Would Stern rescind technicals on Perk and Rasheed if they occur in Game 6?

[nickagneta]

Here's the scenario. The Celtics win tonight and during a tough, grueling game 6 there is a bit of tussling and twice refs hand out double technicals, one each to Artest, Gasol, Perk and Rasheed.

Given the situation with the technicals already handed out so far, would David Stern have the cajones to actually handicap the Celtics into not having a center or back up center on their team during a deciding Game 7 in Los Angeles because of double technical fouls?

Granted, Rasheed has only had one double technical this post season and he's pretty much earned his technicals so if he gets a double technical then, what can you do? But Perkins has had 5 of his 6 technical fouls be double technicals.

Would it be right for the commissioner to suspend two members of one team and none for the other for a deciding Game 7 of the Finals over double technicals? Double technicals have become the refs way of throwing out warnings to players and coaches to calm down because they don't want things getting out of hand. The policy of counting these types of technical fouls as technical fouls that can add up and suspend a player in the post season is a bad policy and David Stern and the NBA executive offices are starting to realize this.

So if both players get double technicals, would Stern, in the best interest of the game either rescind all the technicals from Game 6 or suspend the 7 technicals and you are suspended rule so that such a ridiculous rule wouldn't actually help to decide who win's a championship determining game 7?

Or would he enforce the rule and then admit his mistake if the Celtics lose Game 7 by amending the rule in the off season?

[cdif911]

it depends on the tecnical and how outrageous it is

I'm actually surprised Sheed's wasn't rescinded from game 4

but if it's ticky tacky, separating 2 guys who get tangled up, yes I could see it rescinded

and yes next season I do think they look at it

[Drucci]

If they were to call a T on Perk in game 5 or game 6, they better rescind it immediately because Perk still has 6 T's while he should have only 5. Remember, the NBA only rescinded one of his two T's in game 5 against Orlando while the two T's were terrible calls... but the NBA refused to acknowledge both were outrageous so they only rescinded one while they should have rescinded both.

[More Banners]

If a T is called, it will be reviewed.  If it's upheld, the suspension will follow.  The ticket will be to a) not get the T in the first place, b) don't overreact further to the T being called, and then c) play it cool and hope for it to be rescinded.

There is no question in my mind that this rule will be reviewed and changed in the offseason, but they can't very well change it in the middle of the Finals...  But it's a dumb rule, and the league knows it.  The refs might throw around a few T's and double-T's in a first round series, but they now see how it could determine the winner of the Finals, and nobody, even the league, wants that.

But, to the OP, there is no way David Stern does anything to benefit the Celtics.  No way.  They all remember Red's cigars, too...

[More Banners]

I'm actually surprised Sheed's wasn't rescinded from game 4

I think screaming "That's F-ing Bull Sh--" at the top of one's lungs while taking a fast-walk lap around the half-court probably is worth a T.  Respectfully disagree.

We should give credit to Perk, though, who, for the first time in his career, is not arguing every call against him.

For the record, I got my first T in 4th grade...using profanity, of all things...

[Jon]

If this series goes to a game 7 and the C's have the game in hand, Sheed and Perk should just let the refs have it for the heck of it. 

[connerhenry43]

they showed no mercy on the suns a few years back for the bruce bowen hard foul on nash.

if i recall correctly, there was a game 5 (while they were best of 5 series) with NY and miami where a bunch of guys were suspended for game 5 because of actions in game 4.

the rule is the rule and the nba will not let any appeals or delays. if you break the rule, you will pay the price, game 2, 3,4, 5, 6, or 7.

and the next thing the nba does to help the celtics will be the first, as others have noted.

[dooyork]

Ijust watched Game 4 of the 1987 Finals.  My how times have changed.  They never would have called double techs for guys getting tangled up, or bumping elbows like the first tech on Perk in Orlando game 5.  In Game 4 of 1987, there were several occasions where players actually squared off and pushed each other, and Worthy actually took a swing at Greg Kite's head and nobody got thrown out.  And, when the scuffles happen, the benches clear as though it's the most natural thing in the world. 

They really need to reevaluate the rules for technical fouls, not that it should go back to how it used to be, but you have to let them play a little bit.  And I would support a ban on technicals for complaining to the refs.  The game is being played for the fans enjoyment, not for the ref's ego to get stroked by having players kiss his ***.  If a player is being a jerk to the ref or to other players, any consequence to the player should result from his own loss of focus on the game.  Techs should be limited to physical contact, never for complaining to the refs.  I would make an exception if a player is using extremely bad language directed at fans, but that's rare.

[connerhenry43]

Ijust watched Game 4 of the 1987 Finals.  My how times have changed.  They never would have called double techs for guys getting tangled up, or bumping elbows like the first tech on Perk in Orlando game 5.  In Game 4 of 1987, there were several occasions where players actually squared off and pushed each other, and Worthy actually took a swing at Greg Kite's head and nobody got thrown out.  And, when the scuffles happen, the benches clear as though it's the most natural thing in the world. 

They really need to reevaluate the rules for technical fouls, not that it should go back to how it used to be, but you have to let them play a little bit.  And I would support a ban on technicals for complaining to the refs.  The game is being played for the fans enjoyment, not for the ref's ego to get stroked by having players kiss his ***.  If a player is being a jerk to the ref or to other players, any consequence to the player should result from his own loss of focus on the game.  Techs should be limited to physical contact, never for complaining to the refs.  I would make an exception if a player is using extremely bad language directed at fans, but that's rare.

you can blame stern, the pistons of the late 80's, and the pacers/pistons brawl, namely ben wallace and artest for all the restrictions.

and why would any celtic fan watch game 4 of the 1987 finals?

[christuffa]

If this series goes to a game 7 and the C's have the game in hand, Sheed and Perk should just let the refs have it for the heck of it. 

Totally agree with this mate!

[dooyork]

you can blame stern, the pistons of the late 80's, and the pacers/pistons brawl, namely ben wallace and artest for all the restrictions.

The league took some of the fun out of the game when they started cracking down on trash talking, like banning Mutombo's finger wag.  WTH!  Who cares, that stuff makes it more fun.  I want to see players fired up and talking a little trash.  I don't want to see a contest of who can be more polite to the refs.  I don't think Nate should have gotten T'd up in the 4th quarter.  If Odom's feelings are so fragile that he needs a referee to protect him from getting taunted by a tiny man, that's his problem.

why would any celtic fan watch game 4 of the 1987 finals?

I honestly have no idea!  I forgot, the Celtics were up by about 7 with a minute to go in that game.  Ugh.

[connerhenry43]

you can blame stern, the pistons of the late 80's, and the pacers/pistons brawl, namely ben wallace and artest for all the restrictions.

The league took some of the fun out of the game when they started cracking down on trash talking, like banning Mutombo's finger wag.  WTH!  Who cares, that stuff makes it more fun.  I want to see players fired up and talking a little trash.  I don't want to see a contest of who can be more polite to the refs.  I don't think Nate should have gotten T'd up in the 4th quarter.  If Odom's feelings are so fragile that he needs a referee to protect him from getting taunted by a tiny man, that's his problem.

why would any celtic fan watch game 4 of the 1987 finals?

I honestly have no idea!  I forgot, the Celtics were up by about 7 with a minute to go in that game.  Ugh.

i can respect the league wanting to make sure there are no brawls. but they have taken a lot of the emotion and rivalries out of the game. trash talking is OK, bench clearing brawls that spill into the crowd are bad.

many teams tried that "bad boys" style. but the pistons won with it. the heat never did, the pacers never did, the knicks never did. to me, if the pistons never won a title with their garbage style of play, it would have just been a passing fad, like fratello playing slow down all with his boring cavs teams.

[jdpapa3]

If Perk gets suspended, I live in New York and honestly might go outside of the NBA offices with signs and stuff. His 6th T was for his hand slipping off of Pierce while he was picking it up and the NBA only rescinded one of the techs because of damage control. This would infuriate me more than anything else in the NBA in my entire life of watching it.

[kozlodoev]

First of all, I don't think it's Stern who rescinds techs, its Stu Jackson. Second, this whole conversation is kind of pointless: if someone earns a technical, they'll get a technical, and sit out a game. That's about it. No handouts.

[More Banners]

Is it any coincidence that the league's crack down on trash talk, taunting, and physical tangles seems to have risen as the % of adolescent college dropouts entering the league increased?  I don't care what the basketball talent is, a 20 year old is a 20 year old, and there just has to be some influence of playing in a college program that can't be replaced when a player jumps to big money and center-of-the-universe attention of the pros.  The modern player is, on average, more self-indulgent and impulsive.

I happen to think that 4-year college players, even when everyone played for 4 years, were certainly more disciplined and mature, and perhaps as players became less and less able to limit their aggressiveness, or at least knew when to get back to playing the game (and became, on average, bigger and stronger) the league began to exert more authority?