Anyone have a screen capture of Duncan on the floor?

[Muggum]

Does anyone have a still shot (or video link) to Duncan coming on the floor in support of Elson vs. Jones? If so, trot it out...

M

 

[TheKid_1]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y39nRO5keRM

 

[MigratingOsprey]

watch play resume immediately - watch jones go up the right side of the court - elson came up the left side - neither of them got close to each other or a player from the other team - no fouls called - you can show all the video or screen shots you want - since there was no altercation the rule doesn't apply

 

[jbeecham]

watch play resume immediately - watch jones go up the right side of the court - elson came up the left side - neither of them got close to each other or a player from the other team - no fouls called - you can show all the video or screen shots you want - since there was no altercation the rule doesn't apply

Apparently it's an altercation as soon as Jones & Elson have contact and hit the floor. That's the ruling with the Horry - Nash scenario because Amare was on the floor when Nash got body-checked and before Bell went at Horry.

 

[MigratingOsprey]

and amare was still on the floor while bell & horry were mixing it up

he was still on the floor when nash went after horry

he was still on the floor as all the players converged on the scene

 

[jbeecham]

No, Amare moved to the sideline off the court and then was moved back to the bench.

 

[AZ Sports Native]

Apparently, the league can use "discretion" with this rule when applying it to golden boy Timmy D... but "discretion" is not used when using the rule to apply to the Suns. What a farce.

 

[Sunshooter]

You must be registered for see images

http://img526.imageshack.us/img526/8351/vlcsnap44512ou8.jpg

 

[PhxGametime]

On that picture there, he was outside the 3PT line, watching gamefilm he got even closer than that (at least 3-4 ft), that Pic was when he was returning back... Stern is a joke and anybody watching the series knows how many calls the Spurs get


I hope the fans cheer 'STERN SUCKS'... and whatever they are prepared to call Bowen, that cheap shot artist...


I still think the Suns will win, and I'm hoping they do. Also, I stopped watching every game outside the Suns because the joke the League is becomming with the refs, pretty sad!

 

[Quicksand]

You must be registered for see images

I am so pissed.

 

[BillsCarnage]

Honestly people, you're grasping at air on this one. There was no "altercation". Had Jones and Elson started shoving and others got involved maybe, but that was just incidental contact.

 

[jbeecham]

The Suns countered by saying that Duncan and Bruce Bowen were guilty of a similar leaving-the-bench offense in Game 4's first half when San Antonio's Francisco Elson fell on the Suns' James Jones after a dunk. That play was also reviewed, but Jackson -- while conceding that Duncan "should not have been on the playing court" -- said that the league determined there was "no cause for the suspension rule" to be applied because the Elson-Jones tangle was not deemed to be an altercation.

This sets a horrible precedent. By allowing Duncan and Bowen to get away with this, it means that players from the bench can walk out onto the court and protest non-calls whenever they want as long as there is no altercation. Duncan and Bowen weren't even assessed technical fouls after the game so the precedent has been set that players can do this whenever they want without being susceptible to any punishment.

Also, anyone have a screenshot of the Spurs players still being on the floor once the cameras finally panned down to the Spurs bench at the end of the game? I know I saw at least 1 player's feet on the court......looked like Oberto.

 

[mr_sunshine]

This sets a horrible precedent. By allowing Duncan and Bowen to get away with this, it means that players from the bench can walk out onto the court and protest non-calls whenever they want as long as there is no altercation. Duncan and Bowen weren't even assessed technical fouls after the game so the precedent has been set that players can do this whenever they want without being susceptible to any punishment.

Also, anyone have a screenshot of the Spurs players still being on the floor once the cameras finally panned down to the Spurs bench at the end of the game? I know I saw at least 1 player's feet on the court......looked like Oberto.

A terrible precedent indeed. And I think Oberto was technically "on the court too". I thought it was VERY odd how there were was practically no coverage of the Spurs bench throughout the whole incident.

 

[jbeecham]

Just another point on this that I read:

randdub13 (5/15/2007 at 11:12 PM)

The sticking point between Amare and Boris being suspended and not Duncan and Bowen per Stern is geared around whether there was an "altercation" in Duncan's case. Here is some logic that no one has mentioned. Duncan (enters the court after strong physical contact with Elson) in a fashion that Bowen clearly believes needs to be addressed since he steps on the court and pulls Duncan back. Bottom line Duncan enters the court on a hard physical contact and not because of an "altercation" per the NBA. Let's assume this true.... In the Horry case, Amare and Boris also enter the court because of hard physical contact not because of an altercation. If you look at the video, they immediately enter the court after hard physical contact (just as Duncan did) and before the "altercation" between Horry and Bell begins. If they are already on the court, then they were on the court for the exact same reason as Duncan... very physical contact. Stern's argument is based on the assumption that Amare and Boris come on the court because of an "altercation" when in fact it was because of hard physical contact. They actually retreat as the "altercation" begins. Question is what was considered the altercation? Hard physical contact or the Horry/Bell pushing? Either answer creates an inconsistency in Stern's ruling. If an altercation is hard physical contact then Duncan should be suspended too. If it is the Horry/Bell pushing, then Amare and Boris did not enter the court for that reason. They were already on the court! Conclusion: Amare and Boris enter the court for the same reason as Duncan

 

[jenna2891]

Honestly people, you're grasping at air on this one. There was no "altercation". Had Jones and Elson started shoving and others got involved maybe, but that was just incidental contact.

bingo, that's the point. not a single suns' fan here would dream of bringing that duncan/elson/jones play as something the league should review all on its own (90% of us here probably didn't even remember duncan being on the floor at all). but stern and jackson (aka the confederacy of dunces) have thrown the door wide open to every and all inane suggestion.

according to the league's definition, an altercation = physical contact on a play + one of the people involved in said play is angry about something. well, based on that definition, suddenly this is no longer us "grasping at air".

1. elson and jones get tangled up
2. elson was angry at jones

1+2 = altercation, according to this new, league definition.

if you even want to be less extreme about the whole thing, look at the video. elson and jones get tangled, jones heads towards the other end of the court, elson rushes towards jones thinking he deserves a fight and a ref has to hold him back. clearly (according to the league), elson was in "an altercation" during that play. again, according to the league, one player being ready to fight constitutes every player being ready to fight. where was tim duncan during elson's rush at jones? already at the freaking 3 point line. it wasn't until elson ran at jones that bowen pulled him off the court, seemingly because he didn't want duncan to be in trouble. that being the case, it doesn't matter why duncan was on the floor, he was there when elson got mad, so he should be penalized.

now, don't get me wrong (or any of us, for that matter). a duncan/bowen suspension is not the goal here. the point is to highlight the idiocy that prevails as "letter of the law" justice in the league. in a perfect world, horry would get a game suspension and the idea that anything else would be discussed would be laughable.

 

[__SA__]

I am so pissed.

to be honest i dont see any altercations going on....

 

[greensborohill]

Are the Wildcats really 0-27 in the Rose Bowl or did they lose a recent game 27 to nothing?

 

[dreamcastrocks]

to be honest i dont see any altercations going on....

Nash flopped too, right?

 

[PHX 32]

Greensborohill ?!?! ......... Hahahahahaahhahahahaha!!

 

[greensborohill]

Greensborohill ?!?! ......... Hahahahahaahhahahahaha!!

Hey, how are you!

 

[Russ Smith]

Jackson said on Mike and Mike this morning that Diaw and Stoudemire both made a "left turn" towards an on court altercation before stopping. Duncan was walking on the court but because there was no altercation, the rule doesn't apply.

So as others said that's the official reason. I think the outcome is clearly unfair, but given the rule as it is written, I do understand why the difference between Amare and Diaw, and Duncan. I don't agree with it, but I understand it.

 

[FarAwayFanatic]

So if JJ goes after Elson and causes an altercation, Duncan gets suspended, right? So the NBA rewards teams that start altercations. Brilliant.

 

[PHX 32]

So if JJ goes after Elson and causes an altercation, Duncan gets suspended, right? So the NBA rewards teams that start altercations. Brilliant.

Precisely.

 

[Russ Smith]

So if JJ goes after Elson and causes an altercation, Duncan gets suspended, right? So the NBA rewards teams that start altercations. Brilliant.

Unfortunately the way the rule is written that's correct.

He also said Bowen wasn't suspended for his cheapshots because they can't determine intent. he said there was contact with Nash thus the foul, there was no contact with Amare thus no foul.

Which is sort of like saying until he actually hurts someone with those cheapshots we can't do anything which is completely bass ackwards.

 

[Chaplin]

Unfortunately the way the rule is written that's correct.

He also said Bowen wasn't suspended for his cheapshots because they can't determine intent. he said there was contact with Nash thus the foul, there was no contact with Amare thus no foul.

Which is sort of like saying until he actually hurts someone with those cheapshots we can't do anything which is completely bass ackwards.

What about stepping onto the court while play is going on? Wouldn't that at the minimum be a technical on the Spurs bench?