So let me get this straight...

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by surfah33

I haven't seen Duncan leave the bench. Did he leave the bench and step onto the floor? I think the rule is you can't step onto the court. But I haven't seen video of Duncan, just Diaw and Amare.

He did step on to the floor, but the NBA in its infinitesimal wisdom deemed that his intent was not to get involved in a scuffle. Still, the rule states that any player who leaves the bench during any kind of fight will be suspended for the next game.

The inconsistency of enforcement here is absolutely ridiculous. Duncan is a superstar and the league loves their superstars. Stoudamire is an All-Star, but not a superstar, therefore he is out of tonight's game and Duncan isn't.

[Surfah]

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

He did step on to the floor, but the NBA in its infinitesimal wisdom deemed that his intent was not to get involved in a scuffle. Still, the rule states that any player who leaves the bench during any kind of fight will be suspended for the next game.

The inconsistency of enforcement here is absolutely ridiculous. Duncan is a superstar and the league loves their superstars. Stoudamire is an All-Star, but not a superstar, therefore he is out of tonight's game and Duncan isn't.

You're right. If he stepped onto the floor he should be gone too. I didn't see the video of Duncan and just wanted clarification.

It's funny who the league protects and who they decide to make an example of.

[RockyBalboa]

The NBA has proven that violence and thuggery is okay, but taking a few steps away from the bench is not.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by surfah33

You're right. If he stepped onto the floor he should be gone too. I didn't see the video of Duncan and just wanted clarification.

It's funny who the league protects and who they decide to make an example of.

Video of Duncan on court:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Y39nRO5keRM

[cougjunkie]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Video of Duncan on court:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Y39nRO5keRM

I think this proves Duncan didnt warrant a suspension at all. Their was no fight taking place and he at first went on to the floor because he was fired up about the dunk.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by cougjunkie

I think this proves Duncan didnt warrant a suspension at all. Their was no fight taking place and he at first went on to the floor because he was fired up about the dunk.

Which must be why another Spurs player came on the court and ushered him back to his seat.

Yes or no, cougjunkie:

The Suns now have an incentive to intentionally harm a Spurs player in front of the Spurs bench.

[cougjunkie]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Which must be why another Spurs player came on the court and ushered him back to his seat.

Yes or no, cougjunkie:

The Suns now have an incentive to intentionally harm a Spurs player in front of the Spurs bench.

Yes they do, you are correct if i was Phoenix i retaliate big time.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by cougjunkie

Yes they do, you are correct if i was Phoenix i retaliate big time.

So you are arguing that a rule should be enforced even while noting that the consequence of enforcing the rule is placing players in harms way and increasing the likelihood of substantial injury?

There has to be discretion in this kind of thing. If not, you will wind up with idiotic decisions like this one.

[Surfah]

I watched this about 50 times during my workout at 24 Hour at lunch today. Mike and Mike had Stu Jackson on and he explained that Duncan wasn't suspended because there was no altercation. Players routinely get excited and jump up and down and onto the court at times during big plays, dunks, when the other team is calling a time out to stop momentum, etc.

Diaw and Amare left the bench and had to be restrained from escalating an altercation that was on the court. Even though one could argue they were on the sidelines and not the court, Stu explained that they were 20-25 feet from their bench. Had the incident and altercation taken place on the sideline opposite their bench and Diaw and Amare reacted the same, that would have put them into the lane.

For once I agree with Stu Jackson here. Also, it was clarified during the conversation with Mike and Mike that he only suggests penalties and suspensions and that David Stern either approves, amends, or vetoes what he recommends.

[Venkman]

Originally Posted by surfah33

I watched this about 50 times during my workout at 24 Hour at lunch today. Mike and Mike had Stu Jackson on and he explained that Duncan wasn't suspended because there was no altercation. Players routinely get excited and jump up and down and onto the court at times during big plays, dunks, when the other team is calling a time out to stop momentum, etc.

Diaw and Amare left the bench and had to be restrained from escalating an altercation that was on the court. Even though one could argue they were on the sidelines and not the court, Stu explained that they were 20-25 feet from their bench. Had the incident and altercation taken place on the sideline opposite their bench and Diaw and Amare reacted the same, that would have put them into the lane.

For once I agree with Stu Jackson here. Also, it was clarified during the conversation with Mike and Mike that he only suggests penalties and suspensions and that David Stern either approves, amends, or vetoes what he recommends.

All technical analysis aside, the bottom line is that the rule is stupid and should be scrapped.