Suns-Spurs suspensions

I think it's fair. He got a game for blowing Nash up and a game for throwing a forearm. Regardless, the Spurs would take a 5-gamer for Horry if it meant getting Stoudemire and Diaw for a game, IMO.

 

Baron David cheapshots Derek Fisher in game three and gets nothing. Bruce Bowen knees Steve Nash in the nuts and gets nothing. Tim Duncan walks onto the court after Francisco Elson and Raja Bell get into it and gets nothing. Jason Richardson commits a flagrant foul on Mehmet Okur and Mikki Moore blasts Sasha Pavlovic and neither offender gets anything.

Amare Stoudemire and Boris Diaw take three steps each toward a fight that was caused by Robert Horry and they're down for a game. They don't punch; they don't even swing. They're 10 feet away.

Now the Spurs are basically rewarded for Horry's actions while the Suns are punished for the non-violent acts by Stoudemire and Diaw. The loss of Cheap Shot Rob hardly means anything to the Spurs while the loss of two starters - one of which leads the team in scoring - obviously hampers the Suns.

The ruling was right because it was the letter of the law. But it needs to changed this offseason so that it applies on a situational basis. It's pure BS that Davis, Bowen, Richardson and Moore continue to play while Stoudemire and Diaw don't.

 

Umm, yep that about sums this whole thing up. I'd love to see David Stern respond to those points with out blathering some BS.

 

that leaving the bench rule needs to be changed. those guys acted naturally then went back to the bench.

 

Stern has Duncan's dick in his mouth. Who else gets a ref suspended? And has his team rewarded for dirty play?

Hey Stern! See that video of Duncan? Come on! Stick to the rule. Three-piece suited sack of dung.

 

If they change the rule and make it subjective, they'll run into more problems than they have now. Then they'll be trying to prove intent and it'll get way outta hand.
Of course, if they're going to enforce the rule, then they need to check the Duncan footage.

 

How about the off-the-bench rule applying only if the players in question, you know, actually get involved in the confrontation?

Stoudemire and Diaw were wisely restrained by the Suns assistant coaches. Shouldn't that count for something?

 

Define getting involved? Does he have to throw a punch? what about taunting? How about a player that's restaining other players (potentially an opponent)? That player appears to have good intentions but he's invovled in the situation.

 

The folks that decided to make the "leave the bench" rule absolute with no consideration of surrounding circumstances failed to use basic common sense or have never actually played sports before. Its such a natural reaction to step forward when your teammate is injured or assaulted, it is often done as an immediate instinctive reaction before having time to give it thought. And its also ambiguous, may you leave the bench to give assistance if it appears your teammate has been injured rather than in an altercation? Because many of these incidents could easily be construed either way.

And you'd think someone up there would've considered how such an absolute interpretation actually creates an incentive for and rewards thuggish tactics. As soon as your opponent's star players go the bench, just have one of your stiffs knock someone down and damn good chance they'll leave the bench and get suspended. Hey, doesn't matter who's at fault or how justified they were because the league says the rule is absolute.

 

Robert Horry deserved one game, not two. It is so clear when you watch the replays that Nash, while he was bumped, took a dive and made it look way worse than it was.

 

Fuck the Spurs. Give Nash a hockey stick and let him exact some Todd Bertuzzi-like vengeance next time one of those fuckers wants to get physical.