MJ and Kobe got ALL the foul calls too remember. People love saying Harden gets too many foul calls but MJ and Kobe still averaged more than Harden by quite a bit. And both legends were notorious for playing games with refs and players. But neither got the hate, certainly not like Harden. But I agree, sometimes have to play ball straight up. Unless you're playing against the king of craftiness himself, CP3. He baits foul calls like no other.
Yes, completely. They said no and then they said yes to Dame, Luca, and, I'd name Giannis if he were good enough to draw fouls like these other guys. Obviously fouling Steph with some armpit hair is akin to doing anything that can hurt a puppy or a kitten. Harden? He's a p***y, punch him in the face because he plays for Houston. I quite remember well how many fans enjoyed Harden before he left OKC too, I still can't figure out why people hate Houston so much. Yeah, I mean, if I was an announcer, ref, whatever, I'd prefer announcing in SA, DAL, GSW, LAL/C, ORL, etc. Oh but wait... THIS IS A FREAKING BUBBLE.
Yeah, but he's not as skilled as the other guys in drawing the fouls. He's getting FTAs almost entirely for going down low and using his size.
http://www.espn.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/080522 From an article of rambling, disconnected thoughts heading into the summer: I know she's doing a fine job, but does it make me a sexist that I can't listen to Doris Burke analyze NBA playoff games without thinking, "Woman talking woman talking woman talking woman talking ..." the entire time? Sure, I guess. “This women is a w**** this woman is a w**** ...” would be a definite yes. Of course there are, but no I’m not going to argue with you over it. Sorry, not interested.
There is no such thing as a semi-racist or a semi-misogynist. Some people know how to use code terminology to mask the hate. Does not mean it is not hate. It is actually the most insidious and destructive because it is excused and accepted by mainstream. And FYI, I do not consider you to be either. You just seem to go out of your way to give these people the benefit of the doubt for your own reasons.
I think this is the great point. What she said is reasonable, how she said it triggered a lot of people in real time. I remember mocking her right around the second time she said "Steve is there another option?" EDIT: If Reggie Miller or Mark Jackson did the same thing in the same tone, we'd be all over them. I'm not personally going to give Doris a pass on her basketball opinions because she's a woman and men are disgusting.
Doris was much more animated for fouls vs. Thunder but take a listen to her tone for fouls that were missed for Rockets.
Stop with the bs, she’s a biased commentator and I just don’t like her voice. It’s awful due to her twang, dialect / accent.
Can't stand the sound of her voice. She should be let go but in the PC world we live this will never happen.
Almost everybody was a racist 80 years ago by today's standard. By your argument, they are all therefore equally racist, since one can't be a semi-racist. No moral difference between the racist ideology of the Nazis and of, say, Albert Einstein, who wrote some racist things in his diary about Asian races. And yet we perceive Hitler as evil, and Einstein as lovable. Why is that? Because people are complex. Certain specific attitudes they have may be equally abhorrent, but we judge them ultimately by what they say and do given the complicated array of beliefs and principles that they hold. And it's not always obvious what are the beliefs/principles that are behind what they say/do, or how what they say and do affects others. So, I have no qualms about calling out clear-cut forms of sexism, while being willing to extend the benefit of the doubt to less clear-cut cases. And, I would say that it hurts women to argue that if one is willing to extend that benefit of the doubt in some cases, then they are obligated to remain silent for the clear-cut cases or else be called a hypocrite. I just strongly disagree with that position.
Einstein was racist too. Loveable or not, racism is never shades of gray. It is black and white. And of course America was racist then, as it is right now. Are you even aware of what is going on outside your window? It is the exact same with misogyny.
Punishment? That is another topic. But all racism and misogyny should be identified as such without equivocation. The systematic racism and misogyny in our society depends on the lukewarm reactions to code words, behaviors, laws and actions to not just survive but to proliferate. We all have a responsibility to stand up to this hate and say this is completely unacceptable. In any form.
It's really weird. You're totally willing to call out any shred of racism or sexism, but seemingly doesn't apply to regular bias. So really just muddy the waters and you're all good.
There is nothing weird about being cautious in condemning others when there is doubt but not when there is no doubt. Any other position, to me, strikes me as insane. Yes, some people will "muddy the waters" to try get away with stuff, and that makes it harder to call them out. You then have a choice, absent strong evidence one way or the other -- you can be willing to assume the guilty are innocent, or you can be willing to assume the innocent are guilty.
I think I see where you are coming from, and you are right. We should be vigilant about both direct and subtle forms of discrimination and prejudice. I also think we should be willing to forgive when people acknowledge their mistakes, and we should make an effort to see things from their perspective before rushing to condemnation. Misunderstandings do happen.
