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

The official

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

  • The official

    I'm sorry if this has been posted elswhere but I haven't seen it yet.

    I've seen cryptic messages & I've seen some people come right out & state their feelings. But I've not seen a place where we've actually put it down. So I thought we should have a place for future referance.

    What we're going to do in this thread is state how we feel & where we stand about a few topics related to this incident. I'll list out the topics & then I hope everybody answers them. This can be for Pacers & non-Pacer fans alike.

    Here is the list.

    1. Ron Artest season long suspension

    2. S. Jackson 30 game suspension

    3. J. O'Neal 25 game suspension

    4. David Stern's handling of the situation

    5. Ron Artest future with the Indiana Pacers


    I'll go ahead & begin & for those of you new to the board even though I won't seem to be by some, I am a life long Pacers fan.

    1. Ron's suspension. I was hoping for 50 games. But I understand the season long recess for Ron. He is a gifted athlete, as I've said before capable of being one of the top 10 players in the league. However he does not have control over himself & I don't know that he ever will. If this was his first offense then I think the penalty would have been less but Ron has a violent past. So ultimately I do understand why this punishment was so hard.

    2. Jackson. Did I miss it somewhere, isn't Jackson the only player we have not heard from? Hasn't everybody other than him expressed some form of remorse? Jackson on the floor was a disaster. He was pulling out his jersey & challenging every member of the Pistons team. However, in his defense there were some mitigating circumstances that must be taken into consideration. When he had his back turned Rasheed Wallace shoved him out of the way to get to Ben & Ron. He didn't give him a gentle push either he almost doubled him over. This set Jax off. Then we will never know what he was going into the stands for because the min. he rounded the corner he was immediately hit by the flying fluid. The person was right in front of him & he started swinging. By then all reason was gone. He did get a good hit in on the bald guy so I guess out of anybody he actually eventually hit the right guy. 30 games is harsh, but appropriate.

    3. J.O. If I haven't pissed off my fellow Pacer fans before I sure will now. The man was getting up off of his back when J.O. ran from the side & clocked him. BTW, John Ewdwards was standing with J.O. there was no other fan scuffle as we've heard on here. J.O. looked over his shoulder & saw A.J. punching the guy & came running. I do not buy the defense of the guy was on the floor so everybody should clock him. Bull. Does that mean if a fan runs on the floor the Police should shoot him? No. & even if it does make sense to hit a person on the floor how much is enough? One punch? Two punches? Every member of the team & staff? The man was on his knees trying to get up & J.O. just clocked him. Of course I'm not sure what hurt worse the fact that J.O. hit him so hard or the fact that while he was on his back the first thing he saw when he opened his eyes was the score board that read Pacers 97 Detroit 82 Now in O'Neals defense I thought all along he was the trouble in the tunnel, turns out it was David Harrison that hit that fan. J.O. didn't help matters by not leaving & wanting to fight the entire section. 25 games will probably be lightened a little but I bet not by a lot. Given his past it's hard to say if this is to long or not. But I guess I'll go with thinking this is a little much.

    4. Stern, or as he's known around here Lucifer. As a Pacers fan I feel F#cked. But unlike some of my fellow fans I don't blame Stern for this. He had to hit & he had to hit hard. He was facing a societal problem & one in which he had the ability to control. If we could all step away from being Pacers fans for a moment we would see that he is being universally praised for his action. He is telling the player (who he has control over) that if you go into the stands these are the serious consequences you will face. Anything less than this & he would be being grilled alive by the media in general & were not talking sports media here folks. He would have been grilled by all the networks, newspapers & such. I know that we hate the fact that fans in Detroit got to basically ruin our season. But that is beyond Sterns control. Sure he can fine the Pistons for something & he even gave Ben Wallace an above average suspension for what he did (I know we all want him gone with Ron but let's be honest most on court scuffles end with a 2 game suspension & that is with fist being thrown) But Stern can't fine the fans who did this. His only authority is with the player & it is a wide ranging authority & anybody who thinks that the players union will get this away from him is nuts. The rest of the league is in lock step with him on this & so are his large corp. sponsors. So to clarify, although I'm not thrilled with the way Stern handled this, I do understand.

    5. Ron's future. Look, I'm not a hypocrit about this, so I can't be confused with jumping ship because he's in trouble. I've been telling you guys for a couple of years now that Ron was going to be the downfall of the team. I had no idea this would be the downfall. I can't imagine him doing any more harm to this franchise if he tried. Like I said about three weeks ago when that little incident happened, if you didn't see the problem with Ron by then you never would & true to form some of you are going to go down defending this guy. He is a hell of a basketball player, but sometimes that just isn't enough. I think Ron has played his last game for our team & if not anything the guy does from this time forward the management deserves. Now to true Ron fans, you have my deepest sympathy. My favorite player melted down just before he left as well (not nearly on the collosal scale that Ron did) so I know the feeling. But sometimes you just have to cut the chord.

    Ok, I'd like everybody's opinion on thes points & feel free to blast mine cause I know some of you will.
    [edit=110=1101193775][/edit]


    Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

  • #2
    Re: The official

    So Harrison hit someone too?
    Sorry, I didn't know advertising was illegal here. Someone call the cops!

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: The official

      3. J.O. If I haven't pissed off my fellow Pacer fans before I sure will now. The man was getting up off of his back when J.O. ran from the side & clocked him. BTW, John Ewdwards was standing with J.O. there was no other fan scuffle as we've heard on here. J.O. looked over his shoulder & saw A.J. punching the guy & came running. I do not buy the defense of the guy was on the floor so everybody should clock him. Bull. Does that mean if a fan runs on the floor the Police should shoot him? No. & even if it does make sense to hit a person on the floor how much is enough? One punch? Two punches? Every member of the team & staff? The man was on his knees trying to get up & J.O. just clocked him. Of course I'm not sure what hurt worse the fact that J.O. hit him so hard or the fact that while he was on his back the first thing he saw when he opened his eyes was the score board that read Pacers 97 Detroit 82 Now in O'Neals defense I thought all along he was the trouble in the tunnel, turns out it was David Harrison that hit that fan. J.O. didn't help matters by not leaving & wanting to fight the entire section. 25 games will probably be lightened a little but I bet not by a lot. Given his past it's hard to say if this is to long or not. But I guess I'll go with thinking this is a little much.

      I thought that before he punched the guy, AJ was down and the guy was getting up to approach AJ. So, that's why JO ran to punch that guy.
      [edit=509=1101193751][/edit]

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: The official

        Well Peck, you're thought pretty much mirror mine, especially in the area of David Stern, who was never a forum favorite here to BEGIN with, who I think is simply trying to make the best out of a bad situation.

        As for JO- I do think that if a fan was charging him, he had a right to clock him. However, the fact he applied the teachings of Liu Kang, Shang Tsung and Kung Lao to a fat man who was struggling just to peel himself off the court, paints him in a very unfavorable light.

        To clarify, fans have NO right to be on the court. Simply stepping onto the court should make them subject to arrest and proscecution. But if they aren't attacking the players, I dont know if the players have a right to beat them senseless.

        [edit=64=1101193913][/edit]
        [edit=64=1101194124][/edit]

        It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

        Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
        Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
        NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: The official

          Ok first to truwarier.

          Yes, Harrison clocked a fan on in the bleachers going out the runway. He then fell to the floor & was swarmed on by a minon of Jackals. The guy Harrison hit had just thrown a cup full of liquid on J.O. Why Harrison though he should hit him I'll never know, it was at this time that the chair came flying.

          To MIPacers. No, A.J. was being pulled away & the guy was on his knees looking at Johnson & it looked to me like he was saying "enough". But I can't swear to this. He never even saw J.O. coming until just seconds before he hit him. Both of his arms were out foward in a nonthreating fashion. BTW, it is impressive that he did manage to hang onto his bag of goodies he had the entire time.

          BTW, it also appears to me that he never even wanted to fight Ron or A.J., it was his friend that Ron hit & it looked to me like he was just trying to seperate them. But that is just speculation on my part.


          Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: The official

            The guy Jermaine punched attacked Ron first, so he deserved to be hit. I think JO's punched resembled Jax's sliding punch in MK3.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: The official

              Peck

              I'm in full agreement on the first 3.

              As far as Stern goes, he made it clear that the suspensions were only for the on court behavior of the players. I took that to mean that further action will be taken at a later date against non-players, meaning the Piston franchise.

              If his actions over the weekend & in the coming days curbs the problem that the NBA is facing then I am more than willing to accept it.

              Lastly, on Artest. I am a big fan of Artest the basketball player but don't care for his evil twin, P.R. Nightmare.

              I can't say, no team will take him because somebody will. But we might have to find a way to void his contract or buy him out. I wish he could stay & help this team win a couple rings but I just don't think he can remained focused enough to do so. Too bad to, he has more heart than anyother player in the league.

              I guess we are pretty much in agreement on all 5 points.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: The official

                I don't think Ron's suspension is what he deserved, but probably is the best thing that could happen to him. He'll have an entire year to think things over, and most likely a new bottom-dweller team to start over with.

                Jackson's penalty was right. JO's was by far to much, 10-15 would be right.

                Stern was only wrong in the length of JO's suspension (Artest's is arguable), and how he went about the suspensions. He made them seem personal and like he was "sending a message". That is wrong, they should not seem so personal, like Stern has some grudge against the three players.
                You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: The official

                  I felt the punishment was excessive and absurd. Maxwell got 10 games, but then again, he wasn't a Pacer.

                  David Stern is a dictator of mamoth proportions. No one should be allowed to command such absolute power in the United States Of America. Not even the president has that much power. It's time to clip David Sterns wings and limit his power. IMO, some sort of governing body should be put in place.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: The official

                    There are mitigating circumstances and I won't argue that. If this was any other Pacer I'd be a little more willing to blast the NBA for their reaction (as it pertains to Artest). But Artest has a history of being in this position. That just can't be overlooked. Not at this point in time. Too many questionable days are in his past.

                    The problem I am having in sorting out the happenings is how to judge and understand things once the powder keg exploded. I don't know... what did Sjax see (or hear) or thought he saw or heard in the stands? Did he see someone throw 'something' at Artest and react when Artest did? What did any Pacer see or hear and believe in those moments of confusion?

                    I can't believe the players suddenly thought "Hey, cool... I can clock these a--holes!"

                    And none of this happens if the fans had any civility. The guy who threw the cup never should've felt he could have gotten away with that. There should have been some security serving as a deterrant to that type of behavior. Also, security should've been close enough to have the guy before Artest could get to him.

                    Just because what Ben Wallace did happens 'all the time' in the NBA in the 'heat of battle' doesn't mean it is right. This time it incited the crowd. He should have to pay the price for that and it is atleast (IMO) on par with JO's transgressions and therefore I see those needed to be handled the same.

                    That he incited the crowd and the Pistons didn't have enough security to control them is once again a problem the Pistons should be paying for.

                    The Pacers crossed over the line but the Pistons put them in that position. Artest being 'gone' for the year is one thing but the other Pacers suspensions I see as too harsh when considered with:

                    The mitigating circumstances

                    The need to balance the punishment so that Detroit doesn't actually GAIN from this

                    Their record as NBA players on and off the court

                    The fact of Artest's history and actions here should make him bear the brunt.

                    -
                    I would've like to have seen lessened suspensions with fines and a probationary period for some.

                    -

                    As for Wallace... he was playing with fire. Normally it gets extinquished. This time he caught the couch on fire. The NBA should've come down harder on him and should also look to come down harder on fighting in general.

                    As soon as he pushed Artest, a thumb should've been in the air and he should've been immediately escorted from the court. He should not have been allowed to stand on the court and make threats, throw towels/wristbands, etc.. That it wasn't handled that way is one more mitigating circumstance.

                    2 wrongs don't make a right.... And it isn't going to fix anything to not acknowledge the institutional breakdown that took place in the Palace.

                    ---

                    I'm wondering if the Pacers are now looking into voiding Artest's contract on grounds he breached a 'personal responsibility/image' type clause. I also wonder if the back channel communications might be mentioning if JO (and possibly SJax) could have their suspensions reduced that we guarantee Artest is finished as a Pacer?

                    I'm sure that wouldn't break Stern's heart.

                    ---

                    With the media glare now fully shining on Artest this will cast a LONG shadow. He will be taunted.... And he will be tainted for his whole career. Truthfully, the pressure will be greater than ever. Does anyone think he can handle it? He'll be a lightning rod like never before and I'm not sure who wants to be standing near him the next time lightning strikes.

                    I'm having a hard time believing that Walsh, Bird, Simons, et al are really standing up for Artest.

                    I worry about the fans this year. I think FOR A WHILE it will be fine. But what if this makeshift lineup can't win? Will the bandwagon sunshiners and casual fans hop off the bandwagon? Will some fans turn on the team? Are some fans already turned off by the team? I'm not talking diehards or the eternally optimistic.... I'm talking fans that are with the team win or tie. Or fans that don't believe the team can lose and think we won't miss a beat.

                    I need my Coach Norman Dale quote:
                    "I'd hope you support us for who we are... Not who we are not"

                    Soooo.... uhhhhhh what was the question?

                    -Bball


                    [edit=68=1101197241][/edit]
                    Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                    ------

                    "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                    -John Wooden

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: The official

                      The one thing where I think that Stern made a mistake on was stating that the Refs. were in the correct position.

                      They were not in the position that I've ever seen during a player dispute. I've never once seen two refs. stand on either corner with their hands on their hips.

                      Once Nunez put Ron on the bench & both teams went to the middle Nunez literally slid to the side thus makeing all three refs. triangulated around the teams. Great view no doubt. But totally useless in defusing the situation. If this is the correct stance for the refs. A. I've never seen it B. it's totally wrong.

                      Uncle Buck stated in another thread & I'll reiterate it here. If Joey Crawford was the Ref. this would never have happened.


                      Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: The official

                        see below, added quote
                        [edit=367=1101199625][/edit]

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: The official

                          Originally posted by Peck
                          the Refs. ... were not in the position that I've ever seen during a player dispute. I've never once seen two refs. stand on either corner with their hands on their hips.

                          Once Nunez put Ron on the bench & both teams went to the middle Nunez literally slid to the side thus makeing all three refs. triangulated around the teams. Great view no doubt. But totally useless in defusing the situation. If this is the correct stance for the refs. A. I've never seen it B. it's totally wrong.
                          That is where this whole unbelievable surrealistic nightmare began. The way things were allowed to linger, and linger, and linger. It was almost as if it were by design.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: The official

                            Any reason why the following is not relevant:

                            Nine years ago Vernon Maxwell got 10 games and a $20,000 fine from David Stern for going into the seats and hitting a fan who was taunting him.

                            Charles Barkley got one game for spitting on a child (his aim was bad as his target was a nearby adult verbal abuser.)


                            I'm not buying that the severity of the penalties was justified.

                            The fact is Artest was provoked by external sources to a much greater degree than Maxwell or Barkley. Yet Ron loses almost a full year's salary and gets over seven times the amount of suspended games than Maxwell, and 70 times the penalty that was handed down to Barkley.

                            I am appaled that Pacers fans, above all, fall into the "Ron got what he deserved" category because precedent was certainly not used in passing down the sentence, if you look at the Maxwell and Barkley cases.

                            Then why have the penalties handed out by Stern for essentially the same crime taken a quantum leap?

                            I'll need to think more about that, but I think much has to do with the fact that Artest is an easy public relations target upon which Stern can pass blame for this incident. He's a modern day version of Latrell Sprewell.

                            Let's face it, Ron's image is not politically correct in middle America. Come to think of it, the NBA's image is not the greatest with middle America, either.

                            To me the real culprits last Friday were the hypocrisy and greed of the NBA and Detroit management. That incident would not have happened the way it did, if blatant alcohol abuse had not occured, and if the NBA marketing boys hadn't concocted the screwy idea that fans are a part of the game on the floor.

                            Also, the officials were absolutely ineffective in establishing control and restoring order.

                            I have read that the Pistons kept alcohol sales open after the third quarter and I find this fact most discomforting.

                            I also believe that the NBA has created a fantasy for fans attending game: {Okay, sixth man get on your feet and go crazy - you can will this team to victory and dull the senses of the opponents with your deafening noise. Ready sixth man. LET'S GET CRAZY). No wonder hundreds of lunatics, drunk and otherwise, became personally involved when Ben Wallace flipped out and tried to tear Artest apart.

                            Pro basketball fans at the game are treated pretty much the same way by NBA marketing folks as
                            fans at a "professional" wrestling event.

                            That last point is not well said, but maybe somebody will complete my thoughts in this area.

                            At any rate, from the heart of my bottom I revile the decision handed down by Chief Justice Stern.

                            The decision is unfair to Ron Artest, the Pacers organization, and, to those of us who give our heart and soul to this team.

                            I want a reasonable penalty for Ron and his "I got your back" buddies. Then I want to see a Pacers team on the floor that resembles the team the wife and I shelled out several thousand hard earned dollars to see.










                            [edit=105=1101201130][/edit]
                            [edit=105=1101202673][/edit]

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: The official

                              Peck, I have to disagree with your assessment of the media universally praising Stern.

                              I listened to ESPN radio most of yesterday and I thought the consensus was Stern reacted appropriately to the Pacers, but made a completely one sided decision. I was hearing a lot, a lot of criticism toward him for not holding the Piston fans accountable and setting the stage for further beer throwing on players a fan wants to eliminate.

                              Am I off base here?

                              "If you ever crawl inside an old hollow log and go to sleep, and while you're in there some guys come and seal up both ends and then put it on a truck and take it to another city, boy, I don't know what to tell you." - Jack Handy

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X