Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

ESPN: NBA plans fines for floppers

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • ESPN: NBA plans fines for floppers

    Fines will be imposed for clear cases of flopping

    By Marc Stein
    ESPN.com




    http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/s...e=NBAHeadlines




    The NBA announced to its teams this week at its annual pre-draft camp that fines will be imposed on players starting next season for clear cases of "flopping," ESPN.com has learned.

    The league office has yet to determine exact fine amounts for offending flops and how fines might escalate for repeat offenders, but in-game arena observers and video reviewers will be instructed to report instances of theatrical flopping for potential punishment as part of postgame reports on officiating and other matters.


    The league's pledge to crack down on flopping was conveyed to team representatives at Tuesday's competition committee meeting in Orlando.

    NBA executive vice president of basketball operations Stu Jackson confirmed the new policy Wednesday night saying: "What was clearly expressed to the committee is that we would begin imposing fines next season for the most egregious type of flops. When players are taking a dive, for lack of a better term." Because a precise penalty system has not yet been structured, it is not yet known whether serial floppers will be subject to possible suspensions after a certain number of fines for flopping, as seen with the league's protocol on technical fouls. Players who accrue 16 technicals during the regular season are hit with a one-game suspension when they get to No. 16 -- the limit is seven technicals during the playoffs -- and receive one-game suspensions for every other technical thereafter (No. 18, 20, etc.).

    Detroit's Rasheed Wallace, a player who has 15 technicals this season and has been suspended in the past for being over the limit for technicals, gave his opinion of floppers to ESPN after the Pistons' 106-102 loss to the Boston Celtics in Game 5 of the Eastern Conference finals on Wednesday.

    "All that bull(bleep)-*** calls they had out there. With Mike [Callahan] and Kenny [Mauer] -- you've all seen that (bleep)," Wallace said. "You saw them calls. The cats are flopping all over the floor and they're calling that (bleep). That (bleep) ain't basketball out there. It's all (bleeping) entertainment. You all should know that (bleep). It's all (bleeping) entertainment."

    In other Orlando business:

    • The competition committee considered changes to both the current playoff seeding format as well as the format for the draft lottery but ruled against recommending alterations to either.

    Both subjects will be discussed again at the next Board of Governors meeting in October, but changes typically aren't made by team owners at those meetings without a prior recommendation from the competition committee.

    After another season of great imbalance between teams in the West and East, league officials agreed in April to consider changes that could be implemented in time for next season's playoffs. But NBA commissioner David Stern said from the start that "it's unlikely anything will happen."

    The current system sends the top eight teams in each conference to the postseason. That excluded No. 9 Golden State in the West in spite of the Warriors' 48-win season and forced two 55-win perennial powers -- San Antonio and Phoenix -- to meet in the first round.


    The West's dominance -- and the fact that only three teams in the East (Boston, Detroit and Orlando) had a higher win total than Golden State -- led to a new round of calls for re-seeding after each round of the playoffs as seen in other major professional team sports, or even sending the teams with the best 16 records to the playoffs irrespective of conference.


    But Stern has long maintained that re-seeding is "very difficult when you have the television obligations that we have" because the league's TV partners (ESPN and TNT) would then be required "to wait for every series that can affect the re-seeding to be over." The commissioner has also said that he's comfortable with the idea of a lower seed inheriting the playoff path of a higher seed if it can win a seven-game series.


    There is also naturally considerable opposition from teams in the East to sending the clubs with the 16 best records to the playoffs. The current format enabled several sub-.500 teams this season -- such as Indiana, New Jersey and Chicago -- to stay in playoff contention well into April, giving them something to sell to their fan bases in spite of sub-par records and constant reminders from the media about the West's superior depth.

    Making overall record its primary playoff consideration would also likely force the league to change the format of its entire regular-season schedule. West teams would have a valid complaint if the 16-team playoff field was determined strictly by record and East teams retained the advantage of playing 52 games against other East teams and only 30 against West teams.


    There was likewise no consensus reached by committee members on tweaking the draft lottery. Grumblings about the current system have grown louder with Chicago (ninth-worst record in the league) and Portland (sixth-worst record in 2006-07) winning the past two lotteries, but Stern is said to be strongly against any lottery changes.


    • As Stern promised earlier this month, changes were considered by the committee to the league's rules regarding intentional fouling away from the ball, which is more commonly known as the Hack-A-Shaq strategy.

    Yet it appears that Hack-A-Shaq will be back next season, too.

    Stern himself has said he doesn't like "the idea that [players can say], 'Hey, look at me, I'm going to hit this guy as soon as the ball goes into play, even though he's standing under the other basket.' "


    San Antonio made extensive use of the Hack-A-Shaq tactic in its first-round series with Phoenix after Spurs coach Gregg Popovich had shunned the strategy for years. The Suns later conceded that the strategy not only took advantage of Shaquille O'Neal's poor foul shooting -- he missed half of his 64 free-throw attempts in the series -- but also frequently interrupted their offensive flow.


    Such intentional fouling is legal until the final two minutes of regulation or any overtime, when intentional fouls result in one free throw and the team whose player was fouled retaining possession.


    "We had a pretty spirited discussion on the subject and we talked prospectively about how we might change it," Jackson said, declining to elaborate on the potential alterations.


    "But in the end, there wasn't enough support to change it. ... There was a feeling that by changing the rule you would be essentially rewarding a player for a lack of skill by allowing him to stay in the game."


    • The committee had extensive discussions about expanding the use of instant replay for next season and voted to recommend a proposal which calls for the use of replay to assist referees in determining whether a basket or a shot on which a player is fouled is taken from behind the 3-point line.


    The committee, as expected, is also backing the league's wish to use instant replay to resolve discrepancies on clock malfunctions, after a major clock issue during the Detroit-Orlando series in the second round.

    The league was forced to admit earlier this month that a 3-pointer made by the Pistons' Chauncey Billups at the end of the third quarter of Game 2 against Orlando should not have counted. There were 5.1 seconds remaining in the quarter when the ball was inbounded, but the clock froze at 4.8 seconds as Billups dribbled into the frontcourt. The whole play actually consumed 5.7 seconds, meaning that the buzzer should have sounded before Billups' shot went up, but the play was not reviewable under current rules. Referees are presently allowed to use instant replay only to rule whether a shot goes in before the end-of-quarter clock expires.


    "We still need to refine the procedures involved, but it's expected that Board of Governors will vote on those proposals [in October]," Jackson said.


    Marc Stein is the senior NBA writer for ESPN.com.

    =======================================

    This was in the RoboHicks RSS feed section. But it might be worth some discussion.

    What do you think?
    And I won't be here to see the day
    It all dries up and blows away
    I'd hang around just to see
    But they never had much use for me
    In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

  • #2
    Re: ESPN: NBA plans fines for floppers

    The true end to the Spurs dynasty?

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: ESPN: NBA plans fines for floppers

      What I've always said when people start dicking with the rules is "you can't legislate quality of play."

      I think the flopping issue tends to be overblown. I understand it's frustrating, but if we're going to do that, then we also need to crack down on the guys who get defenders in the air, then jump two feet to their right to initiate the contact, and a myriad of other "little tricks" that players try to get an advantage. Don't fine the guys, just don't call the the offensive foul. Players give up enough easy baskets, the coaches themselves will stop the practice.

      I think the only real solution to the "Hack-a-Shaq" problem is for Shaq (and others like him) to learn how to shoot Free Throws better. I was (and still am) opposed to the original change regarding under two minutes. Shaq's (and other's) FT shooting is a legitimate weakness to be exploited by the other teams. You wanna stop the other team from doing it, then hit your damn Free Throws.

      Speaking of rules, one thing that officials need to do is read the damn rule about the circle in the lane. Prior to its existence, plays where the defender "had good defensive position, but were too far under the basket" went as no-calls. Since then, it's been called as a blocking foul. This is not what the rule says:

      An offensive foul should never be called if the contact is with a secondary defensive player who has established a defensive position within a designated "restricted area" near the basket for the purpose of drawing an offensive foul.

      The "restricted area" for this purpose is the area bounded by an arc with a 4-foot radius measured from the middle of the basket.

      EXCEPTION: Any player may be legally positioned within the "restricted area" if the offensive player receives the ball within the Lower Defensive Box.

      The mere fact that contact occurs on these type of plays, or any other similar play, does not necessarily mean that a personal foul has been committed. The offi-cials must decide whether the contact is negligible and/or incidental, judging each situation separately.
      http://www.nba.com/analysis/rules_c....av=ArticleList

      The idea was to make it more clear, to the refs, players, and fans, where a no-call was going to happen, not to incrementally punish a defender who got good defensive position, but his heels were on the line. I'm fine with the no-call, but I'm just tired of seeing guys get fouls they don't really deserve for what would otherwise be a good, smart defensive effort.

      Sorry, I'm a little pissy this morning...

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: ESPN: NBA plans fines for floppers

        I hope this isn't true. I think this is an overblown way to deal with this problem.

        Why not have the refs just call more blocking fouls on gregarious floppers? That's the right call and I think the players will get the point.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: ESPN: NBA plans fines for floppers

          Great news. Most annoying part of the NBA, IMO. This isn't Cameron Indoor. Noone should be jumping in front of dribblers 20 feet from the hoop and then pretending he -- a word-class athlete with impeccable balance -- was knocked over by someone doing a spin-dribble. It's dumb, it slows down the game and it creates a bad defensive mindset.

          Originally posted by count55 View Post
          I think the only real solution to the "Hack-a-Shaq" problem is for Shaq (and others like him) to learn how to shoot Free Throws better. I was (and still am) opposed to the original change regarding under two minutes. Shaq's (and other's) FT shooting is a legitimate weakness to be exploited by the other teams. You wanna stop the other team from doing it, then hit your damn Free Throws.
          That was about marketing and entertaining casual fans more so than basketball, IMO. It's just boring as hell to watch.

          As for the "jumping into defenders" thing...they instituted the "Reggie leg kick rule" a while ago.

          But in the case where a defender bites on a fake and the jumps into a shooter's aerial space and then the shooter decides to rise up for a shot...well he infringed on the shooter's rightful space and if contact occurs there then it is a defensive foul. It isn't a foul if the offensive guy jumps forward, but the space vertically above him is rightfully his. And while the offensive guy might still be getting the benefit of the doubt from the refs when he jumps forward into a guy slightly, the refs have been keeping their whistles in their pockets a lot more in instances where the offensive guy egregiously changes position to iniate the contact. For about two seasons now, you see almost one of these a game where the shooter tries to draw contact only to get a no-call and throw up an air ball.
          Last edited by JayRedd; 05-29-2008, 10:31 AM.
          Read my Pacers blog:
          8points9seconds.com

          Follow my twitter:

          @8pts9secs

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: ESPN: NBA plans fines for floppers

            Fining is going too far. Just don't call the damn offensive foul and people will stop doing it.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: ESPN: NBA plans fines for floppers

              Even though there was a ton of talk (before the playoffs started) about re-seeding the team - once the playoffs started there has been no talk about how the current system is bad. I think we got the 4 best teams in the NBA in the final four and the two best in each conference playing right now. So why change it

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: ESPN: NBA plans fines for floppers

                One more reason the reign of Stern needs to end, soon.

                Fix the officials, don't fine the players for trying to get a foul call. That is part of the game. If it is so obvious then don't call the foul.

                I remember one game in high school when I flopped on a drive. The official looked down at me and said, "He never touched you." I laughed, nodded, and went back down the court. I never was a good actor.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: ESPN: NBA plans fines for floppers

                  Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                  Even though there was a ton of talk (before the playoffs started) about re-seeding the team - once the playoffs started there has been no talk about how the current system is bad. I think we got the 4 best teams in the NBA in the final four and the two best in each conference playing right now. So why change it
                  I agree with you. A reseeding may also destroy conference rivalries. Imagine the mid to late 90's if we played the Rockets, Blazers, and then the Knicks one year in the semifinals. Just wouldn't have been as fun.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: ESPN: NBA plans fines for floppers

                    Ginobli and Oberto are going to be broke as a joke by the end of the season.


                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: ESPN: NBA plans fines for floppers

                      This ought to open a whole new can of worms.

                      Flopping does need to be curbed, though. It's just too bad that the refs are too inept to not call the flop in the first place. That would allow the entire situation to take care of itself.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: ESPN: NBA plans fines for floppers

                        He's taking the issue of flopping out of the refs hands is all.

                        Since flopping isn't a defensive foul, there's nothing for the refs to call.

                        So if Stern wanted to curb it, it was either by doing this...Or he would to make every charge/block call even more complicated for the officials by adding a third element to it and making the refs decide charge/block/flop.

                        In this sense, flopping isn't an in-game infraction, but more of a "disrespect to the game" behavior that will be treated similarly to wearing your shorts too low or rocking arm-bands in an unsanctioned way.
                        Last edited by JayRedd; 05-29-2008, 12:43 PM.
                        Read my Pacers blog:
                        8points9seconds.com

                        Follow my twitter:

                        @8pts9secs

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: ESPN: NBA plans fines for floppers

                          Why can't the refs just get it right?
                          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMltKsoDwe8&NR=1
                          press pause on the second slow-mo replay around 0:12 mark

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: ESPN: NBA plans fines for floppers

                            Why can't the players just play basketball the right way?
                            Read my Pacers blog:
                            8points9seconds.com

                            Follow my twitter:

                            @8pts9secs

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: ESPN: NBA plans fines for floppers

                              Why doesn't stern put his effort into improving the inconsistent officiating in the NBA first... flopping isn't really a big issue...
                              "We've got to be very clear about this. We don't want our players hanging around with murderers," said Larry Bird, Pacers president.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X