Nalod wrote:No suspension..........

No surprise!

CrushAlot wrote:It was enforced as a black and white rule with no grey area and kept the knicks from advancing another round in the playoffs. If there is a grey area with the new administration that looks at the circumstances and decides it isn't worth deciding a playoff series over something like this that is great. But it needs to be the same for everyone. If this is Zach Randolph or JR Smith or anyone on a team not showcased in the preseason they need to be given the same consideration Paul George was. The 97 b s is still something that I haven't gotten over. Not sure how some are quick to forget the outcome or the stupidity of the ruling at the time and suggest that expecting it to be enforced is hating on a rival. This is supposed to be a knick fan forum. If you just toss aside one of the greatest injustices done to your team and say it is sour grapes to want the rule enforced across the board as it was for the knicks one has to wonder if you are a fan or just trolling here in my opinion.

the language of the rule is clear. you stay within the immediate vicinity of the bench you are safe.

with the 2007 suspension you have two phoenix players going halfway down the sideline to come to the rescue of a teammate. they were stupid and overly emotional. it was unfortunate but the black and white was leaving the immediate vicinity.

with 1997-- that's 17 years ago now, knick players left the immediate vicinity of the bench even more egregiously than stoudemire and diaw, and were suspended. they were stupid and overly emotional. they left the immediate vicinity.

paul george simply stood up, made a step and a half from his seat, and was immediately corralled. there was no impression of stupidity and being overly emotional, regardless of the assistant coach's reaction. he remained in the immediate vicinity.

no matter how you slice it, in black and white, he did not leave the immediate vicinity.

tkf wrote:

dk7th wrote:

tkf wrote:

dk7th wrote:you guys are letting your irrational hatred of a perceived rival get in the way of what is clearly an unviable accusation.

exactly... and I like the use of the word "perceived", because we are not rivals with the pacers at this point.... not even close to being..

yes it's envy pure and simple. looks like vogel is making hard decisions for the good of that team and now the haters are scared ha ha

I don't get the hate, I think they are an interesting and talented bunch, a group that I hope can go on and beat miami.. as much as I would like to see this gritty and game bunch of guys on the hawks advance, they are just not going to beat miami....

I think if the pacers lose some fans think it will validate their wild thoughts that the pacers are really not better than us, that last years whoopin was just a fluke.. but in reality, they are that much better than us, and don't let this series struggle vs the hawks fool you, the hawks are really a good bit better than us too.. when the hawks were healthy, early, they were a legit #4 seed... the hawks are a good team.. they are a true example of a good team suffering some huge injuries...

I don't think in this scenario it is hate. I think this thread was started on a forum where tge fan base saw a deep run in the playoffs taken away by a strict, no exceptions enforcement of the rule. Expecting that to be the norm when it involves other teams/players is just fair in my opinion. If there is a grey area for preferred teams/players I think you have to expect a reaction from a team's fans if that team was used as the example for how strictly the rule would be enforced despite circumstances and impact.

Swishfm3 wrote:

dk7th wrote:

fishmike wrote:

dk7th wrote:

fishmike wrote:

dk7th wrote:

tkf wrote:

dk7th wrote:you guys are letting your irrational hatred of a perceived rival get in the way of what is clearly an unviable accusation.

exactly... and I like the use of the word "perceived", because we are not rivals with the pacers at this point.... not even close to being..

yes it's envy pure and simple. looks like vogel is making hard decisions for the good of that team and now the haters are scared ha ha

^^^ foreplay

how about working on backing up your assertion instead of being bitchy?

I dont give two farts in the wind over starting some dick measuring contest with a donkey like you on the internet so you go streaking down the quad yelling about how right you are. How about this.. your right DK. My bad. It was caught in the maelstrom of my own bloviating. My bad. I retrack. Now you can go back to wanking on your Paul George poster while the unedumacated commoners of UK talk about basketball.

okay cool. thanks

lol...you're such a loser.

I've never actually read the rule but I always took it as a player couldn't step unto the court. If so, P.George did step on and he needs to get suspended.

Its a dumb rule that does needs to change but until it gets done, it is what it is.

whether you think i am loser it doesn't change reality-- george did not leave the immediate vicinity of the bench and he has not been suspended. pacers get to close out a series against a very game hawks team who have been doing great without horford. things are looking up for the hawks while the knicks are going to have to go back to the old drawing board.

maybe the knicks will be relevant and not an embarrassment to genuine new yorkers such as myself someday. meantime it has been a very enjoyable varsity season.

dk7th wrote:

Swishfm3 wrote:

dk7th wrote:

fishmike wrote:

dk7th wrote:

fishmike wrote:

dk7th wrote:

tkf wrote:

dk7th wrote:you guys are letting your irrational hatred of a perceived rival get in the way of what is clearly an unviable accusation.

exactly... and I like the use of the word "perceived", because we are not rivals with the pacers at this point.... not even close to being..

yes it's envy pure and simple. looks like vogel is making hard decisions for the good of that team and now the haters are scared ha ha

^^^ foreplay

how about working on backing up your assertion instead of being bitchy?

I dont give two farts in the wind over starting some dick measuring contest with a donkey like you on the internet so you go streaking down the quad yelling about how right you are. How about this.. your right DK. My bad. It was caught in the maelstrom of my own bloviating. My bad. I retrack. Now you can go back to wanking on your Paul George poster while the unedumacated commoners of UK talk about basketball.

okay cool. thanks

lol...you're such a loser.

I've never actually read the rule but I always took it as a player couldn't step unto the court. If so, P.George did step on and he needs to get suspended.

Its a dumb rule that does needs to change but until it gets done, it is what it is.

whether you think i am loser it doesn't change reality-- george did not leave the immediate vicinity of the bench and he has not been suspended. pacers get to close out a series against a very game hawks team who have been doing great without horford. things are looking up for the hawks while the knicks are going to have to go back to the old drawing board.

maybe the knicks will be relevant and not an embarrassment to genuine new yorkers such as myself someday. meantime it has been a very enjoyable varsity season.

CrushAlot wrote:

dk7th wrote:

Swishfm3 wrote:

dk7th wrote:

fishmike wrote:

dk7th wrote:

fishmike wrote:

dk7th wrote:

tkf wrote:

dk7th wrote:you guys are letting your irrational hatred of a perceived rival get in the way of what is clearly an unviable accusation.

exactly... and I like the use of the word "perceived", because we are not rivals with the pacers at this point.... not even close to being..

yes it's envy pure and simple. looks like vogel is making hard decisions for the good of that team and now the haters are scared ha ha

^^^ foreplay

how about working on backing up your assertion instead of being bitchy?

I dont give two farts in the wind over starting some dick measuring contest with a donkey like you on the internet so you go streaking down the quad yelling about how right you are. How about this.. your right DK. My bad. It was caught in the maelstrom of my own bloviating. My bad. I retrack. Now you can go back to wanking on your Paul George poster while the unedumacated commoners of UK talk about basketball.

okay cool. thanks

lol...you're such a loser.

I've never actually read the rule but I always took it as a player couldn't step unto the court. If so, P.George did step on and he needs to get suspended.

Its a dumb rule that does needs to change but until it gets done, it is what it is.

whether you think i am loser it doesn't change reality-- george did not leave the immediate vicinity of the bench and he has not been suspended. pacers get to close out a series against a very game hawks team who have been doing great without horford. things are looking up for the hawks while the knicks are going to have to go back to the old drawing board.

maybe the knicks will be relevant and not an embarrassment to genuine new yorkers such as myself someday. meantime it has been a very enjoyable varsity season.

If the rule was interpreted as it was for the Knicks and suns he would be suspended. The rule sucks but either you change it or you remain consistent. You can't pick and choose which playoff series you are going to influence the outcome of.

exactly

and...this may be a dumb question but what and where exactly is the "immediate vicinity" and how far do you have to be from this vicinity (assuming its the chairs/bench) before you are considered OUT of the vicinity? one foot?..two? Watching the video, P.George clearly stepped on the playing court...what his intentions are, I don't know and don't care.

In Soccer a player would be cautioned for entering the field of play without the referees permission. not exactly a suspension but Soccer doesn't have the reputation of players fighting on the field and aren't strict like the NBA is with stuff like that.

tkf wrote:

dk7th wrote:

tkf wrote:

dk7th wrote:you guys are letting your irrational hatred of a perceived rival get in the way of what is clearly an unviable accusation.

exactly... and I like the use of the word "perceived", because we are not rivals with the pacers at this point.... not even close to being..

yes it's envy pure and simple. looks like vogel is making hard decisions for the good of that team and now the haters are scared ha ha

I don't get the hate, I think they are an interesting and talented bunch, a group that I hope can go on and beat miami.. as much as I would like to see this gritty and game bunch of guys on the hawks advance, they are just not going to beat miami....

I think if the pacers lose some fans think it will validate their wild thoughts that the pacers are really not better than us, that last years whoopin was just a fluke.. but in reality, they are that much better than us, and don't let this series struggle vs the hawks fool you, the hawks are really a good bit better than us too.. when the hawks were healthy, early, they were a legit #4 seed... the hawks are a good team.. they are a true example of a good team suffering some huge injuries...

Let me first say I'm not trying to "hate" on the Pacers or say what I'm about to say because I'm a bitter Knicks fan. I simply don't care about the Pacers just as I don't care about any team other than the Knicks. I've never been able to get emotionally invested in another team however that does not mean I don't like to watch good basketball or teams other than the Knicks. I'm just not emotionally invested in the outcomes.

Anyway, back to the point. It is very clear that the Pacers team has serious problems and it's not just that Atlanta is better than people give them credit for. Their offense is irreparably broken. For one, it's no secret that their "star" players do not like each other and that animosity is translating into their play and it's quite obvious. Since the All Star break of thereabouts their offense has been ATROCIOUS. During that stretch it was one of the worst in the NBA (if not the actual worst). Hibbert was openly complaining about "selfish" teammates to the media and Lance Stephenson has clearly regressed. Paul George while still playing all NBA level D has been horrendous shooting the ball since the all star break and George Hill looks worse than Felton lately.

The Pacers we are seeing now are very very obviously NOT the same Pacers team we saw in the beginning of the year and it's NOT at all clear that they can or will get back to that level (my money says they are done). Has any player in recent memory regressed as badly as Roy Hibbert? The guy hasn't scored in 2 games for christs sake.

I get it. I get why a lot of people liked the team. The Pacers seemed like a case study in smart team building, they have a group of young hard nosed 2 way players, a x and o young coach, and they looked poised to beat Miami or at least, make the champs life difficult. That team is gone. It's been replaced by a team that is barely competing with 8th seeded ATL, whose players don't like each other and don't high five or congratulate each other after baskets. I honesty don't think they have a chance to win the east this year. They're done. They obviously cannot flip a switch and go back to how they used to play.

Maybe they can sort it out in the off season but I guarantee there will be big changes as it's clear this group can no longer coexist as currently formed.

dk7th wrote:

Swishfm3 wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

dk7th wrote:

Swishfm3 wrote:

dk7th wrote:

fishmike wrote:

dk7th wrote:

fishmike wrote:

dk7th wrote:

tkf wrote:

dk7th wrote:you guys are letting your irrational hatred of a perceived rival get in the way of what is clearly an unviable accusation.

exactly... and I like the use of the word "perceived", because we are not rivals with the pacers at this point.... not even close to being..

yes it's envy pure and simple. looks like vogel is making hard decisions for the good of that team and now the haters are scared ha ha

^^^ foreplay

how about working on backing up your assertion instead of being bitchy?

I dont give two farts in the wind over starting some dick measuring contest with a donkey like you on the internet so you go streaking down the quad yelling about how right you are. How about this.. your right DK. My bad. It was caught in the maelstrom of my own bloviating. My bad. I retrack. Now you can go back to wanking on your Paul George poster while the unedumacated commoners of UK talk about basketball.

okay cool. thanks

lol...you're such a loser.

I've never actually read the rule but I always took it as a player couldn't step unto the court. If so, P.George did step on and he needs to get suspended.

Its a dumb rule that does needs to change but until it gets done, it is what it is.

whether you think i am loser it doesn't change reality-- george did not leave the immediate vicinity of the bench and he has not been suspended. pacers get to close out a series against a very game hawks team who have been doing great without horford. things are looking up for the hawks while the knicks are going to have to go back to the old drawing board.

maybe the knicks will be relevant and not an embarrassment to genuine new yorkers such as myself someday. meantime it has been a very enjoyable varsity season.

If the rule was interpreted as it was for the Knicks and suns he would be suspended. The rule sucks but either you change it or you remain consistent. You can't pick and choose which playoff series you are going to influence the outcome of.

exactly

and...this may be a dumb question but what and where exactly is the "immediate vicinity" and how far do you have to be from this vicinity (assuming its the chairs/bench) before you are considered OUT of the vicinity? one foot?..two? Watching the video, P.George clearly stepped on the playing court...what his intentions are, I don't know and don't care.

In Soccer a player would be cautioned for entering the field of play without the referees permission. not exactly a suspension but Soccer doesn't have the reputation of players fighting on the field and aren't strict like the NBA is with stuff like that.

sounds like you're rooting hard for the hawks. he did not leave the immediate vicinity of the bench. if he had then he would have been suspended. and like it or not, his body language did not indicate aggression.

It's always been a dumb rule IMO but I remember a couple years back a player was suspended because one foot went over the line during an altercation. I believe it was regular season. I'll try to find it. My point is immediate vicinity has typically been enforced as "crossing the out of bounds line" by Stern. It's a good sign George wasn't suspended IMO because that could mean they will leave it open to interpretation from now on instead of using a body part crossing the line as the trigger.

Swishfm3 wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

dk7th wrote:

Swishfm3 wrote:

dk7th wrote:

fishmike wrote:

dk7th wrote:

fishmike wrote:

dk7th wrote:

tkf wrote:

dk7th wrote:you guys are letting your irrational hatred of a perceived rival get in the way of what is clearly an unviable accusation.

exactly... and I like the use of the word "perceived", because we are not rivals with the pacers at this point.... not even close to being..

yes it's envy pure and simple. looks like vogel is making hard decisions for the good of that team and now the haters are scared ha ha

^^^ foreplay

how about working on backing up your assertion instead of being bitchy?

I dont give two farts in the wind over starting some dick measuring contest with a donkey like you on the internet so you go streaking down the quad yelling about how right you are. How about this.. your right DK. My bad. It was caught in the maelstrom of my own bloviating. My bad. I retrack. Now you can go back to wanking on your Paul George poster while the unedumacated commoners of UK talk about basketball.

okay cool. thanks

lol...you're such a loser.

I've never actually read the rule but I always took it as a player couldn't step unto the court. If so, P.George did step on and he needs to get suspended.

Its a dumb rule that does needs to change but until it gets done, it is what it is.

whether you think i am loser it doesn't change reality-- george did not leave the immediate vicinity of the bench and he has not been suspended. pacers get to close out a series against a very game hawks team who have been doing great without horford. things are looking up for the hawks while the knicks are going to have to go back to the old drawing board.

maybe the knicks will be relevant and not an embarrassment to genuine new yorkers such as myself someday. meantime it has been a very enjoyable varsity season.

If the rule was interpreted as it was for the Knicks and suns he would be suspended. The rule sucks but either you change it or you remain consistent. You can't pick and choose which playoff series you are going to influence the outcome of.

exactly

and...this may be a dumb question but what and where exactly is the "immediate vicinity" and how far do you have to be from this vicinity (assuming its the chairs/bench) before you are considered OUT of the vicinity? one foot?..two? Watching the video, P.George clearly stepped on the playing court...what his intentions are, I don't know and don't care.

In Soccer a player would be cautioned for entering the field of play without the referees permission. not exactly a suspension but Soccer doesn't have the reputation of players fighting on the field and aren't strict like the NBA is with stuff like that.

Swishfm3 wrote:

dk7th wrote:

Swishfm3 wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

dk7th wrote:

Swishfm3 wrote:

dk7th wrote:

fishmike wrote:

dk7th wrote:

fishmike wrote:

dk7th wrote:

tkf wrote:

dk7th wrote:you guys are letting your irrational hatred of a perceived rival get in the way of what is clearly an unviable accusation.

exactly... and I like the use of the word "perceived", because we are not rivals with the pacers at this point.... not even close to being..

yes it's envy pure and simple. looks like vogel is making hard decisions for the good of that team and now the haters are scared ha ha

^^^ foreplay

how about working on backing up your assertion instead of being bitchy?

I dont give two farts in the wind over starting some dick measuring contest with a donkey like you on the internet so you go streaking down the quad yelling about how right you are. How about this.. your right DK. My bad. It was caught in the maelstrom of my own bloviating. My bad. I retrack. Now you can go back to wanking on your Paul George poster while the unedumacated commoners of UK talk about basketball.

okay cool. thanks

lol...you're such a loser.

I've never actually read the rule but I always took it as a player couldn't step unto the court. If so, P.George did step on and he needs to get suspended.

Its a dumb rule that does needs to change but until it gets done, it is what it is.

whether you think i am loser it doesn't change reality-- george did not leave the immediate vicinity of the bench and he has not been suspended. pacers get to close out a series against a very game hawks team who have been doing great without horford. things are looking up for the hawks while the knicks are going to have to go back to the old drawing board.

maybe the knicks will be relevant and not an embarrassment to genuine new yorkers such as myself someday. meantime it has been a very enjoyable varsity season.

If the rule was interpreted as it was for the Knicks and suns he would be suspended. The rule sucks but either you change it or you remain consistent. You can't pick and choose which playoff series you are going to influence the outcome of.

exactly

and...this may be a dumb question but what and where exactly is the "immediate vicinity" and how far do you have to be from this vicinity (assuming its the chairs/bench) before you are considered OUT of the vicinity? one foot?..two? Watching the video, P.George clearly stepped on the playing court...what his intentions are, I don't know and don't care.

In Soccer a player would be cautioned for entering the field of play without the referees permission. not exactly a suspension but Soccer doesn't have the reputation of players fighting on the field and aren't strict like the NBA is with stuff like that.

sounds like you're rooting hard for the hawks. he did not leave the immediate vicinity of the bench. if he had then he would have been suspended. and like it or not, his body language did not indicate aggression.

Thanks for answering the question, chief

i would say if you take more than two steps after you have stood up with the body language of charging the scene. he took only two steps and his body language did not indicate charging the scene, therefore no suspension.

HTH