Collusion 2007 confirmed. No penalties for Celtics and Hawks

[Lurker]

NO.  Last year he followed the letter of the law and Suns were suspended.  This year he found a reason to not suspend the best player on the Celtics.  Do you think last year he enforced the rule strictly because he favored the Spurs?  Or do you think this year he reassessed the rule to fit not having to suspend Garnett? 

BOTH!    With the tremendous outCRY from every corner of the b-ball world, with the exception of SA, I would have NEVER expected the league to do a 180 on this rule considering the impact it had on a series last year.  The NBA is in a real dilema, they either admit last year was a mistake or that this year is a mistake.  The third option is that the NBA admit is changes the rules at their whim. 

Seriously, you can NOT have it both ways and if I were to choose which scenario is more reasonable I would say last years response was correct because it leaves NO room for interpretation.  This year they are trying to interperate the players intent when walking onto the court, that simply does not work.

I agree with that as far as Perkins and WIlliams (?) are concerned.  They stepped onto the court technically speaking.  And the league applied more common sense this year in handling that situation.  And that is where the collusion similarity ends.

The situation with Garnett is different.  It is more Horry-like.  He was at the epicenter of the trouble.  And even though the ref grabbed him, he should have never gotten away with pushing him off.  Refs grab players all the time to keep them from escalating a situation.  For KG to copout with the "heat of the moment" BS and the league to buy it is vomit inducing.  There have been instances in the past of accidental or calm touching of the refs that have led to ejections and/or follow up suspensions.  Hell Duncan is ejected for LAUGHING at a ref and Garnett can shove one away to go after another player?

[Joe Vancil]

I'm appalled by the NBA's response on this.  It makes absolutely no sense in light of what happened last year.

WayOut has it right - either they made a mistake last year, they made a mistake this year, or they only enforce the rules at their whim.

[Lurker]

or they only enforce the rules at their whim.

Sounds like the definition of Collusion...especially if it doesn't help my team.   

[WayOutWest]

or they only enforce the rules at their whim.

Sounds like the definition of Collusion...especially if it doesn't help my team.   

That's the point, it helped your team last year.

[Lurker]

or they only enforce the rules at their whim.

Sounds like the definition of Collusion...especially if it doesn't help my team.   

That's the point, it helped your team last year.

Prove it.



That's the problem...no one can prove whether the Suns would have won the series or not.  So to say it "helped" is just an opinion with no facts to sustain it. 

[WayOutWest]

or they only enforce the rules at their whim.

Sounds like the definition of Collusion...especially if it doesn't help my team.   

That's the point, it helped your team last year.

Prove it.



That's the problem...no one can prove whether the Suns would have won the series or not.  So to say it "helped" is just an opinion with no facts to sustain it. 

I am not talking about the series, I am talking about it helped them in the game the Suns players were suspended.

[Lurker]

or they only enforce the rules at their whim.

Sounds like the definition of Collusion...especially if it doesn't help my team.   

That's the point, it helped your team last year.

Prove it.



That's the problem...no one can prove whether the Suns would have won the series or not.  So to say it "helped" is just an opinion with no facts to sustain it. 

I am not talking about the series, I am talking about it helped them in the game the Suns players were suspended.

Again that is not necessarily true.  The Spurs may have won that game even if Amare & Diaw played.  They may have won it more convincingly.  Or the Suns may have won and turned the series.  Either way cannot be proven.

It is still just opinion that the suspensions helped or hurt anyone.

[WayOutWest]

or they only enforce the rules at their whim.

Sounds like the definition of Collusion...especially if it doesn't help my team.   

That's the point, it helped your team last year.

Prove it.



That's the problem...no one can prove whether the Suns would have won the series or not.  So to say it "helped" is just an opinion with no facts to sustain it. 

I am not talking about the series, I am talking about it helped them in the game the Suns players were suspended.

Again that is not necessarily true.  The Spurs may have won that game even if Amare & Diaw played.  They may have won it more convincingly.  Or the Suns may have won and turned the series.  Either way cannot be proven.

It is still just opinion that the suspensions helped or hurt anyone.

No offense but you sould like Randy in regards to losing Yao is not a big deal.  The Suns lost some BIG time player(s) for them that year.  Anyway, the Celtics and Hawks should have been treated the same way, who knows if the Hawks beat the Celts if they lost KG, but they should have been able to find out.

[Reality]

Looks like Stern took Boston out.
47-25 ATL