The Official BOSTON CELTICS thread

Verse1 said:
Either way it was a brain fart from Garnett and shouldn't have happened. Now the Celts are without him for game 2 when they should have him on deck to put the nail in!
Click to expand...
Think he needs a future mentor

issue3_080421.jpg

:lol:
 
Personally, and I'll go on the record and say I haven't liked Garnett for years, I can't see how he could've AVOIDED suspension for that. From what I remember, Dwight got a game suspension for throwing an elbow that apparently didn't even connect in last year's play-offs. And if you want to talk about Q-rich's "history", I'd advise against it, coz it pales in comparison to KG's... And I'm sure a majority of basketball fans who aren't Boston supporters would agree with Q-rich's assessment of KG and particularly Pierce, as "actresses".
 
jimboiitmac said:
See that's where you're wrong.

You talk about Q's "history" and about what he "barked" to Pierce/Garnett.

None of that matters, it's purely circumstantial.

The NBA front office has a hard time with these situations and that is exactly why they make it so cut and dry - like I said.

The bottom line is - one a player makes it physical that is crossing the line.

It is as black and white as that.

Garnett threw the elbow = He's out.

Q didn't get physical = just a fine, despite whatever provocation you think happened, or whatever past history he has with Pierce.

---------- Post added 19-04-2010 at 03:39 PM ----------



I think the other Celts will step up and make it hard for the Heat in Game 2, but Garnett played a significant role in Game 1.

His energy and hustle gave the Heat headaches. Take into account those two alley-oop plays as well, and his defense on Michael Beasley.
Click to expand...

no and no, there is grey area and that's where we are.
they have a hard time yet it's cut and dry? :ermm::rolleyes:
as much as it may help you to sleep at night you can't solve every problem that arises based on rules
you have no where else to take this argument, not sure how else I can explain it.
100% have to agree to agree that you're wrong......
i mean agree to disagree

---------- Post added 19-04-2010 at 04:54 PM ----------
axeman23 said:
Personally, and I'll go on the record and say I haven't liked Garnett for years, I can't see how he could've AVOIDED suspension for that. From what I remember, Dwight got a game suspension for throwing an elbow that apparently didn't even connect in last year's play-offs. And if you want to talk about Q-rich's "history", I'd advise against it, coz it pales in comparison to KG's... And I'm sure a majority of basketball fans who aren't Boston supporters would agree with Q-rich's assessment of KG and particularly Pierce, as "actresses".
Click to expand...

whoa, on the record? :lol:
join the queue bud, I wouldn't like him either if he was that physical and intense to a player/team that I followed.
that's exactly the reason I do follow him, and i can't see how it is possible to hate a player like that though, especially if you've watched interviews and know of his passion for the game!
 
GarnettFan4Life said:
no and no
you have no where else to take this argument, not sure how else I can explain it.
Click to expand...

I don't think you understand.

You make it out like there are a whole lot of other factors involved, but when the NBA Front Office sat down to look at the tape of the brawl, only ONE factor made them suspend Garnett and not do the same for Q.

Garnett got physical.

That's the bottom line.

While it may seem unfair because Q provoked him and has had 'previous altercations' with Pierce - the suspension decision comes down to the fact that Garnett connected with and threw an elbow.

I don't know why you refuse to accept this, or seem to think that I don't understand.

That's what it came down to at the end of the day. You may not agree, but that's just how the decision was made.
 
jimboiitmac said:
I don't think you understand.

You make it out like there are a whole lot of other factors involved, but when the NBA Front Office sat down to look at the tape of the brawl, only ONE factor made them suspend Garnett and not do the same for Q.

Garnett got physical.

That's the bottom line.

While it may seem unfair because Q provoked him and has had 'previous altercations' with Pierce - the suspension decision comes down to the fact that Garnett connected with and threw an elbow.

I don't know why you refuse to accept this, or seem to think that I don't understand.

That's what it came down to at the end of the day. You may not agree, but that's just how the decision was made.
Click to expand...

I do, and, you don't

the end
 
GarnettFan4Life said:
I do, and, you don't

the end
Click to expand...

I re-read the post above after you edited it. Helped me make more sense of where you're coming from.

Yes in your opinion it is a grey area. And for the most part I can see why you say that. If Q hadn't provoked Garnett then Garnett wouldn't have thrown the elbow, and hence wouldn't be suspended. So I guess you could say it started with Q and hence is a grey area as Garnett has copped a worse penalty than Q.

What I'm SAYING though is,

The NBA Front Office DON'T LOOK AT IT AS A GREY AREA. They have to make a decision so they make straight down the line based on who exhibited physical behaviour.

You say
as much as it may help you to sleep at night you can't solve every problem that arises based on rules
Click to expand...

But in this case that's EXACTLY what the NBA has done. They have suspended Garnett, based on a rule.

You throw an elbow, you're out for a game. How much clearer can it be? Dwight got thrown for it last year, KG this year. It's just the rule.

If you don't understand that then there's nothing else that can be said. Can anyone help me out here?
 
jimboiitmac said:
I re-read the post above after you edited it. Helped me make more sense of where you're coming from.

Yes in your opinion it is a grey area. And for the most part I can see why you say that. If Q hadn't provoked Garnett then Garnett wouldn't have thrown the elbow, and hence wouldn't be suspended. So I guess you could say it started with Q and hence is a grey area as Garnett has copped a worse penalty than Q.

What I'm SAYING though is,

The NBA Front Office DON'T LOOK AT IT AS A GREY AREA. They have to make a decision so they make straight down the line based on who exhibited physical behaviour.

You say

But in this case that's EXACTLY what the NBA has done. They have suspended Garnett, based on a rule.

You throw an elbow, you're out for a game. How much clearer can it be? Dwight got thrown for it last year, KG this year. It's just the rule.

If you don't understand that then there's nothing else that can be said. Can anyone help me out here?
Click to expand...

I'd say there is a grey area, hence their provision for allowing review and re-classification of flagrant fouls given by refs - so they're saying that a flagrant foul may be called F1, but on review they can change it to F2, that means it is subjective, not black and white. base that in all the incorrect and missed calls this year and you absolutely have some grey.

i just think they shouldn't have been so hasty in dishing out the suspension, as you say, on past examples it seemed expected, though I don't know the Dwight Howard instance and doubt there was any underlying issue as in this case.


No-one can help you out also, you came into a Celtics thread, trying to convince a member, with the name GarnettFan4Life, that his fav player should be suspended :lol: mate that was a lost cause from your first post I just thought a bit of convo would liven up these threads a bit, it's PLAYOFF time!!!!! pump up!!!!!!!!
 
GarnettFan4Life said:
I'd say there is a grey area, hence their provision for allowing review and re-classification of flagrant fouls given by refs - so they're saying that a flagrant foul may be called F1, but on review they can change it to F2, that means it is subjective, not black and white. base that in all the incorrect and missed calls this year and you absolutely have some grey.

i just think they shouldn't have been so hasty in dishing out the suspension, as you say, on past examples it seemed expected, though I don't know the Dwight Howard instance and doubt there was any underlying issue as in this case.


No-one can help you out also, you came into a Celtics thread, trying to convince a member, with the name GarnettFan4Life, that his fav player shouldn't be suspended :lol: mate that was a lost cause from your first post I just thought a bit of convo would liven up these threads a bit, it's PLAYOFF time!!!!! pump up!!!!!!!!
Click to expand...

You mean should right?

Anyway I see what you're getting at. We're both right :lol:

But yeah, agree to disagree. Although I think we just got caught up on a few little things but really knew what each other was meaning the whole time.

Playoff time!:kick:
 
Glad garnett got suspended. He deserved it!

He is sooo dirty!

Pierce is such a girl and goes down so many times like he has done a season ending injury and then comes back.

I think Garnett/Pierce might be my most hated players right now haha
 
BackInTheGame said:
Glad garnett got suspended. He deserved it!

He is sooo dirty!

Pierce is such a girl and goes down so many times like he has done a season ending injury and then comes back.

I think Garnett/Pierce might be my most hated players right now haha
Click to expand...

:lol::lol::lol: yeah he's one of the worst in the league :rolleyes:

---------- Post added 19-04-2010 at 10:08 PM ----------
twizz said:
0,,6080583,00.jpg
Click to expand...

hospitalised!
oh wait, nah he's back on the court :p
 
I'd say that's smart not wussy. May give him another season :D
Look at Jermaine O'Neal with that BIG flop against Perkins in the post in the first game, trying to do the same thing, take advantage of a rule.
Not saying I like it, one of the reason I absolutely HATE soccer, but they will try it.
 
The Truth. No lie


[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bp97d4HMSEg&feature=related"]YouTube- Paul Pierce's Career Buzzer Beaters[/ame]



[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RRnpHgyzQoA"]YouTube- Paul Pierce\'s crazy game-winner shot vs Bulls [29 april 200"]400 Bad Request[/ame]



[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_YCrDZLR8DY"]YouTube- Paul Pierce Game Winner vs.Hawks (Goraps420)[/ame]





#10 career game winner?


[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T7fAW6Qz23M"]YouTube- Paul Pierce Hits Game Winner vs Heat at Buzzer (HD)[/ame]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom