Should Amare and Diaw be banned for leaving the bench?

I understand where you're coming from, and I agree with many of the points... but you're really over-romanticizing at this point.

The NBA needs more series that are well played, intensified, even heated... but not marred by technicalities such as this one.

The Lakers getting the benefit of some in-game calls does not compare to this... and believe me, if the Spurs win the title, this WILL be remembered.

 

Stu(pid) Jackson said Amare and Diaw left the bench in reaction to the altercation. He could have ruled that those two reacted towards the hard foul and possible injury of Nash, and it was before Horry and Bell got into each other. But as we all know, when it comes to a disciplinary matter, it is way more important for Stu(pid) and Stern to show off their authority than making a sensible decision within the rule. Had they not suspended those two, there will be someone calling them lenient, which is like a murder to them. The moment the debate the started after the game, Amare and Diaw were already screwed. What p***es me off the most is that, there had been plenty of hard fouls prior to this one. Had there been a suspension earlier (unfortunately it could have been Juwan), Horry might never have fouled Nash as hard as he did, and the series wouldn't have been screwed. This is sad.

 

it always seems that way in the heat of the moment, but it just all falls by the way after a while. like i wish more people would talk about game 6, but it just doesn't happen, especially in the media, which is generally where the perception of athletes or games comes from. just like no analysts are gonna come out and say bruce bowen is a very dirty player even though we all know he is, there will just be very little mention of the suspensions. they just don't take controversial stands like that when it comes to on the court matters in sports. it might get brought up in passing, maybe brought up some if they meet again next year, but it just won't live on.

here's an example of short term memory in sports. when's the last time you heard about the new ball the NBA introduced this season? i literally can't even think of an off-hand comment about it in months, and that's even an event that happened during this season and was a big time controversy and topic of discussion. but at the end of the day, it's done with and the collective sports consciousness has moved on, just like they will from this event in a week or two (whether the spurs or suns win) when the conference finals and nba finals rev up.

 

Playoffs are a big deal... championships are a big deal. How a team wins a championship is a big deal. The new ball controversy was an issue... and they had to rectify it. Your example may have been more applicable if they were still using the new ball, and everybody had forgotten about its problems, but they aren't... the only reason you don't hear anything anymore is because the problem was FIXED. If the Spurs win the title, there's no way to take this incident away.

You think people forgot about the US-Soviet gold medal game? Ask Doug Collins about that. You think people forgot about the clock not functioning in game 4 94 Utah? That didn't even affect the outcome of the series. You think fans forgot about the 93 Rockets-Spurs last game of the season, where Robinson's tip-in counted after the buzzer... and it cost them home court against the Sonics? (where a home-home series determined the winner)?

You really underestimate controversy of this nature. Believe me... I'm a fan of the NBA and I don't want things like this to mar a high quality/well played/heated series. Series like these, if played well, do have the ability to improve the overall outlook of the NBA.

(unfortunately, the only way it won't be remembered is for the suns to come back and win... and loathing the Suns more than I do the Spurs, i'm not thrilled about that).

 

So you're argument essentially boils down to:

It was Amare's intent to join in the Raja Bell Robert Horry confrontation.

I dont disagree with that.

But factually, Amare was definitely without a shadow of a doubt already ON the court before Bell ran at Horry. And the rule does not actually consider cases like this. If you want to argue that it's just implied that cases like this are covered under the rule, I agree but strict interpretation has to be applied equally in all facets then.

And if you look at video (not the one New Yorker) sent, Boris Diaw jumps off the bench but he actually never even looks at Horry. He looks for 2 seconds at Nash, see he's ok and retreats on his own to the bench. Suspending him is just ASININE.

I can see Amare because he had to be held back by coaches but Diaw:

A) retreated on his own
B) From video, not only could it be argued that he was just checking on Nash (I agree with you that from Amare's path he was not headed for Nash), but that's what looks the most probable.

According to your interpretation of the rule, Duncan WOULD have been suspended had Elson and one of the Suns players gotten in his face because he'd have already been on the court "1 to 2 seconds before" it happened. And that's where this rule starts to become more ridiculous. It depends on the actions of others moreso than your own, as this instance proves.

 

Good points. Also, do you think fans in the future will not downplay Bonds' breaking of the HR record held by Hank Aaron in light of the steroids accusations? Damn right, they will.

Bonds may technically win the record but he's lost an incredible amount of respect from most corners. If the Spurs win in 6 games, absolutely it's tainted. The only way the Spurs win and it's not tainted is if somehow PHO wins Game 5 but SA wins 6 and 7 against a full strength Suns team.

 

this (and rdsgonzo13's bonds example) are huge things with huge implications, even just beyond the events themselves. cold war politics, the home run record, etc. i'm not saying everything is forgotten, some things do linger on. but 1 month from now the collective sports world won't really give a crap about some star being suspended for a game in a single playoff series. it just won't, it's not of that magnitude. i'm not saying no one will remember it occurred, or that people like us might not care or discuss, just that in general no one in the future will say the spurs won a tainted championship. sports fans just don't rile themselves up that much if it doesn't directly involve their team. maybe you're just saying you'll consider it tainted and i can't say you won't, but just in general no one will care. like i said, it would be cool if they cared about game 6 more, but i understand people just aren't going to be that bothered.

the general nba fan probably doesn't know either thing happened and certainly wouldn't care about it if you told them. we're houston fans so we remember them, and fans of other teams probably have their own moments similar to these, but we (houston fans) don't care about them. i might as well tell them about drexler being ejected by odonnell or sabonis getting credit for that jump hook after the buzzer in double OT to win the last game with replacement refs. in 5 years any suns fan bringing up that they were cost a title (if they lose the series) b/c of amare being ejected will just be called a whiner and told that it's over and done with. after this series, it essentially becomes part of the past and we move on.

does anyone care about all the knicks ejected from that knicks/heat series? no. it gets mentioned when things like this happen but no one considers anything tainted or seriously bothers themselves with the implications of it.

even dwade getting all those calls in the finals doesn't really make anyone think of that series as tainted and happening in the finals made it a much bigger deal. nba fandom will be watching spurs/pistons and only care that those two teams are there, and not really care how they got there.

when the refs screwed up that OT coin flip in the nfl, was that in a playoff game? i can't remember, but if it was, it was a really big deal, and yet no one cares about it now. that's just how it works.

it's just not of that nature. unless you're a suns fan, in a week you'll have forgotten it even happened unless someone reminds you of it. this would practically have to be in the finals, game 7 for anyone to really remember it as a big deal. game 5 of the conference semis just isn't going to get it done.

 

i think people may be treating this too much like court where we need some ironclad proof or something. stern knows that there was a hard foul, players immediately gathered around to start something (and then did), and that amare left the bench to join in before being held back. the fact that technically bell hadn't gotten to horry when amare first budged, or that amare may have been physically on the court (though you can't really be on the bench and on the court) or that one could presume he was going to nash or to check in isn't going to keep him from using what he knows was really going on. in court, amare might get away with some technicality, but stern isn't bound by that standard.

he very well might have been. he stupidly walked onto the court and thus put himself in the position of possibly coming off the bench during a fight. luckily for him, there was no altercation, so he's just some bench guy taking a few steps onto the court instead of suspended for a game. and while it may depend on what others do to some extent, all you have to do is not leave the bench for no reason and you stand no chance of being suspended, whether or not a fight breaks out. duncan got lucky but will probably get reminded by the spurs coaches to not put himself in that position again b/c everyone understands how the rule is going to work.

 

-Oh, boy. On the surface you make some excellent points. However, I think some things are flagrant enough that they linger longer. Just in recent memory a couple things come to mind

1) Game 6 Lakers Kings WCF. That was a hosejob that any non Lakers fan saw. This has become the gold standard for officiating hosejobs and wont be forgotten for years.

2) The Tuck Rule. No one will forget about this for the next 50 yrs.

3) Spurs 99 Asterisk: Still talked about and always will be because it was one 50 game season surrounded by a million 82 game seasons.

But the real reason I think this will be remembered unless the Pistons or Suns win the NBA Finals is that I'm pretty sure all of this crap will lead to the NBA finally killing this poorly conceived rule this offseason. I think that in and of itself will lead to the logical question: "Would the Spurs have won if this rule had been changed a few months back?"

BTW, this comment shows what a scumbag jerk Greg Popovich is.

Spurs coach Gregg Popovich told The Associated Press that he didn't even think Horry's foul on Nash was that bad.

"It was just an end-of-game foul and Steve fell down," Popovich said before the penalties were announced. "I didn't think it was such a big deal"

 

I thought I made it clear that the people who will always think about things like this ARE the NBA fans... not the common average sports fan who usually could care less about the NBA.

Sure, in the grand scheme of things, it will be a blip on the radar... because the NBA is just not that important. Had something like this happened in one of the other leagues, they'd likely devote entire segments of sportscenter/SI cover story/top news story of the year type focus to it (btw, the coin-flip was in the regular season, and it involved the Steelers... and maybe the Lions... this is off the top of my head because of the coverage it got... in a seemingly "meaningless" NFL game.)

Which brings me back to my original point... the NBA doesn't need this... they already struggle enough as it is. Now, even the diehard fans are pissed off as the casual fans scratch their heads at a ruling that on the surface, makes NO sense.

 

I don't agree with the suspension...

I just don't understand why Bowen's not suspended due to his MANY "dirty" plays (i.e. karate kick to Wally S's face)

I guess rules are rules.

You don't ruin a playoff series with meaningless suspensions unless there are actual fights.

 

Well I am done with the NBA for this season, maybe forever. Thanks David Stern and Stu Jackson - let me know when you 2 bozos are out of power and the league actually gets some people with a brain to run it.

Sincerely,

A former fan

 

Remember the Jazz trying to foul Yao and not getting the call? Thee is no guarantee. It was a hard foul. That's it. Dude wasn't even injured. He went flopping. I see real spills at the skatepark all the time. This wasn't one of them.

 

Here is where the Suns and coaches were dumb, dumb, dumb. They need to train a bench scrub that when you recognize an opposing star off the bench during any play to go clock someone.

In the end Horry's play was brilliant on multiple accounts. First the foul to draw the Suns star off the bench, and then to throw the forearm at Bell's throat to make sure the event is an "altercation". The Suns have a lot to learn from the play and shows the idoitic logic of the NBA that afford a situation where instigators can bait opposing stars for the own teams advantage.

Now I will say in the end, I don't think the series will be tainted. It isn't game 7. The Suns will have a major disadvantage in game 5, and the Spurs will have a moderate disadvantage for game 6. For the Spurs to win they will have to win game 7 at Phx versus a full strength Phx team or beat them on home court without a key clutch player while Phx is full strengh. Both teams are excellent road teams. So the series is still there for the best team to win. Thankfully this happened with at least 2 wins needed for a team to win.

While of course not as severe as losing Amare, I view Horry as at least as important as Diaw. Personally I think Horry's loss is underestimated. Without Horry SA can't run its ideal last 5 minute of the game lineup with 4 shooters around Duncan, while also maintaining reasonable size/defense. Horry and Finley are really by far the best Spurs clutch 3 shooters.

Also, I think the the Suns have an excellent chance tonight. 1) the team will be super motivated. 2) the crowd will be crazy. 3) the refs will be looking close at the Spurs for physical plays (maybe under Stern's order--look at see if Bowen in particular gets in foul trouble for stuff he usually gets away with and see a big whiney face on him). Now the Suns will play a lot more small. A lot more James Jones and even more reliance on Barbosa. That may not be such a bad thing. For one, without Horry it is less damaging to double Duncan. Two I think Diaw has been pretty ineffective against the Spurs and Phx spacing will be better with an extra 3 shooter. The Suns may also need a few quality minutes/hard fouls from Burke or Jurmain Jones--but they will be home and have the crowd behind them--much better situation for scrubs to come in and be positive for a few minutes. Also, the Suns match-ups are not as screwed up as it might appear. Thomas/Marion on Duncan (if Marion use more doubles--and Marion if you remember has played TD in the past and does have a major quickness advantage), Marion/Thomas whichever scrub PF/C the Spurs play (Oberto/Elson), Bell/Barbosa on Parker, Bell/Barbosa on Finley, Nash on Bowen. James Jones plugs in there well too.

Now the small line-up isn't a good mainstay versus the Spurs--but for one game where they all focus on the boards, gets some favorable calls--calls tighter on the wings (Bowen handchecking) and looser inside (not giving TDs covers touch fouls), hit some 3s, have the Spurs 3 shooters get a little choked up without their best clutch one (making doubles on Duncan more effective), and have the home crowd help them be relentless on the pace--could easily steal a game.

Further, even if the Suns lose game 5, they still only have to win 2--one game at SA where they have a line-up and freshness advantage with Amare/Diaw rested + no Horry, and then back home for a game 7. No scenerio would have been as dark for them then if they had lost game 4 and needing to win 3 strait--which they almost did.

Again, this series is there for the taking by either team, not tainted. Would have been fairer to suspend Horry for all 3 games and Diaw/Stoud for 1 each, but the 2 and 1-1 doesn't decide the series with 3 games left.

 

I think y'alls giving Horry too much credit here.

He didn't draw Amare off the bench. That was Amare's own doing. And it's not like he was the only Sun on the bench. Your star player doesn't get into fights to protect someone else. A bench player does that. Undisciplined. There were four other Suns on the floor, and less critical bench players too.

The hit on Nash was hard, and bordering on dirty. But not as over the top as some have made it out to be. Nash fell because that's what happens when you get a hip check. He did a quick head shake and then got right up. Hardly a flop at all. And he is getting beat up pretty bad in this series. Spurs are dirty. They've been watching old Jazz tapes. Don't they know Jazz never won?

And the Jazz still suck. I know they're not in this series, but I'm not about to post in one of the Jazz-love threads that have somehow muddied this site.

 

I was being a bit facitous (sp)--that other scrubs should model Horry's actions and clock players when they see opposing stars on the bench. My point was to illustrate the flaws in the rules that don't allow for the consideration of larger contexts. Does a cop/judge enforce tickets when you are rushing a dying person to the hospital? I don't know but I imagine it is considered.

I agree with your here. I thought the worst of Horry's actions was the forearm to Bell's throat after the play. Horry was the only one after the sort of in the flow of the action play to sorta try to land a blow. The latter part IMO is the bigger reason for the suspension. As for Nash, it wasn't a flop but IMO he did embellish with the hands in the air and throwing his head back after he hit the floor. But so what, that didn't take away from the fact Horry's hit was dirty and could have broken Nash onto a table or something.

Horry's play(s) were dirtier than the Juwan Howard play on Derek Anderson and that play resulted in like a 3 playoff game suspension if I recall. In that case they weighed the fact DA's season was ended (consequences). Horry's could have done that to Nash, just didn't. But it did instigate events that lead to better players losing 2 games total, which is why I would have liked Horry to be suspended for 3. But overall the 2-1-1 suspensions if they were going to suspend Amare/Diaw was not atrocious or anything.

 

well i believe the spurs have been playing this way since they won back in 99. Nobody really noticed it because the league was still a little more physical then. Only recently since the suns, mavs, and kings style have come into existence has the league gone soft, imo

 

I think what makes Horry's play somewhat worse is that they seem to be targetting Nash. Too many hard (dirty) plays. On him. This isn't hack-a-shack where they're capitalizing on an inability to sink free throws....just a dirty game plan. Attacking their best player.

Suns should get an enforcer to target Duncan.

Nash may have embellish a bit, but I give him a pass as it was so quick, and he didn't do the euro-soccer-i'm-dying-here roll and flop.

Amare and Diaw cost themselves the suspension. I still like the Sun's chances.

 

i think this is all one big overreaction.

horry did lean in a bit but where was nash trying to go? horry had the baseline cut off...i think nash milked it. The dude was running full speed to a place occupied.