PDA

View Full Version : Davis gets 5 games



Mr. Pink
01-19-2006, 06:36 PM
http://www.nba.com/news/Davis_Suspended_060119.html

NEW YORK, Jan. 19 New York Knicks forward Antonio Davis has been suspended five games without pay for entering the spectator stands, it was announced today by Stu Jackson, NBA Senior Vice President Basketball Operations.

"We have made it plain to our players and our fans that players may not enter the spectator stands, no matter the provocation, and that violations of this policy will be treated with the utmost seriousness," Jackson said. "We have concluded, however, that Antonio's actions were the result of his belief that his family members required his immediate assistance, and have taken those mitigating circumstances into account in setting the length of the suspension."

The incident occurred with 1:04 remaining in the overtime period of the Knicks' 106-104 loss to the Chicago Bulls at United Center. Davis will begin serving his suspension tonight as the Knicks host the Detroit Pistons.

GetOdom
01-19-2006, 06:39 PM
Not bad, but he only deserved 2-3 games.

Kstat
01-19-2006, 06:41 PM
No problem with 5-8 games.

Antonio should take the time to either ban his wife from the games or tell her to behave.

317Kim
01-19-2006, 06:42 PM
Yikes. I was only thinkin 1-3 games but 5 isnt that bad.

Shade
01-19-2006, 06:42 PM
Stu Jackson just completely contradicted his first sentence with the second.

Chauncey
01-19-2006, 06:42 PM
Also, an EXTREMELY classy move by Walsh to make the comments he did to Marc Stein regarding the difference in the two situations. Walsh is a stand-up guy.

Jermaniac
01-19-2006, 06:43 PM
All those drunk idiots in the crowd and he has to tell his wife to behave. I bet she started it all.

Kstat
01-19-2006, 06:45 PM
All those drunk idiots in the crowd and he has to tell his wife to behave. I bet she started it all.

It certainly doesn't seem out of the realm of possibility. Kenrda's no wallflower.

It'll be very interesting to see how this plays out. I hope they get the whole incident on camera.

tadscout
01-19-2006, 06:48 PM
Stu Jackson just completely contradicted his first sentence with the second.

:iagree::rotflmao:

Jaydawg2270
01-19-2006, 06:53 PM
Just the ask the question who wouldnt do what antiono did?

Kstat
01-19-2006, 06:57 PM
I don't think Antonio minds this suspension much. He's the union president and of all people knows the consequences for his actions.

However, what's going to kill him is if it turns out his wife started it, and it winds up costing him 845K in lost salary, plus another million in a lawsuit.

Jermaniac
01-19-2006, 06:59 PM
What lawsuit? He didnt touch no body.

Kstat
01-19-2006, 07:00 PM
What lawsuit? He didnt touch no body.

No, but his wife did.

Do you think Kendra's going to cut the check for that if he gets awarded that amount, or Antonio?

Moses
01-19-2006, 07:02 PM
Appropriate suspension IMO.

Gotta keep these guys on the court, let security do their job by notifying them of the problem.

Kstat
01-19-2006, 07:03 PM
STU Jackson did a "great" job of convincing Stu Jackson that he only deserved 5 games, according to ESPN.

Moses
01-19-2006, 07:06 PM
STU Jackson did a "great" job of convincing Stu Jackson that he only deserved 5 games, according to ESPN.
Yeah, That was probably one of the funniest thing's I have ever seen. Thats John Maddenworthy right there.

Kstat
01-19-2006, 07:08 PM
From video of the incident, and eyewitness accounts on ESPN, it seems like Kenda and the fan were equally at fault. She turned around and got in the fan's face, and the fan argued back at her.

You can clearly see the fan turn around call for an usher to intervine, as Kenda is still yelling at him while his back is turned.

Then Kendra puts her hand in his face, the dan pushed her hand away and I assume from there, that's when she lost it and scratched him.

The guy didnt look drunk, though. He WAS definately cussing back and forth at her.

Jaydawg2270
01-19-2006, 07:09 PM
They just talked about it on espn they said that his wife was jumping up and down cheering for the knicks blocking the view of the fan behind her. the fan behind her told her to sit down and shutup and he also threw some explicit langue in. she was pointing at him saying something and they said he moved her hand out of his face.

beast23
01-19-2006, 07:11 PM
I don't think Antonio minds this suspension much. He's the union president and of all people knows the consequences for his actions.

However, what's going to kill him is if it turns out his wife started it, and it winds up costing him 845K in lost salary, plus another million in a lawsuit.Kstat, what the heck are you talking about?

Other than a shouting match, there wasn't anything that happened. I think any talk of a lawsuit is ridiculous.

And being in an opponent's arena, I doubt seriously if she started anything.

Jaydawg2270
01-19-2006, 07:14 PM
man i got beat again, you guys are fast

Kstat
01-19-2006, 07:15 PM
Kstat, what the heck are you talking about?

Other than a shouting match, there wasn't anything that happened. I think any talk of a lawsuit is ridiculous.

And being in an opponent's arena, I doubt seriously if she started anything.

He's saying she started it, and he's suing her for $1 million.

Not saying he'll get it, but he's going forward with it.

Shade
01-19-2006, 07:21 PM
Just the ask the question who wouldnt do what antiono did?

You could easily ask the same question about Ron.

Evan_The_Dude
01-19-2006, 07:23 PM
He's suing? What a p***y. One million for a scratch. People like this are whats wrong with this Country.

Kstat
01-19-2006, 07:23 PM
Shade, I honestly don't see there being any way for you to enter this discussion and not come out mad. Not saying you can't participate, but doing so is just going to irritate you further.

We've all made up our minds on how 11/19 was handled. Bringing it up as it relates to this incident is rather aimless.

Kstat
01-19-2006, 07:24 PM
He's suing? What a p***y. One million for a scratch. People like this are whats wrong with this Country.

Well, that and she did have him ejected. From a pretty good game, too.

Obviously, it's ridiculous to ask for a million, but I've seen lesser things result in more cash before....

Shade
01-19-2006, 07:27 PM
Shade, I honestly don't see there being any way for you to enter this discussion and not come out mad. Not saying you can't participate, but doing so is just going to irritate you further.

We've all made up our minds on how 11/19 was handled. Bringing it up as it relates to this incident is rather aimless.

I only bring it up because it's relevant. Stern set a precedent to supposedly dissuade players from going into the stands, and then first chance he gets, he ignores that precedent. It's obvious the man has way too much power. One man's opinion should not control an entire sport's system of regulations.

Kstat
01-19-2006, 07:31 PM
I only bring it up because it's relevant. Stern set a precedent to supposedly dissuade players from going into the stands, and then first chance he gets, he ignores that precedent. It's obvious the man has way too much power. One man's opinion should not control an entire sport's system of regulations.

I know, and you've brought it up several times.

BTW, is was also implied that the player's association had quite a bit to do with the ruling on this issue, because Antonio Davis spoke with Stu Jackson and not David Stern.

As the union president, I have to believe Davis could speak to Stern whenever he wants to.

This was not all Stern's decision. I believe he was influenced by Stu Jackson arguing on his behalf. Clearly the union found this incident to be more defensible than the previous one, and they fought a bit harder.

If you want to take it up with both the union and the stern, then I suppose that's your prerogative. But In no way do I believe Stern was the one and only hand in this decision.

able
01-19-2006, 07:39 PM
I agree with Shade and leave it at that.

Anthem
01-19-2006, 07:45 PM
Would the suspension have been different if Antonio had gone up and gotten punched by a fan?

Kstat
01-19-2006, 07:46 PM
Would the suspension have been different if Antonio had gone up and gotten punched by a fan?

Assuming there was no retaliation in his part, no I wouldn't think so.

DG-33
01-19-2006, 07:54 PM
It looked to me like Antonio was in his right mind when he went into the stands, unlike Artest who clearly just snapped. Whether that makes Antonio going into the stands more or less wrong is debatable.

Question - had a brawl broken out, what do you think Antonio's suspension would have been? And what do you think it should have been?

PostArtestEra
01-19-2006, 08:12 PM
It looked to me like Antonio was in his right mind when he went into the stands, unlike Artest who clearly just snapped. Whether that makes Antonio going into the stands more or less wrong is debatable.

Question - had a brawl broken out, what do you think Antonio's suspension would have been? And what do you think it should have been?

This seems to be the question people want to ask, and I don't get it. Why would that change anything? Can't we all agree that a brawl very well could have broken out. Whether it does or not is entirely on Davis. What is on Davis is going into the stands and making it a possibility. I think that is only logical, but I'm sure I'll get torn apart for it.

microwave_oven
01-19-2006, 08:21 PM
WOW!!!

brichard
01-19-2006, 08:24 PM
Assuming there was no retaliation in his part, no I wouldn't think so.

I disagree. The whole reason the brawl was such a big deal was b/c of the interaction of players and fans. Even if Antonio doesn't throw punch #1, all of a sudden we have the potential of fans staying away from arenas worrying about players coming into the stands.

As a fan, you may not worry about them attacking you, but perhaps you are afraid of the riotous atmosphere that you could be involved in if they do. Maybe you ponder that you don't want to bring your kids to be involved in such an environment.

If a fan hits Antonio it makes things look worse for the NBA with this particular situation, and I think Stern would be forced to add some games to his suspension accordingly.

Jon Theodore
01-19-2006, 09:13 PM
it's funny how much better at posting kstat is than everybody else

myself included

DisplacedKnick
01-19-2006, 10:31 PM
Somewhere from 5-10 games seemed about right. Be interesting to see how the lawsuit pans out - Axelrod's got a lot of money and AD isn't poor.

Kstat
01-19-2006, 10:32 PM
AD's not in nearly as bad shape as Rimfire's championship forumla.... :tongue:

Chauncey
01-20-2006, 12:15 AM
This hilarious....of all the people on this forum..I just *knew* that Shade would be one of the extremely few misguided who would dare to compare Ron Artest to Antonio Davis.

Chauncey
01-20-2006, 12:21 AM
Yeah, its not like they both went into the stands or anything............

You too, are you kidding me? Is this a joke? Am I living in the twighlight zone?

Do you people not have real jobs? Employee A has made mistake after mistake after mistake....next mistake they get fired. Employee B has been a great representative of your company and is widely respected..his next mistake he'll get a slap on the wrist.

Hell you have Donnie Walsh saying the exact same thing, that its nowhere near the same situation.

This is like talking basketball with my brother's kids or something. Nerve-racking sons of batches.

Unclebuck
01-20-2006, 08:52 AM
Vescey makes a lot of good points


http://www.nypost.com/php/pfriendly/pfriendly_new.php



SLAP ON THE WRIST
By PETER VECSEY

FOLLOWING last sea son's Palace rampage pitting players vs. players and then players vs. fans, David Stern made one thing indubitably clear above all else:

Never again!

No matter what the motivation, the NBA commissioner harrumphed when announcing his judgment to suspend Ron Artest for the remainder of the season and other verdicts pertaining to Stephen Jackson, Jermaine O'Neal, Anthony Johnson and David Harrison, no matter what the provocation, no matter what the circumstances, the league will not tolerate players violating the sanctity of the stands or spectators from trespassing onto the court.

I don't know this to be a fact, but I got the distinct impression over the succeeding months that Stern agonized whether he'd done the right thing, that perhaps his Artest sentence had been too harsh.

On the other hand, the totality of the design was to deter anybody from even thinking about ever again breaking and entering into the fans' sanctuary. The plan was to prevent another such outrage from scarring the league's already stained image, and Stern's decision may have tormented him; at the same time, he had to make sure there couldn't be a next time.

Yet only 14 months later, Stern's worst nightmare comes to life; there is, indeed, a next time. Not only that, but now it's 37-year-old Knicks center Antonio Davis, the anti-Artest, one of the league's nicest guys, the president of the players' union, for crying out tears, who lumbers over the scorer's table with 1:04 left in OT and ventures 12 rows up into the stands.

Evidently, Davis, naturally an ex-Pacer (the team's non-operational training camp in Afghanistan must have taught this kind of behavior, that and proficiency on the monkey bars — see accompanying video) wasn't paying the least bit of attention when Stern read the riot act to his constituents two Novembers ago and laid down uncompromising law and order commandments.

"Violators of this policy will be treated with the utmost seriousness," Stu Jackson, the league's dean of discipline, reiterated yesterday before completely compromising Stern's original premise and the above-stated positions with a capital BUT.

"We have concluded, however," Jackson summarily hedged, "that Antonio's actions were the result of his belief that his family members required his immediate assistance, and have taken those mitigating circumstances into account in setting the length of the suspension" of a ludicrously insufficient five games.

No wonder Davis felt it was unnecessary to take notes when Stern was preaching fire and brimstone from his pulpit.

No wonder he didn't think twice about leaving a stalemated OT game (if only Antonio could see the court under pressure as well as he sees the stands) to get in between his wife, Kendra, and a fan who have been equally relieved that Antonio interceded.

"Given the choice of taking on Kendra or Antonio," declared someone who has known both for years, "I'd rather fight Antonio. She can be real tough on people."

So, what is the literal translation of Stern's latest ruling? That players now have the right to pick and choose a time to go into the stands? They're now free to decide when it's justified?

You start making excuses for one player, and the next player is more apt to take the law into his own hands and cause a disturbance that's going to hurt more than just his family. Remember the picture of those frozen-in-fear youngsters at the Palace? Chairs being heaved indiscriminately? Fist fights all over the place? It doesn't get any viler. Not until the next time, anyway.

Did Antonio consider anybody but himself and his family before taking his misguided tour? He easily could've incited a riot by going into the stands. The fact no one took the bait is irrelevant.

Antonio had no idea if someone was going to take offense to him breaching their space. No clue if someone might stab him, shoot him or throw beer on him. And then it would've been on! That quick!

Antonio very well might have had the right (though distorted) intentions, but once he's offsides and things get out of hand he's no longer in control of his emotions or anything else. For exercising such stupidity and selfishness, it says here, he should've be given 20 games minimum, an unpaid opportunity to spend quality time with his wife.

Hell, I'd even find out which players voted for him and give each of them five games.

peter.vecsey@nypost.com

Slick Pinkham
01-20-2006, 08:55 AM
"Given the choice of taking on Kendra or Antonio," declared someone who has known both for years, "I'd rather fight Antonio. She can be real tough on people."


:lol2:

RWB
01-20-2006, 08:59 AM
Yeah, I have a job.

Save the bull **** trolling for IS.

Yeah VA, noticing a trend here.

Slick Pinkham
01-20-2006, 09:05 AM
the clear message:

going into the stands gets you a double digit suspension.

It may be more if you are a hopeless nutjob who has a long history of behavioral issues and blown 2nd/3rd/4th/...22nd chances.

It may be less if you have absolutely no such history, if there were some mitigating circumstances, and if you didn't run up with fist clenched ready to "take somebody out", and thus you lucked out and no brawl ensued.

I'm not sure that the outcome (brawl/no brawl) should or did factor into it, but that aspect always factors into it elsewhere in society.

If Peck and I both shoot people as we each separately rob memorabilia shops in Indiana and Florida to haul away all their Brad Miller gear, and the guy Peck shoots lives miraculously while the guy I shoots dies, I am a murderer but Peck is not. The reason? Peck got lucky.

able
01-20-2006, 09:37 AM
I said it before, I'll say it again, the outcome bares no semblence on the initial act.
The outcome bares substance once it leads to "other" infringements.

This crowd was not rowdy, not druk, and had no Brother of Ben Wallace in the stands.

BUT...........WHAT IF..........

Let's say I was sitting next to the guy, innocent, and the guy is right, she attacked him, in his team's building, and AD stormed at "us", would you forgive me for taking no risks and taking him down as soon as he came close?

What would the result have been?

What if the guy who thought that way, had raised a hand to AD, woul he have held his hands to his own or decked the guy?

Can we agree that "any" player entering the stands in this matter is a thread to the public?

It was for that reason that Stern announced the very severe punishment on 5 of our players. Not only ron a season ( as he was the "ionitiator") but also 40 to Jax, 30 to JO (who never entered the stands) and so on and so on.

Ron entered the stands because he was physically attacked, no way about it, someone threw a bottle in his face, that constitutes an attack.

Jax went to help his friend/teammate, both were attacked once in the stands and defended themselves.

"You shall not go in the stands"


Unless........................

You have friends in high places.


PT, your example goes limp, Peck could simply have been a better shot with no intentions to kill, you were not, you knew the risk when you used the gun.

The only one lucky in your example is Peck's victim.

What is the next justification for going in the stands? It seems that if they attack you, you have to refrain, however if you as much as think they are attacking your wife, no matter what way, THEN you have mitigating circumstances.


If you can not see the absolute bollocks in this then I fear for justice in the world in general.

Fool
01-20-2006, 10:55 AM
This is like talking basketball with my brother's kids or something. Nerve-racking sons of batches.

Where ya' goin' with that shotgun?

brichard
01-20-2006, 11:54 AM
the clear message:

going into the stands gets you a double digit suspension.

It may be more if you are a hopeless nutjob who has a long history of behavioral issues and blown 2nd/3rd/4th/...22nd chances.

It may be less if you have absolutely no such history, if there were some mitigating circumstances, and if you didn't run up with fist clenched ready to "take somebody out", and thus you lucked out and no brawl ensued.

I'm not sure that the outcome (brawl/no brawl) should or did factor into it, but that aspect always factors into it elsewhere in society.

If Peck and I both shoot people as we each separately rob memorabilia shops in Indiana and Florida to haul away all their Brad Miller gear, and the guy Peck shoots lives miraculously while the guy I shoots dies, I am a murderer but Peck is not. The reason? Peck got lucky.


Well, I think a better analogy would be... you and Peck each robbed somebody and had a gun. So both accounts are technically armed robbery. However, Peck shoots somebody and gets the book thrown at him while you keep your gun in your holster. And Peck has been robbing people with regularity while this is your first offense. Two totally different sets of behavior although they fall in the same category.

The legal system will always weigh in all factors before making a decision. History, pre-meditation or lack thereof, was it self defense... etc.

Now, what I personally think the league should do is to establish a hard and fast rule on what happens if you enter the stands. When I worked at Fed Ex, they told you from day 1, if you get in a fight... you are gone. If you start it... you are fired. If you get bum rushed by 5 guys... you were still fired. The point being is that they had zero tolerance for fights.

If the NBA really wanted to eliminate this stuff, they would have a similar policy. If you enter the stands, you are banned for life. If guys are worried about their families... hire a bodyguard. Clearly this will be a cheaper solution. :)

naptownmenace
01-20-2006, 12:12 PM
You too, are you kidding me? Is this a joke? Am I living in the twighlight zone?

Do you people not have real jobs? Employee A has made mistake after mistake after mistake....next mistake they get fired. Employee B has been a great representative of your company and is widely respected..his next mistake he'll get a slap on the wrist.

Hell you have Donnie Walsh saying the exact same thing, that its nowhere near the same situation.

This is like talking basketball with my brother's kids or something. Nerve-racking sons of batches.


:lol:

That was hilarious and I can't help but say that I thought the exact same thing. :nod:

grace
01-20-2006, 01:01 PM
Look, I think we'd all agree that the Pacers got screwed with the length of our suspensions resulting from the brawl. Despite Stern's supposed friendship with the Simons he hates the team. It happened. We moved on and the team is now mired in mediocrity.

Antonio went into the stands because there was a problem involving his wife. He thought she was being threatened. Maybe he knew she was causing trouble and went up there to tell her to take her meds. I don't know and like most things these days I don't care. All things considered I think there's very little wrong with a 5 game suspension.

Remember: David Stern hates the Pacers and their fans. He only gave Antonio 5 games just to **** you off.

efx
01-20-2006, 01:23 PM
Look, I think we'd all agree that the Pacers got screwed with the length of our suspensions resulting from the brawl. Despite Stern's supposed friendship with the Simons he hates the team. It happened. We moved on and the team is now mired in mediocrity.

Antonio went into the stands because there was a problem involving his wife. He thought she was being threatened. Maybe he knew she was causing trouble and went up there to tell her to take her meds. I don't know and like most things these days I don't care. All things considered I think there's very little wrong with a 5 game suspension.

Remember: David Stern hates the Pacers and their fans. He only gave Antonio 5 games just to **** you off.

I can't tell if sarcasm was behind this post but can anyone really offer up some concrete proof as to why he "hates" this team?

grace
01-20-2006, 03:15 PM
There is a hint of sarcasm because some people tend to think that Stern has it in for us. Maybe "hate" is the wrong word. See if this anaolgy rings just a little bit true. The manner in which Stern handled the Pacers and the aftermath of the brawl is akin to when Stern was 8 years old and liked to pull the legs off daddy long legs. He does it because he thinks it's fun.



[Yes the above is intended to be humorous sarcasm. If people can't understand what I'm trying to say I'll tell you what I tell people at work. "Don't pay attention to what I say. Just read my mind."]

brichard
01-20-2006, 05:06 PM
There is a hint of sarcasm because some people tend to think that Stern has it in for us. Maybe "hate" is the wrong word. See if this anaolgy rings just a little bit true. The manner in which Stern handled the Pacers and the aftermath of the brawl is akin to when Stern was 8 years old and liked to pull the legs off daddy long legs. He does it because he thinks it's fun.



[Yes the above is intended to be humorous sarcasm. If people can't understand what I'm trying to say I'll tell you what I tell people at work. "Don't pay attention to what I say. Just read my mind."]

I'm not sure I buy in to the whole "Stern hates Indiana" argument, but he absolutely threw the book at us last year while lightly slapping the wrist of Detroit. I thought Artest deserved a major suspension, but Stern multiplied the previous penalty by about 6 times, so I thought that was harsh.

I also think it is in the best interest of the league to have major market teams be successful. When LA, Chicago, or NY are in the playoffs... ratings are going to be up.

Do I believe there is corruption in the NBA? I'm not sure. I'm not one of the folks who cries about the world being against us all the time, it just isn't my style. But, we have seen corrupt people in boxing, football, basketball, etc., so it wouldn't shock me either. If I thought it was prevalent, I wouldn't watch a game. But it is interesting how all officials tend to give out the star treatment etc. Perhaps that is more of a referee thing that has been handed down over the years. Ah well, who knows?

PacerMan
01-20-2006, 08:01 PM
http://www.nba.com/news/Davis_Suspended_060119.html

NEW YORK, Jan. 19 New York Knicks forward Antonio Davis has been suspended five games without pay for entering the spectator stands, it was announced today by Stu Jackson, NBA Senior Vice President Basketball Operations.

"We have made it plain to our players and our fans that players may not enter the spectator stands, no matter the provocation, and that violations of this policy will be treated with the utmost seriousness," Jackson said. "We have concluded, however, that Antonio's actions were the result of his belief that his family members required his immediate assistance, and have taken those mitigating circumstances into account in setting the length of the suspension."

The incident occurred with 1:04 remaining in the overtime period of the Knicks' 106-104 loss to the Chicago Bulls at United Center. Davis will begin serving his suspension tonight as the Knicks host the Detroit Pistons.

Complete an total hypocritical BULL****. The son of a ***** should have a boil lanced on his scrotum. *******.