RealGM

according to KTAR Frye has been suspended for one game and JRich has been fine 25,000 for the Pacers altercation.

wtf? 25,000 is a lot of money... i know its not much for Jrich but thats still a huge fine!

i dont know if anything is going to be brought upon the pacers players but this is the update. so no frye against the lakers!

lock this thread if it seems unnecessary!

Granger suspended 1 game, Watson fined 30,000, and Hibbert 25,000. Hibbert probably going crazy because he can't afford it

You big idiot dinosaur

Jdiddy701 wrote:Granger suspended 1 game, Watson fined 30,000, and Hibbert 25,000. Hibbert probably going crazy because he can't afford it

You big idiot dinosaur

alright good i was gonna be hella pissed if they got nothing haha now it seems okay i guess.
amare better not get into foul trouble against the lakers!

Wonder if Collins is going to get any playing time

MaryvalesFinest wrote:Wonder if Collins is going to get any playing time

if its a blow out sure why not! haha

Frye should be the only one suspended, and I think those fines are a little excessive for such a small incident. But I guess that's how the league handles any altercations. Oh well, that's what happens when you're the only league to have had a history of attacking fans.

I think all suspensions and fines seem fair to me. The only possible one I take issue with was Frye's suspension. He was the only player out of all involved whose every move COULD be attributed to self-defense. Still, it takes 2 so I'm fine with all punishments.

What a joke. Stern and Jackson and their cronies overreact about a lame sissy fight. Fines are too much, but I am happy that Granger got ding too if Frye was going to get suspended. His actions were just as bad and his immaturity after affected it I think. Lost respect for cat. Wish Bell, Barnes or at least shaq was on the team for just this situation to see if a fight would have really happened.

Roy Hibbert threw punches why was he not suspended and it was even i n the article on ESPN after the game so why has Stu failed to suspend him for actions ? Why can 't Stu be freaking consistent for once instead of always allowing someone to get away with the action that got another player suspended.

You know...this is probably a good thing. I didn't really want to see Frye out there for most of the 4th quarter against the Lakers.

Watson should have been suspended too, he is the one who took the aggression to the next level.

meh, the Pacers will lose either way. Suspensions or not. But yeah, Frye out for this game isn't that big a deal in my mind. Odom would render his potential 3 point threat a moot point. would rather see Lopez get time down the stretch, and use Collins usual smart veteran play.

Yay!! Collins gets more playing time.

We might actually see Lopez in the 4th quarter now!

wtfsunsfts your avatar gives me the chills.

Can the Suns appeal Frye's suspension?

KLEON wrote:Can the Suns appeal Frye's suspension?

It won't do any good. Heck Duncan was allowed to walk six feet onto the court when he thought Jones undercut Elson in the same game where Amare and Diaw stepped onto the floor, and no suspensions for Duncan. And even though Bowen walked out there to get him, according to the LAW, he should have been suspended as well. Plus a year later in the Boston game, a fight breaks out, people walk onto the floor, and nothing happens. The LAW is flawed and Stern and his NBA wrecking crew could care less.

RunDogGun wrote:

KLEON wrote:Can the Suns appeal Frye's suspension?

It won't do any good. Heck Duncan was allowed to walk six feet onto the court when he thought Jones undercut Elson in the same game where Amare and Diaw stepped onto the floor, and no suspensions for Duncan. And even though Bowen walked out there to get him, according to the LAW, he should have been suspended as well. Plus a year later in the Boston game, a fight breaks out, people walk onto the floor, and nothing happens. The LAW is flawed and Stern and his NBA wrecking crew could care less.

I remember Stu's logic was that, though Duncan and Bowen stepped onto the court, there was no "altercation" and thus Duncan wasn't attempting to join in the fun... because there was no fun...

...brilliant logic Stu, brilliant. It was a very subjective and arbitrary call. A total shame.

The current suspensions were what I thought would make sense, though those fines to seem very high.

Sun Scorched wrote:
I remember Stu's logic was that, though Duncan and Bowen stepped onto the court, there was no "altercation" and thus Duncan wasn't attempting to join in the fun... because there was no fun...

...brilliant logic Stu, brilliant. It was a very subjective and arbitrary call. A total shame.

The current suspensions were what I thought would make sense, though those fines to seem very high.

I heard the logic, and was sad to hear that they now know what players are thinking while (even in their own head) an altercation happens. Like Diaw would have been out there to escalate the situation.

Oh well, I still hate to lose any guys for a game against LA.

What about the Boston fight a year later? No altercation? Or they still wanted a Boston/LA finals more than they wanted to follow the "letter of the law'?

WOW, Stu needs to go watch a Hockey game to learns what throwing punches and fighting is really like.

This was more a political move then anything doing with "rule interpretation." The league really taints themselves with such rulings.

Watson got a sweetheart deal.