Nikola Jokic Shoves Markieff Morris After Morris's Foul; Both Ejected

[BBallFreak]

Lots of people acting high and mighty, ignoring one side and focusing on the other. I challenge anyone to put themselves in either players shoes before responding.

1. If you were Morris, would you sprint across court to blindside biggest guy on the court, possible injurying him, and just turn around expecting nothing will come out of it?

2. If you were Jokic and just got blindesided, would you ignore it?

If you dont answer either of those questions truly, you are not assessing the entire situation correctly. Im no tough guy. I avoid confrontation in any sort of form. However, i got blindsides once and i went ballistic. You can sit behind a keyboard and talk about the high roard. But once you personally are wronged, chances are you will react, and mostly not in a nice and polite manner.

Bottom line is, no matter how hard certain posters are trying to make Morris play a "basketball play", neither play was that. Morris play was unprovoked, Jokic was a response. Both were cheap shots. Players got punished and its time to move on.

Instead, Heat is trying to escalate things with Jimmy, with team confrontation, with Spo talking about face to face confrontation, Haslem comparing Jokic take fouls with Morris "take" fouls and what not (dont get me wrong, Jokic is not an angel, but these are not comparable). To me, biggest difference in this entire event are 2 things:

1) 1 cheap shot was provoked, the other one wasn't
2) One player apologized for his actions and the other one, that started it, responded by keeping score, implying this will continue.

Pretty decent assessment, except for two things:

1) We don't know that Morris wasn't provoked. Jokic is a big man, willing to use his size, and clearly does have a temper. Morris might have been responding to a game's worth of abuse. Either way, completely uncalled for, I agree. Not justifying what Morris did. I'm not defending him at all. I'm just pointing out that elbows get thrown and things get said during the course of a game that might at least explain why Morris targetted him. Again, not justification.

2) If I'm Jokic, I don't ignore it, but I either face up with Morris like a man, or I make sure the refs call the damn flagrant and throw him out. What he did was uncalled for, as well. Yes, he was provoked, but nothing justifies his actions, either.

Both players are wrong here. Morris should have received the same punishment as Jokic...

[dshearn]

Well …

Joker fouls Bam, Morris retaliates, then Joker retaliates against Morris.


The going narrative so far is Joker is in the clear for retaliation….

So I suppose by that logic none of this conversation would have taken place if Bam just came down the floor and leveled Joker…

The actual take away from all this is, Joker is easy to set off. I suspect he gets hacked a ton more if he can’t control himself l.

[DB23]

Lots of people acting high and mighty, ignoring one side and focusing on the other. I challenge anyone to put themselves in either players shoes before responding.

1. If you were Morris, would you sprint across court to blindside biggest guy on the court, possible injurying him, and just turn around expecting nothing will come out of it?

2. If you were Jokic and just got blindesided, would you ignore it?

If you dont answer either of those questions truly, you are not assessing the entire situation correctly. Im no tough guy. I avoid confrontation in any sort of form. However, i got blindsides once and i went ballistic. You can sit behind a keyboard and talk about the high roard. But once you personally are wronged, chances are you will react, and mostly not in a nice and polite manner.

Bottom line is, no matter how hard certain posters are trying to make Morris play a "basketball play", neither play was that. Morris play was unprovoked, Jokic was a response. Both were cheap shots. Players got punished and its time to move on.

Instead, Heat is trying to escalate things with Jimmy, with team confrontation, with Spo talking about face to face confrontation, Haslem comparing Jokic take fouls with Morris "take" fouls and what not (dont get me wrong, Jokic is not an angel, but these are not comparable). To me, biggest difference in this entire event are 2 things:

1) 1 cheap shot was provoked, the other one wasn't
2) One player apologized for his actions and the other one, that started it, responded by keeping score, implying this will continue.

Pretty decent assessment, except for two things:

1) We don't know that Morris wasn't provoked. Jokic is a big man, willing to use his size, and clearly does have a temper. Morris might have been responding to a game's worth of abuse. Either way, completely uncalled for, I agree. Not justifying what Morris did. I'm not defending him at all. I'm just pointing out that elbows get thrown and things get said during the course of a game that might at least explain why Morris targetted him. Again, not justification.

2) If I'm Jokic, I don't ignore it, but I either face up with Morris like a man, or I make sure the refs call the damn flagrant and throw him out. What he did was uncalled for, as well. Yes, he was provoked, but nothing justifies his actions, either.

Both players are wrong here. Morris should have received the same punishment as Jokic...

IMO everyone is focusing on Morris’s back being turned but it’s the same thing as sucker punching someone straight on, if they don’t expect it, it is equally as cheap. And jokic definitely was not expecting a flying elbow to the ribs from nowhere.

[ballup]

It's already been established that instigators usually get harsher punishments. Morris got off easy with a 50k fine. He was ejected in a game with less than 3 minutes left.

Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk

[Grumpy Heat Fan]

Read on Twitter

[TunaFish]

Morris should have been suspended.

[Mickey8]

Read on Twitter

Nice blurred pictures, good for Jokic he gotten much worse all night long, he was fouled almost on every made field gold plus other he didn't make. Adebayo should have fouled out long time ago.

[Texas Chuck]

Lots of people acting high and mighty, ignoring one side and focusing on the other. I challenge anyone to put themselves in either players shoes before responding.

1. If you were Morris, would you sprint across court to blindside biggest guy on the court, possible injurying him, and just turn around expecting nothing will come out of it?

2. If you were Jokic and just got blindesided, would you ignore it?

If you dont answer either of those questions truly, you are not assessing the entire situation correctly.

But what if your assumptions are flawed?

1. I still am not remotely convinced Morris was trying to injure Jokic. People keep highlighting the knee because its central to that case, but I've watched it a bunch and the knee contact appears quite incidental. Morris was upset about something and took a hard needless foul. But I just don't believe because he and his brother have a history of a few plays in thousands of NBA minutes that every time they are involved in something its them trying to injure someone.

2. Are there not other options between ignoring it and what he chose to do? Why is this being presented as either we must admit we would react exactly like Joker did or we are just "high and mighty"? Is there no level of nuance? No other actions we could have taken that don't require us to turn the other cheek or react as violently as Jokic?

You are trying to set a very limited framework and then tell everyone else not willing to accept your assumptions that we can't assess the situation correctly? Nah man.

And I hate that I have to keep doing this, but let me do it anyway--I'm not saying your assumption about Morris is wrong. He might have intentionally gone knee to knee and hoped to injure Joker. I don't personally believe it, but you are welcome to. But me(or others) choosing to think otherwise isn't about being high and mighty or defending Morris or being unable to assess situations.

[Mickey8]

It was nothing accidental, he went full force into Jokic's body, knee to knee and to his rib cage, could have injured Jokic very badly.

[Synciere]

It was a sucker hit. Like a sucker punch. He hit someone from behind.

That's weak punk stuff. Jokic is a giant baby and a coward for doing that. You don't hit someone from behind like that. He hit someone from behind, snapping their neck violently, in retaliation for what amounts to a hard-ish foul in a professional basketball game.

Jokic should be suspended for 30 games in my opinion.

While I agree that Jokic isn't some victim like others have stated, 30?!?! Come on.. No one died.

[Synciere]

Lots of people acting high and mighty, ignoring one side and focusing on the other. I challenge anyone to put themselves in either players shoes before responding.

1. If you were Morris, would you sprint across court to blindside biggest guy on the court, possible injurying him, and just turn around expecting nothing will come out of it?

2. If you were Jokic and just got blindesided, would you ignore it?

If you dont answer either of those questions truly, you are not assessing the entire situation correctly.

But what if your assumptions are flawed?

1. I still am not remotely convinced Morris was trying to injure Jokic. People keep highlighting the knee because its central to that case, but I've watched it a bunch and the knee contact appears quite incidental. Morris was upset about something and took a hard needless foul. But I just don't believe because he and his brother have a history of a few plays in thousands of NBA minutes that every time they are involved in something its them trying to injure someone.

2. Are there not other options between ignoring it and what he chose to do? Why is this being presented as either we must admit we would react exactly like Joker did or we are just "high and mighty"? Is there no level of nuance? No other actions we could have taken that don't require us to turn the other cheek or react as violently as Jokic?

You are trying to set a very limited framework and then tell everyone else not willing to accept your assumptions that we can't assess the situation correctly? Nah man.

And I hate that I have to keep doing this, but let me do it anyway--I'm not saying your assumption about Morris is wrong. He might have intentionally gone knee to knee and hoped to injure Joker. I don't personally believe it, but you are welcome to. But me(or others) choosing to think otherwise isn't about being high and mighty or defending Morris or being unable to assess situations.

His assumptions are flawed.

It was a take foul situation. Morris didn't run to blindside Jokic. He hustled to give a foul and stop the clock. HIs foul was aggressive and by definition, flagrant. I don't see intent to harm in it though. That said, if people look at Morris's history and see it that way, that's not an unreasonable stance. Morris's intent is still up for debate. We'll never know.

[Mickey8]

What was he stopping, when the game was already over, Heat was trailing big at 2:39 in the 4th quarter , Jokic was blindsided while dribbling the ball down the court , he didn't expect Morris would run into his buddy from the side, it was the cheap shot , same as Jokic's afterwards.

[DB23]

Lots of people acting high and mighty, ignoring one side and focusing on the other. I challenge anyone to put themselves in either players shoes before responding.

1. If you were Morris, would you sprint across court to blindside biggest guy on the court, possible injurying him, and just turn around expecting nothing will come out of it?

2. If you were Jokic and just got blindesided, would you ignore it?

If you dont answer either of those questions truly, you are not assessing the entire situation correctly.

But what if your assumptions are flawed?

1. I still am not remotely convinced Morris was trying to injure Jokic. People keep highlighting the knee because its central to that case, but I've watched it a bunch and the knee contact appears quite incidental. Morris was upset about something and took a hard needless foul. But I just don't believe because he and his brother have a history of a few plays in thousands of NBA minutes that every time they are involved in something its them trying to injure someone.

2. Are there not other options between ignoring it and what he chose to do? Why is this being presented as either we must admit we would react exactly like Joker did or we are just "high and mighty"? Is there no level of nuance? No other actions we could have taken that don't require us to turn the other cheek or react as violently as Jokic?

You are trying to set a very limited framework and then tell everyone else not willing to accept your assumptions that we can't assess the situation correctly? Nah man.

And I hate that I have to keep doing this, but let me do it anyway--I'm not saying your assumption about Morris is wrong. He might have intentionally gone knee to knee and hoped to injure Joker. I don't personally believe it, but you are welcome to. But me(or others) choosing to think otherwise isn't about being high and mighty or defending Morris or being unable to assess situations.

His assumptions are flawed.

It was a take foul situation. Morris didn't run to blindside Jokic. He hustled to give a foul and stop the clock. HIs foul was aggressive and by definition, flagrant. I don't see intent to harm in it though. That said, if people look at Morris's history and see it that way, that's not an unreasonable stance. Morris's intent is still up for debate. We'll never know.

I keep hearing this and it’s nonsense. You don’t make a take foul like that or make one down 20 with 2 mins to go.

It was a cheap shot, nothing less.

[Crazy-Canuck]

So, 50k fine for players going after star players with the intent to do bodily harm and any retaliation is a suspension. Should be an interesting play offs this year.

[Synciere]

But what if your assumptions are flawed?

1. I still am not remotely convinced Morris was trying to injure Jokic. People keep highlighting the knee because its central to that case, but I've watched it a bunch and the knee contact appears quite incidental. Morris was upset about something and took a hard needless foul. But I just don't believe because he and his brother have a history of a few plays in thousands of NBA minutes that every time they are involved in something its them trying to injure someone.

2. Are there not other options between ignoring it and what he chose to do? Why is this being presented as either we must admit we would react exactly like Joker did or we are just "high and mighty"? Is there no level of nuance? No other actions we could have taken that don't require us to turn the other cheek or react as violently as Jokic?

You are trying to set a very limited framework and then tell everyone else not willing to accept your assumptions that we can't assess the situation correctly? Nah man.

And I hate that I have to keep doing this, but let me do it anyway--I'm not saying your assumption about Morris is wrong. He might have intentionally gone knee to knee and hoped to injure Joker. I don't personally believe it, but you are welcome to. But me(or others) choosing to think otherwise isn't about being high and mighty or defending Morris or being unable to assess situations.

His assumptions are flawed.

It was a take foul situation. Morris didn't run to blindside Jokic. He hustled to give a foul and stop the clock. HIs foul was aggressive and by definition, flagrant. I don't see intent to harm in it though. That said, if people look at Morris's history and see it that way, that's not an unreasonable stance. Morris's intent is still up for debate. We'll never know.

I keep hearing this and it’s nonsense. You don’t make a take foul like that or make one down 20 with 2 mins to go.

It was a cheap shot, nothing less.

Yeah I thought about that too. Basically what was the score/time situation. But sometimes a take foul is given just to get the rest of the bench in and I think Spoelstra implied that in the post game presser.

[nikster]

Lots of people acting high and mighty, ignoring one side and focusing on the other. I challenge anyone to put themselves in either players shoes before responding.

1. If you were Morris, would you sprint across court to blindside biggest guy on the court, possible injurying him, and just turn around expecting nothing will come out of it?

2. If you were Jokic and just got blindesided, would you ignore it?

If you dont answer either of those questions truly, you are not assessing the entire situation correctly.

But what if your assumptions are flawed?

1. I still am not remotely convinced Morris was trying to injure Jokic. People keep highlighting the knee because its central to that case, but I've watched it a bunch and the knee contact appears quite incidental. Morris was upset about something and took a hard needless foul. But I just don't believe because he and his brother have a history of a few plays in thousands of NBA minutes that every time they are involved in something its them trying to injure someone.

2. Are there not other options between ignoring it and what he chose to do? Why is this being presented as either we must admit we would react exactly like Joker did or we are just "high and mighty"? Is there no level of nuance? No other actions we could have taken that don't require us to turn the other cheek or react as violently as Jokic?

You are trying to set a very limited framework and then tell everyone else not willing to accept your assumptions that we can't assess the situation correctly? Nah man.

And I hate that I have to keep doing this, but let me do it anyway--I'm not saying your assumption about Morris is wrong. He might have intentionally gone knee to knee and hoped to injure Joker. I don't personally believe it, but you are welcome to. But me(or others) choosing to think otherwise isn't about being high and mighty or defending Morris or being unable to assess situations.

1. t was a dirty reckless play that could have easily injured Jokic, so dont think intent matters that much. Dont think he had the intent to actually injure him but he definitely meant to him harder then he needed to.
2. I think the general consensus is that Jokics response was inappropriate but understandable

[Mickey8]

Yeah right, lets hurt opposing player to let our bench into the game.

[Yuri Vaultin]

By not suspending Morris the league has basically shouted from the roof tops that it's okay for scrubs to physically attack and attempt to injure stars... but will clutch their pearls should a star try to defend themselves and say enough is enough.

[ballup]

For someone trying to make a take foul, Morris doesn't try to get the refs attention or make it super obvious. When has it ever made sense to walk away from a take foul?

Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk

[DB23]

His assumptions are flawed.

It was a take foul situation. Morris didn't run to blindside Jokic. He hustled to give a foul and stop the clock. HIs foul was aggressive and by definition, flagrant. I don't see intent to harm in it though. That said, if people look at Morris's history and see it that way, that's not an unreasonable stance. Morris's intent is still up for debate. We'll never know.

I keep hearing this and it’s nonsense. You don’t make a take foul like that or make one down 20 with 2 mins to go.

It was a cheap shot, nothing less.

Yeah I thought about that too. Basically what was the score/time situation. But sometimes a take foul is given just to get the rest of the bench in and I think Spoelstra implied that in the post game presser.

Honestly thought spo was just trying to do his best to defend his player in the post game presser. It sounded like a really silly take to me. You just don’t foul someone like that even in a close game and not expect repercussions.

I honestly can’t think of another comparable situation in recent years of a take foul being made like that. Seems much more likely Morris is trying to send a msg.