Reply With Quote
Please describe it in detail.
You can go look at my post history if you'd like, but I'm not going to read my resume to you. Not all of us are cheaters. You avoided the question again. Do you think I'm not going to notice?
I ask again: Why do you think that your team doesn't have to follow the rules that everyone else has to follow?
Please describe it in detail.
You beat me to it.
Horry got suspended for hitting Raja Bell above the shoulders. Did Elson or Jones throw the first punch?
I don't have to describe it. It's there on plain, clear videotape to see, probably all over the internet.
Yeah right, look at the post history of any serious Spurs fan here, the players always take the blame. Only bandwagoners, as you may be familiar with, go blaming the refs and Stern.
Then you should have no problem producing ONE.
Really? Because I have the game on plain clear videotape and I didn't see Elson or Jones throw a punch.
So provide one link to one video that shows the altercation. Just provide the link to the one you saw. I think I still have that game on DVR. Tell me what I'm supposed to be looking for.
No, you really need to explain how it is an altercation when Elson is talking to the ref while the plyer who undercut him is running up the court.
Because the rules are flexible to an extent to insure fairness--at least that's the way it works until it puts the Spurs at a disadvantage.
See: 1997 Knicks v. Miami
Why, 10 years later, are the rules supposed to be broken for your ring-starved team?
I don't know how spurs fans can defend what Horry did. Horry is a punk.
Yes, had Amare not run so far away from the bench, he wouldn't have been suspended.
I'm not defending what Horry did. He was punished.
You can tell they were about to tear into each other, but they new the clock was about to start again, and they put they primal passions aside for the sake of the game at that point. The Horry incident took place at the very end of the game.
That rule is inflexible. That rule calls for a mandatory suspension for anyone that leaves the vicinity of the bench during an altercation. Amare and Diaw both ran toward the altercation, thus negating the "vicinity" rule that was put in there for guys whose toes stick over the sideline. That rule is in place for every NBA player on every NBA team in every NBA game for the last 12 years.
So why do you think that your team should not have to follow the exact rules that everyone else has to follow?
How?You can tell they were about to tear into each other
You defended Jason Terry punching Micheal Finley in the balls. o?
Who on this thread is defending Horry?
Because, I've seen incidents similar to this in which the rule was NOT enforced. It's not as ironclad as Stern would have you be brainwashed to believe.
Must I continue to repeat myself?
Come on, man. I'm sure you've been in a fight or two before, you know that look and posture.
You didn't actually see it did you? You are talking out of your ass on a Spurs message board to Spurs fans about something you didn't even see. You didn't even take the time to educate yourself about what transpired in that exchange after Elson's dunk, and you somehow thought you were going to get away with that? Here?
Primal passions? Elson hung on the rim too long and let go at the wrong time. Jones got up and ran downcourt. The official spoke to Elson and play resumed.
Give us examples?
Yet the entire time before the suspensions were handed out NBA player after NBA talked about seeing someone or themselves taking one or two steps on the court during an altercation and being suspended.
'
Yet not one: "We'll I've seen a lot of times when players run on the court or leave the bench during an altercation and they are not suspended." Not one, expect for the one game when the fight was in the tunnel.
So you're admitting there was no altercation.they put they primal passions aside for the sake of the game at that point.
Good boy.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions