Should Amare and Diaw be banned for leaving the bench?

Stern will find a way not to suspend them, he has to do so here. You can't slant game 5 that much in the spurs favor when their guy started the mess, and neither player got involved in the ensuing events.

The rule needs discretion here, despite the fact they both broke it.

 

During an altercation, all players not participating in the game must remain in the immediate vicinity of their bench. Violators will be suspended, without pay, for a minimum of one game and fined up to $35,000.

You could argue it wasn't an "altercation" and you could argue they were in the immediate vicinity.

They might suspend Diaw and Amare for game 5--but then if so they should suspend Horry for game 5 & 6. Horry's flagrant 2 was the instigating event--and he was the only playerto kind of throw a blow afterward.

The NBA is in a tough position, but they absolutely have to do no less than an equal penalty to Horry if there are suspensions.

 

I think the problem is if he does suspend them, you are basically destroying the suns in game 5, and for what? They didn't get involved in the mess horry caused.

 

Bad analogy. If the stated penalty for a murder and traffic ticket are the same, then YES, then a guilty verdict in both cases will have the same punishment.

In the NBA rules, a flagrant 2 is a one game suspension (at least from memory, please correct me if I'm wrong). In the NBA rules, walking from the bench and onto the court during an altercation is a one game suspension. I guess you're asking Stern to rewrite the rules tonight? I'm not saying I agree w/ the rules, but it is what it is.

At the begninning of the season Stern clearly wanted a zero tolerance policy concerning fouls and off the court rules, so I think this is a real dilemma for him. Does he maintain his hard stance (which I applaud him for all season), or does he start making exceptions again for such an important moment of the NBA season. I honestly wouldn't argue one way or another if he did or didn't suspend them. The thing I do like about the NBA is it's pretty cut and dry what happens when you violate the rules, unlike the NFL and MLB which seem to make them up as they go along (giving preferential treatment, of course).

 

Everyone understands why the bench rule is what it is. But to basically give the spurs game 5 when neither sun got involved in the altercation that a spur started is wrong. Teams work too hard all year to have this happen.

 

If a rule is poorly conceived, the answer isn't to make 2 wrongs a right and continue to enforce this rule, but to admit a mistake was made and modify it to be more just.

Supposing the initial law was that a murder and traffic ticket were to be dealt with punitively in the same manner, would the US legal system continue to enforce something or change the law to give a harsher punishment to the murderer?

The SPIRIT of the Law is always #1. Society is dynamic and every entity has to be willing to make changes to adapt.

If Stern suspends the Suns 2nd best player and 2 of their starters and all the Spurs give up is a backup 36 yr old PF who cheapshotted the Suns best player, it's the entire NBA fan base who loses by killing the flow of a great series.

 

Stoudemire and Diaw should have read and been read the rules. The coaches clearly knew the consequences, the players have no excuses.

Enforce all the rules or none. Pick and choose which and your league is a joke.

 

So Horry can be suspended 1 game for the flag2 + one game for the after blow on Bell. If they interpret Amare and Diaw as leaving the immediate vicinity of the bench and that is an altercation--suspending both players 1 game, I could live with that 2 game suspension of Horry. SA still benefits, but not as much and Horry loses the most.

 

It might make stern soft/the league a joke but both suns should play wednesday. You can't just slant the most pivotal game in the series that much when they had nothing to do with the altercation. The rule is too harsh in the first place.

 

I agree, to a point. I'd hate to see Amare or Diaw suspended, it would taint the series like someone else said. But the rule is clearly stated in black and white and everyone is well aware of that rule since the Det/Ind/WWE incident. Why is everyone ignoring it now? It might be 'wrong' as in unfair. But I don't know how anyone can argue it would be technically wrong. Like others suggested, maybe on technicality Stern states that there wasn't an altercation, and as a behind the scenes settlement, Amare and Diaw publicly announce they let their emotions get the better of them and made a mistake.

 

Well you can stick to the most strict interpretation that they left the immediate vicinity of the bench--and that it was an aletercation, suspending both players. But there is nothing saying Horry couldn't be suspended 3 games for his actions--1 game for the flag 2 (they did it for Bell last year), 2 games for the blow after the play. So there are ways to make the oucones fair without violating rules.

 

Bad argument.

NBA rules are badly written, arbitrarily enforced, never cut and dry. The examples are abundant. Three-second violations, charging/blocking fouls, and loose ball fouls are some of the most poorly officiated events in NBA games. The calls vary from one official to another, one game to another, one player to another, one end of the floor to anther, one moment of the game to another, you name it.

David Stern is applaudable? LOL

 

I don't think this works either. Without amare in game 5, suns lose. I don't feel you can just slant the series that much when they never got involved in the melee. If stern suspends them I understand, but I think it's a mistake on his part.

 

I don't see how the hell they should get suspended. It would be total BS.

If this were to happen to the rox,(eg, horry cheapshot T-mac, Yao/Juwan step over) I doubt any of you gonna say Yao/Juwan should get a suspension.

If their is a suspension, it would most likely apply to Diaw only.

 

Any suspension starts with Horry, then maybe includes Diaw or Amare.

 

When I say "wrong" i'm talking about the fact that yes, they broke the rule, but game 5 is the most pivotal game remaining in this series and to suspend one of the suns best players and a valuable role player when they never got involved on the court is a wrong in the greater sense of slanting a series way too much.

 

We don't change laws overnight after once occassion either. Otherwise we'll be changing laws everyday and we might as well throw out the rulebook because it will be obsolete the second it's done printing.

 

It's their own fault if they're suspended. Like I said, these are grown men who have read and been read the rulebook. If it was that important to them, they would have remained seated.

Sowwie guys.

 

So should we never have admitted slavery was wrong by amending the law to abolish slavery because the way the rule was written is more important than reality, justice, and common sense?

The league is a joke if Horry gets the same punishment as Diaw/Amare. A complete joke. If EVER a title would deserve an asterisk, that would be it, assuming the Spurs went on to win.

How can you reward a team who commits what Horry did by dealing a much harsher punishment (2 guys suspended, one of which is the 2nd best player) to the team which was the victim of Horry's cheapshot?

All this would do is invite teams to cheapshot other teams superstars by sending some dispensable goon out to take them out.

If you think all rules across the league are enforced consistently, explain why some NBA players are allowed to handcheck and others aren't?

Are Shaq and Yao really officiated the same as other NBA players? No, they arent.

 

Stoudamire validated his stupidty and hot-head tendency... but it REALLY is a stupid rule... and it has been since the first day they put it into action.

You know its stupid when now the NBA will agonize over all the footage, camera angles, and scenarios of two guys who took two steps off the court... instead of focusing on the initial incident that caused it (and Horry's past violations where he decides to randomly body check a tiny PG).

(best analogy alert)
I liken it to people congregating around an accident scene, or traffic slowing down to witness the wreckage, and the cop starts focusing more on the people watching (and starts handing out tickets) instead of attending to the actual crime, and what caused it.

In this day and age, where there is ample footage/media/internet coverage of every incident... the NBA needs to look at each situation on a case-by-case level, especially when it comes to the playoffs.