Wednesday, May 16, 2007

Cheap Shot Rob

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playoffs2007/news/story?id=2871615

Regarding this issue, I want to bring up one point that I haven't read anywhere else. The suspensions resulting from the altercation at the end of Monday's Suns-Spurs game have been the popular media issue as of late, to the point that the Suns well-fought comeback has been pushed to the back of the forum. While the consensus is that the suspensions are excessive, the real point is that the NBA has rewarded Robert Horry for his aggressive actions.

Horry metaphorically threw the first punch, he initiated the fight. He knocked Nash to the floor and Diaw and Stoudemire jumped up instinctively to defend their comrade. They did not retaliate with contact, or even get close to using any force. In fact, they didn't even leave the "general bench area." In normal physical altercations in sports, be it football, basketball etc. the only time both sides are penalized is when the victim of the initial attack responds in turn with a violent act of his own. If a basketball player punches another player, he'll receive a technical and usually an ejection. If the player who is hit gets up and swings back, he'll normally get ejected too. He doesn't get penalized if he stands up and stares back at the guy. So why should Diaw and Stoudemire be penalized for innocent reactions? If they had responded with violence, in addition with having had to leave the bench to do so, then serious reprimands would be in order.
The whole argument about this not being a fair trade doesn't hold any water. It does not matter that the Spurs' player was a role player while the Suns' players are vital components. The only issue is who was actually causing trouble. Did Stoudemire or Diaw escalate the situation? Did their actions have any detrimental consequences at all? No, they did not.

In the end, the league did interpret their rule correctly. It is a "black or white" rule, not open to interpretation, but that is where the fault lays. Meanwhile David Stern has been reluctant to even admit that the rule needs some revisiting. Hopefully after all the fallout from this debacle he will change his mind.

No comments: