this day and age. I think Horry and his big shot ways deserves a standing Ovation all the time. I was glad to see it.
What pissed me off was that the CBS employee blogger (on Sportsline.com) yesterday called SA fans "classless" for giving Horry the standing O, because Horry was trying to deliberately injure Poor Little Stevie.
One hard foul where his arms never left his body and where he aimed at the midsection is not at all the same as a blow to the head or a clothesline.
Nor is it the same thing as booing a player who WANTED to play for your team, but who was cut anyway and decided to continue playing. City smack is just weak.
This author is a hack and I love Robert Horry a little more for having read this.
Robert Horry is a bumb! I am no Danny Ainge fan (as coach or player) but, anyone who throws a towel in their coaches face is a bumb! Anyone who makes the kind of foul that Horry did at the end of game four is is bumb! You foul with your hands and arms in the open court at the end of a decided game... and you don't stick out your left elbow for good measure. If you can't see the truth in that than you don't know basketball at all! Comapring a hard foul as you go to the basket to fouling to stop the clock in the open court of a decided game is a dumb comparison for Horry to make. The simple fact of the matter is that Horry was pissed that the Spurs blew the game and wanted to dish out some vigilante justice. Horry made a stupid play and is clearly not man enough to admit it. Anyone who sticks up for Robert Horry is a bumb including everyone that stood up and cheered for him when he entered game 1 of the Western Conference Finals. The Spurs are too good of a team to resort to Robert Horry tactics.
As a Suns fan, I am willing to admit that the Spurs are no doubt a great team and likely would have won the series anyway. I also think that Stat and Diaw are to blame for their own suspensions for thinking before they acted. I agree that there must me a punishment for leaving the bench during an altercation. However, I also feel that the punishment should fit the crime. If a player from the bench contributes to the altercation then they should be fined AND suspended. If a player serves as peacemaker or does not escalate the situation they should still be fined, but not suspended. Anyway, the rule is a rule and I think the NBA made the right decision, but from the Suns perspective it was, no doubt, a tough pill to swallow.
Having said all that, Robert Horry is a bumb. He was a bumb before he played for San Antonio and still is!
Not unlike Mavs Fan ... where has he been? For all he dished out this year, he's been strangely absent the past couple of weeks. Oh wait, he's at home watching some other team win the trophy. Good riddance, I say. Come back when your team has won something.
It's "bum," and Robert Horry and Spurs fans are not "bums." (except for the baseline bums.) And they DID NOT think before they acted. And I don't think you understand the rules of the NBA. And Amare wasn't walking onto the court to serve as a peacemaker--nor was he going to check on Nash nor to "check in," as he so adamantly claimed in the post-game conference and interviews.
bumb
I am really glad to see this interview with Horry. I agree with him 100% and have been posting this since day zero of "the incident". The Horry foul on Nash was a Flagrant 2 hard foul in today's game (10 years ago it would have just been a common foul). But it was nothing close to an intent to injure, and should not have caused a suspension. Horry did not go for the head. Horry did not hit someone in the air. It was just a good clean hard playoff foul.
Every ex-player and ex-coach commentator that I've seen agrees with me that they don't understand why this is so blown out of proportion. It's only the "sports analyst" and media contingents that seem to want to keep whipping this horse.
Can anyone think of another body-to-body foul in the open court with both players' feet on the ground that caused a suspension? I sure can't. I think this is unprecedented.
My theory is that, had Amare/Diaw not come off the bench, Horry would not have been suspended. It was a make-up call.
Bum... bumb... my mistake... you still got the message. No one will EVER know what Diaw and Stat's intentions were, but the fact remains that the they did not escalate the altercation. The coaches refrained them from making anything worse so why should they be suspended? Fined yes! Suspended no! If they would have made it to the "altercation" and either made physical contact or made made verbal statements that escalated the situation than the suspensions would have been justified. Depending on what they MIGHT have done, perhaps more than one game would have been warranted. By rule of law... I just think someone should be punished for what they DID do... not what they MIGHT have done. Innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt... ring a bell? Horry is still a bum (thanks for helping my spelling miscue)!!!
I agree they did not escalate the situation, but the fact is they broke the rule. The rule all owners for the past 10 years have been signing off on, that has been enforced numerous times and no one has had a problem with untill now.
There are always what if's, just gotta learn to live with em.
They were punished for what they did do -- they left the bench area during an altercation. It's not like this is a new rule.By rule of law... I just think someone should be punished for what they DID do.
The win was not assured, that is why Horry fouled Nash. Wosh is an idiot.
This is so typical of an immature at ude about rules. You think you're en led to "fairness" in rules interpretation, by your definition of "fairness". You think that the blame lies with someone else when you break the rules. You think that your intention should be considered.Bum... bumb... my mistake... you still got the message. No one will EVER know what Diaw and Stat's intentions were, but the fact remains that the they did not escalate the altercation. The coaches refrained them from making anything worse so why should they be suspended? Fined yes! Suspended no! If they would have made it to the "altercation" and either made physical contact or made made verbal statements that escalated the situation than the suspensions would have been justified. Depending on what they MIGHT have done, perhaps more than one game would have been warranted. By rule of law... I just think someone should be punished for what they DID do... not what they MIGHT have done. Innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt... ring a bell? Horry is still a bum (thanks for helping my spelling miscue)!!!
Sorry to introduce you to the real world in such a harsh fashion -- but -- none of these things is actually true.
I'll leave you with two quotes from the series:
1. Gregg Popovich wrote on the board for his players to see before Game 5:
"Expect nothing. Ask for nothing."
2. Shaq O'Neal, when asked if the suspensions were fair, said:
"Life isn't fair. They don't even let you bring toothpaste on airplanes any more."
Hmm, maybe the fans were giving Horry a standing ovation because this is probably his last Playoffs, and he just got back after being suspended for two days?
If you all will look back at my original post this morning you would see that I said that under the current rule I agreed with the NBA's ruling. Amare and Boris did NOT (my mistake again) think before the acted. There is no doubt that under the current rule they should have been suspended. If they wouldn't have then the player's union could appeal any future decision made under that rule. The correct call was made by the league. The conversation that I am trying to create or perhaps the point I am trying to make is that if the rule were just it would be changed to incorporate the language that I propose. Rules are rules, but are always open to human interpretation. Not to get into a civics lessen, but that is what the courts are for. They interpret the laws and hand down punishments based upon the spirit of the law. I guess what I am trying to say is that the rule should be amended FOR FUTURE instances to protect players that don't really do anything. There is a big differnce between a player who takes 5-10 steps and is cut off by an assistant coach and on the other hand a player that sprints into the altercation and starts grabbing and pushing people or talking trash. Even as a Suns fan I would say that if say Kurt Thomas would have done that at the end of one of the games to Tony Parker and then Duncan and Brent Barry steped toward the altercation and the Spurs assistants stopped them before they could actually do anything... I can honestly say that I wouldn't want them to be suspended... becasue they wouldn't have actually DONE anything to warrant a suspension. To be honest, rule or no rule I like the fact that Suns players jumped up like that when they saw one of their teammates get smashed... part of that is just the curiosity of being a human being, but also being ready to help out a teammate. To be honest if the shoe had been on the other foot I think Spurs players would have done the same thing, becasue at least from an outsider perspective if the Spurs are nothing else they are a great TEAM. A trait that the Suns are trying to learn... and if they do they will beat the Spurs in the near future if the managment doesn't panic and start trading poople away. Neverthless... I am a long time Suns fan and Horry is still a bum... without the extra "b" of course.
There's no reason to change it. Players should stay near the bench. Period.I guess what I am trying to say is that the rule should be amended FOR FUTURE instances to protect players that don't really do anything.
you got to love Horry!
all the whiny pussies that call themselves players
... i play with my friends and we do a lot of HARD fouls all the time and noone says anything
and some guys whine about hard plays in the playoffs lol
I know that this is a lame response, but it just came to me and I found it fitting...
"Only a Sith speaks in absolutes."
-Obi Won Kenobi to Anikan Skywalker in Star Wars just before Anikan officially turns into Darth Vader: Episode III
Life is all about the grey area... there is no such thing as black and white... not even the law.
And... Horry is still a bum!
Polelander I think.
There are already gray areas in the rule. Amare and Boris went far outside those areas.
Stay near the bench.
Define "near."
Near = Not 20 feet away.
The rule was changed to allow players to do something like stick their toes over the sideline (Pat Ewing did precisely this), not sprint 20 feet away from the bench.
Amare was free to put his toes over the sideline.
Not that I think it warranted anything but a technical foul for coming on the court during play... but was Duncan "near" the bench or was he too far away when Bowen had to come and get him? ... just as an example of where the barrier actually is... for example
There was no altercation. So Duncan was lucky that he did it w/ no altercation. We've already covered this in here (this forum) many times. We realize you're new.
There are many threads discussing the altercation issue and the suspension. The search function is up for now, so I suggest you read through those other threads.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
