PDA

View Full Version : NBA Suspensions and Ejections in the Playoffs



JordansBulls
11-24-2009, 09:52 PM
Should the NBA be a bit more lenient in the playoffs regarding giving out Suspensions and/or Ejecting players? Or should it be the same?

Like when guys come off the bench but are not really in the altercation should that be an automatic suspension as it has been in recent years?

SteveNash
11-24-2009, 10:12 PM
No, as nothing good can happen by having players leave the bench.

Shady66
11-24-2009, 10:27 PM
Their should be no suspencions when players stand up off the bench.


Especially if their star player gets body checked

Kakaroach
11-24-2009, 10:34 PM
I think we all hate that suspension about how the players jump off of the bench. Just get rid of it, thats useless.

Wilson
11-24-2009, 11:51 PM
Should the NBA be a bit more lenient in the playoffs regarding giving out Suspensions and/or Ejecting players? Or should it be the same?

Like when guys come off the bench but are not really in the altercation should that be an automatic suspension as it has been in recent years?

I hate that rule. Would it be so hard for the NBA to judge incidencts seperately, and just suspend guys for actually getting involved in a fight? It's pretty ridiculous.

I also thought the refs were too quick to toss Ron Artest from that Lakers/Rockets play-off game last year. He was just talking, he wasn't trying to hit anyone or anything. Just let them compete.

I also thought there were way too many foul calls during the parts of the play-offs last year. On the whole the refs appeared to be acting more like parents than officials, I found it very frustrating.

_KB24_
11-24-2009, 11:55 PM
Their should be no suspencions when players stand up off the bench.


Especially if their star player gets body checked

:laugh:


I would love to agree with you(I secretly do), but I'm never going to admit it. ;)

I think the rule should stand. You have a certain amount of area where your suppose to stay in. Doesn't matter what the situation is, follow the rules.

Wilson
11-25-2009, 12:03 AM
:laugh:


I would love to agree with you(I secretly do), but I'm never going to admit it. ;)

I think the rule should stand. You have a certain amount of area where your suppose to stay in. Doesn't matter what the situation is, follow the rules.

You have to allow players to react emotionally though. That's why cases should be looked at seperately. If a player leaves the bench area by a few feet, then returns having had nothing to do with the altercation, why should he be suspended?

Raps18-19 Champ
11-25-2009, 12:05 AM
Depends on the act.

If it is something like trying to stop an altercation and if that means leaving the bench, I say let them.

If it is something harmful like Howard's elbow to the head, then that should be an ejection immediately.

GspLAL
11-25-2009, 12:10 AM
Should stay the same, if they tweak the rules then players will do stupid **** knowing that they won't get suspended.

_KB24_
11-25-2009, 12:18 AM
You have to allow players to react emotionally though. That's why cases should be looked at seperately. If a player leaves the bench area by a few feet, then returns having had nothing to do with the altercation, why should he be suspended?

No. Emotions can lead to physicality bro. I think its a good rule. If you are on the bench, you should not be able to leave them bench at any time no matter what, and if you do, you should be penalized. It may seem harsh from a fans point of view, but the NBA is a business and like all business, there are certain rules and regulations you must obey.

Wilson
11-25-2009, 12:28 AM
No. Emotions can lead to physicality bro. I think its a good rule. If you are on the bench, you should not be able to leave them bench at any time no matter what, and if you do, you should be penalized. It may seem harsh from a fans point of view, but the NBA is a business and like all business, there are certain rules and regulations you must obey.

I should have worded that differently. I think players will react emotionally regardless of the rules, but as long as they don't actually go out swinging I see no reason to suspend someone.

These guys are adults, and I think the bench rule is almost treating them like children. You need to trust them to act and react as a mature adult, as most of them do.

_KB24_
11-25-2009, 12:37 AM
I should have worded that differently. I think players will react emotionally regardless of the rules, but as long as they don't actually go out swinging I see no reason to suspend someone.

These guys are adults, and I think the bench rule is almost treating them like children. You need to trust them to act and react as a mature adult, as most of them do.

I know what you mean. I would have a hard time holding back when my team-mate is in need. But things will just escalate. 2 guys from one team get up, 4 guys from another team will get up. And with us men being "tough", something is bound to happen. I say its better to be safe than sorry, and examples should be set.

Raph12
11-25-2009, 12:47 AM
No the rules should still be as strict as they are throughout the season IMO, Rondo should've been suspended, Alston deserved his suspension and Fisher should've been suspended for even longer.

If you start being lenient on the rules come playoff time, than the physical teams will always fare better than the rest.

SteveNash
11-25-2009, 01:19 AM
Their should be no suspencions when players stand up off the bench.


Especially if their star player gets body checked

Standing up doesn't get you an automatic suspension.

And please, all Horry did was give Nash little more than a moving screen, it wasn't that bad, Nash just flopped.


You have to allow players to react emotionally though.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J82P2Q2y_F0

Wilson
11-25-2009, 01:26 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J82P2Q2y_F0

The NBA went 50 years without something like this happening, it's hardly something that was happening all the time.

Don't get me wrong though, I do understand the reasoning behind the bench rule. I just think it's something that could be executed much better.

SteveNash
11-25-2009, 05:34 PM
The NBA went 50 years without something like this happening, it's hardly something that was happening all the time.

Don't get me wrong though, I do understand the reasoning behind the bench rule. I just think it's something that could be executed much better.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uTtxnBFZ88Y

thephoenixson28
11-25-2009, 06:02 PM
See what pisses me off is that amare and diaw get suspended for stepping on the court and they get suspended. I know rules are rules. But let me tell you this why doesn't kobe get suspended for the elbows, or rondo doesn't get suspended for throwing hinrich in the score board table. If rules are rules both should get suspended cuz both weren't basketball moves. If you want to have rules inforce them or don't have any rules.

Wilson
11-25-2009, 06:26 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uTtxnBFZ88Y

The guys who left the bench area on that clip were trying to break up the fight.

The answer, in my opinion, is just harsh (really harsh) repercussions against the player who enters the stands, like what happened to Ron Artest. If a guy takes one step out of the bench area, and then returns, I don't think it should be the same black-and-white response every time.

ZebraCity916
11-25-2009, 07:24 PM
I hate that get off the bench rule. If a player get in the altercation and instigates the situation then it deserves a suspension. If they get off the bench and try and stop the altercation then they shouldn't get suspended.

Other than that I don't think they should be anymore lenient.

Some of the flagrants they called last year during the Rockets-Laker series were ridiculous though. Some justifiable, most were not though in my opinion.

Deezy Dee 24.
11-25-2009, 07:34 PM
I say keep the rule, otherwise the bench players would run on the court for a hand check foul :laugh2:

SteveNash
11-25-2009, 08:40 PM
The guys who left the bench area on that clip were trying to break up the fight.

The answer, in my opinion, is just harsh (really harsh) repercussions against the player who enters the stands, like what happened to Ron Artest. If a guy takes one step out of the bench area, and then returns, I don't think it should be the same black-and-white response every time.

I was talking about Maxwell going after a fan in response to your previous post stating that you have to allow players to react emotionally. Well that's what happens when players are only reacting based on emotion.

And if we're going to loosen rules, why not loosen the out of bounds rule, let players be able to take one step out of bounds then return and still keep possession.

Wilson
11-25-2009, 08:55 PM
I was talking about Maxwell going after a fan in response to your previous post stating that you have to allow players to react emotionally. Well that's what happens when players are only reacting based on emotion.

And if we're going to loosen rules, why not loosen the out of bounds rule, let players be able to take one step out of bounds then return and still keep possession.

OK, I can see what you mean about players reacting emotionally. However, if the NBA focused on giving harsher suspensions for stuff like that (as they did, Artest was suspended for the rest of the season for attacking a fan, as well as some of the next I think) then players would not do it. The game was much different in the video you posted. I don't know if it's true or not that the player who attacked the fan stayed in the game (as the video description says), but either way we know that someone doing that today would suffer a huge backlash from the league.

I'm not talking about loosening rules, I'm just saying that this particular rule is too black-and-white. Again, I don't think a guy should get suspended for stepping out of the bench area, then stepping back in. The league should look at things case by case.