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

I don't get why people boo at the games for things off the court

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

  • #31
    Re: I don't get why people boo at the games for things off the court

    Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
    Yeah, I'm not a guy that boo's either. At worst I will yell about something specific, like "get back on defense next time" or something, and even that is rare.

    The idea that you must boo to make your point is ridiculous. How about just keeping your yapper shut? You don't think silence makes its point? No one is asking you to cheer for a player you don't like, but just take the "if you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all" attitude. It's tried and true IMO.


    The fans that really get me are the ones that sit till the end of a Pacers blowout loss apparently just to boo and heckle the Pacers some more. I sit and watch every minute even if it's mostly crap, but I understand why a fan would say "enough" and walk out. But if you hate enough to whine and moan, why not just end the pain and leave?

    A few nitwits boo'd Tinsley at FAN JAM of all places, a free "we give you a hot dog and some chips" family friendly scrimmage. That's really going out of your way to be a jerk, ironically rather the same personality they are complaining about some Pacers having.
    One question. When you mess up at work, does your boss keep his/her trapper shut?

    I know mine doesn't.
    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: I don't get why people boo at the games for things off the court

      Originally posted by Black Sox View Post
      It was wrong. I even said something to a person booing next to me. Those that were booing were obviously those who live in glass houses or Pleasentville.
      Or haven't been arrest twice in four years.

      I don't understand how people can actually SUPPORT stupid bahavior. I guess we need to start patting felons on the back, telling them they need to do better next time, instead of punishing them.
      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: I don't get why people boo at the games for things off the court

        Originally posted by Peck View Post
        Sadly, or after looking at the box score maybe mercifully, I was not able to attend the game because I was in Ohio so I was not there when Jax was introduced.

        I don't boo very often & just as often as not I don't cheer either, just ask Hicks he'll tell you I pretty much sit there like a bump on a log unless something sparks me.

        However I just want to be the first person to disagree with the premise of not booing off-court behavior. IMO, it does not make them the worst kind of fans.

        No, the worst kind are the ones who only pay attention when the team is in a deep playoff run & stay home & not watch the rest of the time.

        Let me ask you a question. How is it that management knows the fans don't like Jax? I can assure you that it is not because they have mental telepathy.

        It's because the fans boo'd Jackson long & hard last season. Often times, IMO, unfairly but that is not my decision to make. But boo him they did.

        Now let's take your premise for a min. & say that every fan should just cheer with unabashed enthusiasm whenever any person wearing blue & gold walks on the floor.

        Let's just use Jax as an example.

        Let's say the fieldhouse expolded with applause for Jax, even though let's say roughly 75% of those in attendance no longer wanted him on the team.

        How then would management know that the fans were unhappy with Jackson? If you only cheer no matter what then your voice is not heard.

        Is it fair to the other players? Probably not, but I think they are smart enough to know that the fans are directing this at one player & one player alone.

        This guy has taken what should have been a fresh new start & dipped it in the same old stink of previous conflicts. So are fans wrong to be upset? I say hell no.

        IMO, the fans would only have themselves to blame if they didn't let tptb know how they felt. I'm sure for everyone involved (minus Jackson) would prefer the fans to do this as opposed to the other way they could protest. They could just stay home.

        As far as screwing with the team & messing with their heads I'd say that went out the window with the magic of 3 a.m.

        I am differant than most people but I just feel that people who go to games with the mindset of not telling the truth about how they feel only hurts the team.

        IMO, we should never boo when a team is just beating us. We should never boo when a guy or the team is busting their @ss trying but just not able to get it done.

        But lack of effort, lack of desire & yes stupidity off court justifies a good old fashioned boo.

        Like I said often times last season I thought the fans were wrong to boo him, but it's their choice.
        Great post.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: I don't get why people boo at the games for things off the court

          I guess my point was misunderstood. What I said had to do with the thread title "People booing for things OFF THE COURT". I strongly believe Jack would have been booed even if he hadn't been involved in the strip club incident. People here just don't like him.

          I just don't understand how Saras, whom has done absolutely nothing since he's been here and has only earned time due to others' injuries, and has complained to the media (in his country) about his role with the Pacers, can draw a ridiculous amount of cheers. But Jackson, whom has been unfortunately involved in two incidents since he's been here, but otherwise comes to play every single game unless he can't walk, plays hard, and has had some big games to help his team win, get's booed.

          Combine those with the use of the word 'thug' which I keep hearing (sounds sort of like a racial slur to me), that's why I believe race has something to do with SOME OF the reactions Jack is getting. As much as I dislike some of the things Kravitz writes, he was right on point when he said "If Saras and Jeff Forster were the ones involved in this incident, the reaction would have been different". I believe if Saras did the shooting and got hit by a car, then said it was self defense, nobody would even be talking about it for more than a day or two.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: I don't get why people boo at the games for things off the court

            Originally posted by Peck View Post
            Sadly, or after looking at the box score maybe mercifully, I was not able to attend the game because I was in Ohio so I was not there when Jax was introduced.

            I don't boo very often & just as often as not I don't cheer either, just ask Hicks he'll tell you I pretty much sit there like a bump on a log unless something sparks me.

            However I just want to be the first person to disagree with the premise of not booing off-court behavior. IMO, it does not make them the worst kind of fans.

            No, the worst kind are the ones who only pay attention when the team is in a deep playoff run & stay home & not watch the rest of the time.

            Let me ask you a question. How is it that management knows the fans don't like Jax? I can assure you that it is not because they have mental telepathy.

            It's because the fans boo'd Jackson long & hard last season. Often times, IMO, unfairly but that is not my decision to make. But boo him they did.

            Now let's take your premise for a min. & say that every fan should just cheer with unabashed enthusiasm whenever any person wearing blue & gold walks on the floor.

            Let's just use Jax as an example.

            Let's say the fieldhouse expolded with applause for Jax, even though let's say roughly 75% of those in attendance no longer wanted him on the team.

            How then would management know that the fans were unhappy with Jackson? If you only cheer no matter what then your voice is not heard.

            Is it fair to the other players? Probably not, but I think they are smart enough to know that the fans are directing this at one player & one player alone.

            This guy has taken what should have been a fresh new start & dipped it in the same old stink of previous conflicts. So are fans wrong to be upset? I say hell no.

            IMO, the fans would only have themselves to blame if they didn't let tptb know how they felt. I'm sure for everyone involved (minus Jackson) would prefer the fans to do this as opposed to the other way they could protest. They could just stay home.

            As far as screwing with the team & messing with their heads I'd say that went out the window with the magic of 3 a.m.

            I am differant than most people but I just feel that people who go to games with the mindset of not telling the truth about how they feel only hurts the team.

            IMO, we should never boo when a team is just beating us. We should never boo when a guy or the team is busting their @ss trying but just not able to get it done.

            But lack of effort, lack of desire & yes stupidity off court justifies a good old fashioned boo.

            Like I said often times last season I thought the fans were wrong to boo him, but it's their choice.

            Well said

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: I don't get why people boo at the games for things off the court

              Originally posted by Ev_eezy View Post
              I guess my point was misunderstood. What I said had to do with the thread title "People booing for things OFF THE COURT". I strongly believe Jack would have been booed even if he hadn't been involved in the strip club incident. People here just don't like him.

              I just don't understand how Saras, whom has done absolutely nothing since he's been here and has only earned time due to others' injuries, and has complained to the media (in his country) about his role with the Pacers, can draw a ridiculous amount of cheers. But Jackson, whom has been unfortunately involved in two incidents since he's been here, but otherwise comes to play every single game unless he can't walk, plays hard, and has had some big games to help his team win, gets booed.

              Combine those with the use of the word 'thug' which I keep hearing (sounds sort of like a racial slur to me), that's why I believe race has something to do with SOME OF the reactions Jack is getting. As much as I dislike some of the things Kravitz writes, he was right on point when he said "If Saras and Jeff Forster were the ones involved in this incident, the reaction would have been different". I believe if Saras did the shooting and got hit by a car, then said it was self defense, nobody would even be talking about it for more than a day or two.
              I would feel the same way. My problem, which I stated in the other thread was that it was one bad decision after another that escalated the incident, which Jackson actually had the power to defuse if he had just walked away, or better yet, stayed out of the setting in the beginning.

              I don't care which player would have done it, I would held the same feelings. That it happened to Jackson makes the poor decision making ever worse because of past mistakes. Is that fair? I think so. If you go to your job and mess up on the scale that Jackson did during Detroit and then mess up again like he did in the latest incident, then you would probably be fired.

              As I tell students all the time, if you keep making dumb choices, you will get a bad reputation, even though you may not really be a bad person at heart. That is what has happened to Jackson.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: I don't get why people boo at the games for things off the court

                Originally posted by Ev_eezy View Post
                I guess my point was misunderstood. What I said had to do with the thread title "People booing for things OFF THE COURT". I strongly believe Jack would have been booed even if he hadn't been involved in the strip club incident. People here just don't like him.

                I just don't understand how Saras, whom has done absolutely nothing since he's been here and has only earned time due to others' injuries, and has complained to the media (in his country) about his role with the Pacers, can draw a ridiculous amount of cheers. But Jackson, whom has been unfortunately involved in two incidents since he's been here, but otherwise comes to play every single game unless he can't walk, plays hard, and has had some big games to help his team win, get's booed.

                Combine those with the use of the word 'thug' which I keep hearing (sounds sort of like a racial slur to me), that's why I believe race has something to do with SOME OF the reactions Jack is getting. As much as I dislike some of the things Kravitz writes, he was right on point when he said "If Saras and Jeff Forster were the ones involved in this incident, the reaction would have been different". I believe if Saras did the shooting and got hit by a car, then said it was self defense, nobody would even be talking about it for more than a day or two.

                While I understand your point & I certainly won't deny that to some race is an issue here, I guess I just disagree about the main players.

                The way you've written it Jackson has only been involved in two incidents first the brawl & now this.

                The truth is nobody boo'ed Jackson for his part in the brawl, well let me restate that Jackson did not start getting boo'ed regularly until last season. This was after the brawl, but the fans don't boo Jermaine. Why is that?

                Simple, while both have the nasty horrid habit of argueing with referee's after every play only Jackson curses the coach when he is taken out of a game.

                IMO, that is what sets the two apart. If J.O. ******ed a fit after being taken out of a game & stood there & argued with the coach like Jackson does I think the fans would turn on him as well.

                As to Saras. I'm not sure how many games you watched with him last season but I think as the year went on the cheers started getting less & less.

                Was it because he was white that people cheered him? Maybe, I can't tell you for sure. But some of it could be that Larry Legend annointed him as the second coming & he had a long pedigree of basketball wins coming in from Europe.

                Now will the fans boo him? Probably not but it has nothing to do with race IMO.

                Indiana fans rarely boo a player for playing badly. Oh you will get cat calls & an occasional "Travis you suck" yelled from the stands but for the most part they won't boo bad play.

                Now I will say this, if the majority of fans read what Saras said in the foreign press that might change things but as is only those few of us who read the net daily know this.

                But I feel confident in saying that if he griped at every call or non call to a ref. & then threw a fit every time he was taken out of a game I think the fans would boo him as well no matter what color he was.

                But like I said, I understand where you are coming from. I just think in this case race is not the dominate issue.


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

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: I don't get why people boo at the games for things off the court

                  I'll weigh in here...

                  Sjax has much more baggage than the two incidents and that has soured the ticket buying fanbase greatly. As Peck said, arguing with the coach is one of them. What would appear to be selfish play is another. Then factor in holding the ball too long and THEN making a turnover or taking a bad shot. That is another. And this stuff happens alot.That's where there's a problem that has festered around Sjax with the fanbase. Then the two big incidents just bookend all of that and indicate a player who just isn't 'getting it'.

                  As for Saras.... Again Peck pointed it out- Bird was high on him. Also, for the first time in recent memory the Pacers set out to get a FA player and did it. Those two things had to create much optimism.

                  As for the things that Saras has said, or been alleged to say in the press (foreign or otherwise), much of it doesn't filter it's way to the ticket buying public as a whole as it does to the forum regulars. Also, IMHO much of what Saras critisized about the Pacers were arguably correct and easy to agree with. He's said the same things many fans have said.

                  Most of the Sarunas Mania had been tempered considerably by the last 1/3rd of the season and now.

                  But there's a difference to how Sjax and Sarunas have reached this point in their NBA careers and to overlook that and go looking for other reasons is over-reaching.

                  -Bball
                  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


                  • #39
                    Re: I don't get why people boo at the games for things off the court

                    Two things.

                    First, the players who put on a uniform are representing the team and the community. It is not their privilege to say what the franchise stands for. They have an obligation to live up to the expectations of the franchise and the community. To those who would say, "Naw, It's just basketball," I say your position is absurd. The game is just throwing a ball through a hoop. What sane person could really care about how many times a ball goes through a hoop? You might just as well care about whether all the leaves on an oak tree fall "face up" in the yard or keeping the valve stems on all four wheels of your car rising and falling in unison. No, when you detach basketball from everything else it becomes stupid. It is only because the teams and the players represent something honorable, or at least because they represent us, that we cheer for them. What happens off the court is a part of how they represent, and it matters deeply.

                    The second point I'd like to make is that disapproval of brawling, pistol-packing, dope smoking, and whoring at 3am has nothing to do with race. The culture of crime and violence is not black culture. Most black folks want to live, and they want their neighbors and their children to live. I think there is some legitimacy to the part of this thread that asks why some people are more lenient with Jasikevicius than Jackson, based on the unsatisfactory play of each. But that argument cannot be extended to imply that criminal behavior off the court is seen differently through a prism of race. If Jackson committed a felony outside Club Rio, it was a crime against the black community. If he committed battery, it was against another black man.
                    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)

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: I don't get why people boo at the games for things off the court

                      Originally posted by Destined4Greatness View Post
                      It doesn't help the team one damn bit, the management knows people don't like Jack. But going and Booing Jack a member of this team for nothing he is doing on the court at that moment(Whether or not that helps a player is debatable) is just moronic.

                      Normally I would agree with (not) booing for off-the-court issues, but here's the difference: Stephen, and management for that matter, made it an issue when they publicly stated they would make better decisions on and off the court. Stephen went out of his way to make a promise to the fans, which he broke before the first preseason game.

                      Aside from that, there are other issues. The magnitude of his off-the-court issues is a distraction that becomes an on-the-court issue. Jermaine can say it isn't a distraction but it was two years ago and last year and I don't see that changing (because he cares too much, as do other players). Also, if Stephen is convicted and faces jail time, it becomes an issue on the court because it forces a team out of their routine (assuming Stephen is going to be a part of the regular rotation). Factor those things in with Stephen's past behaviors and his play and his public perception isn't good.

                      In my opinion, it's better to let players know that you disapprove of their actions than it is to reinforce them with unconditional cheers. Cheering can send mixed messages by letting them know it's okay to go out and act like a fool, or play without effort, because you're going to cheer no matter what. There's less incentive for progress, and that's not something I want to encourage. I'm not saying anyone should go to a game to purposely boo, or that you should boo every time a player makes a mistake, but I don't think it's wrong to let your team know if certain actions aren't "okay".

                      As far as off-the-court issues, I'd rather they stay that way. But if it affects the game, then it affects the game.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: I don't get why people boo at the games for things off the court

                        What happen to our good imagine? Indiana has always been notrious for clean sports team, work ethic and blue collar guys. What has the Pacers turned into? A run n gun bunch of criminals that don't give two ****s about the team. As I think about it now, I always thought reggie was forced into retirement, by the media. Now I have the conclusion, he was coming to his last years and he knew what type of players were around him. He was to old to be brawling it out in Auburn Hills, maybe not physically but mentally, he's a grown *** man not some little thug. This isn't reggie's folk and he didn't want to leave for another team so he retired.

                        Never once have I heard an Indiana crowd boo our team or player. This truly makes me sad, I don't think these people are booing the team they are booing the players (hope you understand what I mean) no true Indiana fan wants these pistol toting thugs on our squad. Wrap em' up and ship em' out Larry and Donnie I don't care if it takes up 5 years to rebuild, ship these punks out before you really lose your fan base and DESTROY the pacers Image.

                        To the person who wrote these people are "jealous" because of finacial success. You better look around there are many many wealthy people that attend games. The guys who have the $1000 black seats can't be that bad off and they are probably booing louder then any one up in nose bleeds. No one is jealous of finacial success, they just don't like the players. I say keep on booing until they ship them out, I don't care about the players (except for a small few) I care about the team. This is a Business the players made it into a "business" so do what any Owner of a billionare dollare company would do to there employee, that was toting a pistol at a strip club in the early morning.

                        This is my 2 cents.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: I don't get why people boo at the games for things off the court

                          Originally posted by imawhat View Post
                          Normally I would agree with (not) booing for off-the-court issues, but here's the difference: Stephen, and management for that matter, made it an issue when they publicly stated they would make better decisions on and off the court. Stephen went out of his way to make a promise to the fans, which he broke before the first preseason game.

                          Aside from that, there are other issues. The magnitude of his off-the-court issues is a distraction that becomes an on-the-court issue. Jermaine can say it isn't a distraction but it was two years ago and last year and I don't see that changing (because he cares too much, as do other players). Also, if Stephen is convicted and faces jail time, it becomes an issue on the court because it forces a team out of their routine (assuming Stephen is going to be a part of the regular rotation). Factor those things in with Stephen's past behaviors and his play and his public perception isn't good.

                          In my opinion, it's better to let players know that you disapprove of their actions than it is to reinforce them with unconditional cheers. Cheering can send mixed messages by letting them know it's okay to go out and act like a fool, or play without effort, because you're going to cheer no matter what. There's less incentive for progress, and that's not something I want to encourage. I'm not saying anyone should go to a game to purposely boo, or that you should boo every time a player makes a mistake, but I don't think it's wrong to let your team know if certain actions aren't "okay".

                          As far as off-the-court issues, I'd rather they stay that way. But if it affects the game, then it affects the game.
                          Great post...but I would add that off-court issues are likely to affect on-court performance. Maybe not all the time, but certainly in this case since it negatively impacted preseason. ...and Jack may be suspended, injured or in jail over these types of activities. SO I do believe that impacts the team's performance.

                          Also, I don't like the idea of putting a muzzle on the crowd...or brushing dirt under the table...or the idea that boo'ing should never be done for off-court issues. TPTB need to know what the paying fans think about the team they have constructed.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: I don't get why people boo at the games for things off the court

                            Originally posted by Ev_eezy View Post
                            They boo Jack but cheer the hell out of Saras, even when Jack is obviously trying his *** off out there. Nope, not a race issue at all.
                            Heck no its not a race issue! Are you crazy! First of all Saras does not go out and play it up on the streets at 3:00 am during training camp! Second of all Saras does not go around shooting people and get misdemeanor charges against him. Third, Saras does not downgrade the proffesionalism of the franchise. And fourth Saras doesnt go out there and cry all game to the refs and whine when he doesnt hit shots which is near every game. Because of this no one like Jack! I HATE HIM . He is a disgrace to the team and organization.

                            For that I am one of the thousands that "boo" him everygame. He dug himself a hole and now he is paying for it. I dont get it? Why wouldnt you boo him for how selfish and self centered the man is. Jackson is a thug that needs to get out of Indiana.
                            sigpic

                            I LOVE YOU REGGIE!

                            GO PACERS!

                            miller31

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: I don't get why people boo at the games for things off the court

                              Originally posted by miller31 View Post
                              Heck no its not a race issue! Are you crazy! First of all Saras does not go out and play it up on the streets at 3:00 am during training camp! Second of all Saras does not go around shooting people and get misdemeanor charges against him. Third, Saras does not downgrade the proffesionalism of the franchise. And fourth Saras doesnt go out there and cry all game to the refs and whine when he doesnt hit shots which is near every game. Because of this no one like Jack! I HATE HIM . He is a disgrace to the team and organization.

                              For that I am one of the thousands that "boo" him everygame. He dug himself a hole and now he is paying for it. I dont get it? Why wouldnt you boo him for how selfish and self centered the man is. Jackson is a thug that needs to get out of Indiana.
                              LMAO. That's pretty harsh. Now tell us what you really think.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X