ky4799 wrote:

Nobody likes the decision, but think about what everyone would be saying if it were the other way around. What if it were the Spurs getting suspended and not the Suns? That would be justice right? Everyone on this board is either Suns fans or Jazz fans. I hate to say this but a lot of people sound exactly like other MWC teams fans, nobody cares if BYU is not doing so well but then when we have a good football season it's a conspiracy or we get preferential treatment by the league or it's the return missionaries.

Nah, I have pretty much always hated the Spurs!! I am happy when they are losing and torked when they are not.

Someone mentioned that there was no altercation and that was why Duncan and Bowen were not suspended...sounds like a judgement call to me. Easy way to work around the rule that everyone is so adamant should be kept. Again, an interpretation that went the way of the golden boy spurs. Yeck!!!

ky4799 wrote:

Nobody likes the decision, but think about what everyone would be saying if it were the other way around. What if it were the Spurs getting suspended and not the Suns? That would be justice right? Everyone on this board is either Suns fans or Jazz fans. I hate to say this but a lot of people sound exactly like other MWC teams fans, nobody cares if BYU is not doing so well but then when we have a good football season it's a conspiracy or we get preferential treatment by the league or it's the return missionaries.

I understand what you're saying, but I want CONSISTENCY - no matter who it's against (even if it is a JAZZ player). I want CONSISTENCY in the officiating. I want CONSISTENCY in handing out the "fines" and "suspensions". I want CONSISTENCY in how the team I root for plays... Is that too much to ask?

ky4799 wrote:

Nobody likes the decision, but think about what everyone would be saying if it were the other way around. What if it were the Spurs getting suspended and not the Suns? That would be justice right? Everyone on this board is either Suns fans or Jazz fans. I hate to say this but a lot of people sound exactly like other MWC teams fans, nobody cares if BYU is not doing so well but then when we have a good football season it's a conspiracy or we get preferential treatment by the league or it's the return missionaries.

If the Spurs were getting suspended most would think it was justified because of their dirty play and the fact that their dirty players have initiated the "altercations".

Personally I think it a a crock of S@&t to have a hard rule about leaving the bench that is enforced only after a purely judgement call (was it an altercation or not?). This allows the league office tremendous latitude to use suspensions to affect the outcome of playoff series in whatever manner they choose. Apparently being well-grounded in basic logic concepts is not a job requirement to become an NBA commissioner.

What really bothers me is that Horry commits a felony against Steve Nash and he drives a forearm into Raja Bell's throat, and he gets a two game suspension. Staudemire and Diaw do nothing, assault no one, throw no punches, don't jump into the fight--but they get suspended too. So SA, the offending team, loses one guy, Phoenix who is the victim loses two players. Something is wrong with this picture.

Frankly, I think SA is the better team, and I think the Jazz will do better against Phoenix. But it isn't right that a team who does nothing offensive, gets the worst end of the suspensions.

What really bothers me is that Horry commits a felony against Steve Nash and he drives a forearm into Raja Bell's throat, and he gets a two game suspension. Staudemire and Diaw do nothing, assault no one, throw no punches, don't jump into the fight--but they get suspended too. So SA, the offending team, loses one guy, Phoenix who is the victim loses two players. Something is wrong with this picture.

Frankly, I think SA is the better team, and I think the Jazz will do better against Phoenix. But it isn't right that a team who does nothing offensive, gets the worst end of the suspensions.

I hate to be the bringer of facts to the discussion, because I already have negative karma going against me on CB, but the main reason Duncan didn't get suspended was because he was still in the game. He didn't go to the bench until after the cheap shot by Horry. I didn't notice if Bowen was in the middle of the court, but if he was, he does deserve a suspension. He went to the bench and was replaced on the court by Horry. So if he did come out he should be suspended but not Duncan because he was still in the game.