I'll probably regret saying that but let's gooooooo
xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media
So even a day later there are people that still think he should have been suspended?
You people are total hypocrites - NONE of you would say the same thing if it was Booker or Durant had done the same thing.
We just want it to be fair. We had key players kicked out of a playoff series. We were told rules are rules. Then later on, some guys came off the bench in a game, and Stern said there was no intent, so no suspensions. Suns in the past have seemed to have the rules enforced on us in the harshest way possible, when other teams are given some leeway.So even a day later there are people that still think he should have been suspended?
You people are total hypocrites - NONE of you would say the same thing if it was Booker or Durant that had done the same thing.
I don’t look at it as being hypocritical if it was DA or Book they probably get suspended for a game that’s the truth! Shoot a player just got suspended for contacting a ref for a game. But the Joker gets special treatment so no big shock. Personally he knew who it was and exactly what he was doing. Same story when he got mad and whacked Payne across the face and got all up in Books face! He’s a punk!So even a day later there are people that still think he should have been suspended?
You people are total hypocrites - NONE of you would say the same thing if it was Booker or Durant that had done the same thing.
Good grief. Ishbia did not touch him first. In fact, Ishbia only touched him because Jokic was pulling on the ball and pulling Ishbia as a result.I thought it would be a fine. Reading on other sites fans saying our owner should be fined for touching Jokic first, Ishbia shouldn't be allowed to attend other playoff games, etc.
I look at it differently. Ishbia didn't shove Jokic or intend him any harm. So if I come up and touch a person, they are allowed to elbow me violently in the chest? The two acts are not similar. Just because someone touches you doesn't mean you then have a free shot at injuring them.
I don't agree with it either. I find it funny how two different sides can look at the same exact thing, and describe it in polar opposite terms.Good grief. Ishbia did not touch him first. In fact, Ishbia only touched him because Jokic was pulling on the ball and pulling Ishbia as a result.
Anyway. This is exactly what I thought would and should happen.
Amare and Diaw should not have been suspended. It would seem fair if Jokic was. However, that was a long time ago and two wrongs don't make a right. I think this is exactly the right response. If they want to fine Ishbia for holding onto the ball, fine.So even a day later there are people that still think he should have been suspended?
You people are total hypocrites - NONE of you would say the same thing if it was Booker or Durant that had done the same thing.
IDK, I was always told, you give the ball to the referees.Amare and Diaw should not have been suspended. It would seem fair if Jokic was. However, that was a long time ago and two wrongs don't make a right. I think this is exactly the right response. If they want to fine Ishbia for holding onto the ball, fine.
If this was Booker or KD, guaranteed they would have been suspended a game.I think it's more some wanted the Suns to benefit from rules being followed by to the letter rather than being screwed because of the same.
I have zero doubt Stern would have suspended Jokic but never thought Silver would. I can see both sides but I'm fine with this decision, provided this is now the precedent.
They could have just left him alone. What's a $25,000 fine to a $50 million a year player? But yeah I would rather beat Nuggets at full strength so no excuses. Go Suns!!Meh rather have suns beat den full strength nooo excuses
Hugeeee gm tom gooooi suns
Not long enough in some of our minds.A fine was what was warranted. Much ado about nothing IMO. The Amare/Diaw thing was how long ago? No correlation at all.