Not to beat a dead horse...

High 5 · Post #1 » by **High 5** » Thu May 8, 2008 12:30 am

...I know threads like these pop up almost daily, but if you could only suspend one of these players which one would it be?

http://youtube.com/watch?v=LPlbvPP7O1s

http://youtube.com/watch?v=BM9ku8B_Jcs&feature=related

I'd absolutely love to hear Stu Jackson (I believe he hands out the suspensions) justify his decisions over the past couple of seasons.

And that's the last time you'll see me make a thread like this.

Post #2 » by **NO-KG-AI** » Thu May 8, 2008 12:34 am

I wouldn't have suspended either after review, but Kidd could say he was going for the ball a bit, Marvin was going for Rondo, though he did try to catch him.

AgEnT50 · Post #3 » by **AgEnT50** » Thu May 8, 2008 12:35 am

Lazy Faizy · Post #4 » by **Lazy Faizy** » Thu May 8, 2008 12:36 am

If I could only choose one, it would be Marvin Williams.

High 5 · Post #5 » by **High 5** » Thu May 8, 2008 12:36 am

NO-KG-AI wrote:I wouldn't have suspended either after review, but Kidd could say he was going for the ball a bit, Marvin was going for Rondo, though he did try to catch him.

Kidd grabs the back of head head and pulls him down face first. I don't care if he came away with the ball in his hands, that's an extremely dirty play. I have no problem with Marvin being suspended, but Kidd's play was easily more violent and dangerous (IMO) and he gets away with it.

Post #6 » by **NO-KG-AI** » Thu May 8, 2008 12:38 am

High 5 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Kidd grabs the back of head head and pulls him down face first. I don't care if he came away with the ball in his hands, that's an extremely dirty play. I have no problem with Marvin being suspended, but Kidd's play was easily more violent and dangerous (IMO) and he gets away with it.

My point was intent, there is some reasonable doubt as to whether he meant to grab his head or not.

I wouldn't have suspended either to be honest, but I would toss them both.

Boognish · Post #7 » by **Boognish** » Thu May 8, 2008 12:39 am

Don't question Stu Jackson. He, in his infinite wisdom, is infallible

High 5 · Post #8 » by **High 5** » Thu May 8, 2008 12:42 am

NO-KG-AI wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

My point was intent, there is some reasonable doubt as to whether he meant to grab his head or not.

I wouldn't have suspended either to be honest, but I would toss them both.

Intent doesn't matter, but I don't see how that could possibly be viewed as an accident. Did Kidd even try to call it an accident?

But like I said, I'm not calling for Kidd to be suspended over Marvin, I just think both plays should have been treated the same. The fact that Kidd's was more dangerous just adds to the humor.

Cybulski37 · Post #9 » by **Cybulski37** » Thu May 8, 2008 12:55 am

I wouldn't have suspended either. A fine for Williams maybe, but that would be it. I think in these situations you need to look at a player's history, and judging from what the commentators were saying in the Williams video, he seems like a standup guy. I think because of that, I wouldn't suspend him now, but if it happens again, I would. With Kidd, I don't think his was quite as bad as Williams' but he, as far as I know, is in the same boat and doesn't pull that crap often. IF it's someone like Artest or Bowen though, I would suspend them.

etopn23 · Post #10 » by **etopn23** » Thu May 8, 2008 12:57 am

It looked like Kidd went for the ball IMO, Marvin looked like he trying to spear Rondo.

streetp0et · Post #11 » by **streetp0et** » Thu May 8, 2008 1:01 am

i got a question, if a player commit a flagrant that warrant an automatic suspension the last game of the season, does it carry over to the next season?

edit: nvm, just read the news on williams suspension.

High 5 · Post #12 » by **High 5** » Thu May 8, 2008 1:04 am

Well I must be the odd man out, because I thought Kidd's play was easily worse than Marvin's. Intent is not supposed to matter.

Nevermind, then.

robertjanssen007 · Post #13 » by **robertjanssen007** » Thu May 8, 2008 1:08 am

Kidd foul was worse. You people are too easily influenced by commentating. Why the hell did Doug Collins say Kidd was going for the ball?

etopn23 · Post #14 » by **etopn23** » Thu May 8, 2008 1:31 am

robertjanssen007 wrote:Kidd foul was worse. You people are too easily influenced by commentating. Why the hell did Doug Collins say Kidd was going for the ball?

I didn't have my speakers on. It does look like Kidd went for the ball.

Parasight · Post #15 » by **Parasight** » Thu May 8, 2008 1:47 am

I don't care if he was going for the ball. That move could've easily ended Pargo's CAREER. Had he not broken his fall with his hands to roll out of the flip, he would've had a serious spinal injury. Watching it in full speed was disturbing. Like the OP said, sometimes intent isn't the only measuring stick. The severeness of that play was similar to the Horford on TJ one. I respect Horford and I know he wasn't out to "get" TJ, but the consequence of the injury cost Horford a suspension. This is the same situation, except Pargo was lucky enough to break his fall.

etopn23 · Post #16 » by **etopn23** » Thu May 8, 2008 1:52 am

Parasight wrote:I don't care if he was going for the ball. That move could've easily ended Pargo's CAREER. Had he not broken his fall with his hands to roll out of the flip, he would've had a serious spinal injury. Watching it in full speed was disturbing. Like the OP said, sometimes intent isn't the only measuring stick. The severeness of that play was similar to the Horford on TJ one. I respect Horford and I know he wasn't out to "get" TJ, but the consequence of the injury cost Horford a suspension. This is the same situation, except Pargo was lucky enough to break his fall.

It isn't the same situation. It's blatantly obvious that Kidd made an attempt to go for the ball. Williams just speared Rondo and Horford just jumped and hit Ford upside the head - they were both trying to run from behind to catch the play, realized they weren't going to catch their man - so they just hit him.

Kidd was already there, clearly was in front of his man, and went for the ball.

High 5 · Post #17 » by **High 5** » Thu May 8, 2008 2:00 am

Kidd went for the ball with one hand and Pargo's head with the other. I don't see how him touching the ball changes anything.

Parasight · Post #18 » by **Parasight** » Thu May 8, 2008 2:00 am

High 5 wrote:Kidd went for the ball with one hand and Pargo's head with the other. I don't see how him touching the ball changes anything.

This.

You're telling me you wouldn't notice that you are grabbing his neck?

j3yuen · Post #19 » by **j3yuen** » Thu May 8, 2008 2:20 am

jason kidd for sure
if you look at the marvin clip it, you can clearly see him trying to catch rondo. he didn't exactly swing down on his face.. he grabbed him over the chest while rondo was jumping but then couldn't really catch him on the way down..
jkidd just went for pargo's head... in kid's defense.. pargo's head did kind of look like the basketball?

Lazy Faizy · Post #20 » by **Lazy Faizy** » Thu May 8, 2008 4:01 am

I don't understand.. how in the world did Marvin try to CATCH Rondo on the way down? look at it again.. http://youtube.com/watch?v=LPlbvPP7O1s

You don't try to catch someone from the front when they're about to fall back on their ass. I don't know, maybe I'm missing something...