Artest Has Been Suspended for Game 2!!!!

Dave McNulla · Apr 25, 2006

Stu Jackson: Ron is a recidivist

link to the story

"Had any player made contact with another player's head with his forearm, during what I would consider a nonbasketball play, they would have been suspended," Stu Jackson, the league's senior vice president for basketball operations in charge of discipline, said in a telephone interview yesterday.

"The message is clear: We're just not going to tolerate plays like that in our games."

At practice in San Antonio yesterday, Artest's teammates said that he was being punished for his reputation. "You know with Ron's questionable past, they're going to look for a way to get him," Bonzi Wells said, according to The Associated Press. "Whether it's minor or major, they're going to look at it in a different way."

Jackson said: "It is true that in any on-court incident, a player who is recidivist, that fact is taken into account. But this play stands alone as his actions warranted a suspension."

This is Artest's first game-related suspension this season. The league suspended him for 73 games last season — and for the playoffs — for his role in inciting a brawl at the Palace of Auburn Hills in 2004.

The Indiana Pacers deactivated Artest in December after he publicly demanded a trade, and they never played him again before trading him to Sacramento.

"Ron has been exemplary this season in terms of his behavior on the court," Jackson said. "My hope is that it is an isolated incident and that he'll continue to play the high level of basketball that he's been playing at."

Jackson said that he spoke with Artest for 10 minutes yesterday. "He explained his position and we differed, but it was very cordial and I think at the end of the conversation we both understood each other," Jackson said.

vj9999 · Apr 25, 2006

I think Artest's foul was intentional. I am more upset by double standards that NBA has than anything else. I don't think even Fortson would have been suspended for something like this.

vj9999 · Apr 25, 2006

Dave McNulla said:

That made me laugh. Just imagine one of the league's sweethearts being suspended for a foul like this. I can totally see it. Can anyone see Tim Duncan suspended for a play like that? Or Lebron? Heck, even Shaq would be patted on the back and told that accidents happen.

Stu Jackson is missing a letter in his name. It should be STFU Jackson.

Diehard Jim · Apr 25, 2006

http://www.sacbee.com/content/sports/story/14247536p-15065122c.html"It wasn't even a payback shot," Artest said by phone. "It was just like defensive aggressive awareness. I'm in the paint, and it's just, You're not going to be into my lane. Both elbows were pulled back. I pulled them back so they wouldn't hit anybody, you know what I'm saying?"

Jackson didn't buy it. The league's disciplinarian was candid about the logic behind his decision, saying a player's past offenses are always factored into such a choice.

"It was not a basketball play," Jackson said. "It's a type of play that endangers other players, and we just can't allow that type of non-basketball play in our game."

The repeat offender took offense to the logic behind the decision, which only supports his opinion that the NBA is on a headhunt of its own.

"No, I wasn't headhunting," Artest said. "You know, it's like another good excuse (for them) to take things away from me that I've worked so hard to achieve."

KingKong · Apr 25, 2006

Stein's take....

Artest suspension dictated by NBA's rules
By Marc Stein
ESPN.com

It was on the eve of the NBA playoffs that Ron Artest announced that his Sacramento Kings were "going to shock a lot of people."

So far . . .

They have and they haven't.

After finishing the season with a 27-14 flourish after acquiring Artest, Sacramento shocked us all -- San Antonio included -- when they slinked back to the visitors' locker room with a 34-point halftime deficit in Game 1 against the Spurs.

Then came the non-surprise.

The second half was exceedingly rough and Artest, with a backdrop of loud told-you-so's back in Indianapolis, was especially chippy.

When a game gets out of hand, history says that Artest will soon follow ... and the forearm he landed on Ginobili in the third quarter of San Antonio's 122-88 romp was not the first swipe Artest took in the quarter. There was also a clip to the back of Tim Duncan's head before that and a takedown of Tony Parker.

So you can't be too surprised that Artest was hit with a one-game suspension Monday. Artest's new supporters in Sactown will undoubtedly wail about Ron-Ron being punished only because he's Ron-Ron, and point out that he hasn't flirted with any serious trouble since becoming a King in late January, but not me. This was a classic case of Artest, a great frontrunner and not so great when his team is unraveling, began that second half in a retaliatory mood.

It's fairly evident that the league office wants to take a strong stance on disciplinary matters from the start of the playoffs, as confirmed by the one-game suspension Miami's Udonis Haslem also received Monday for firing his mouthpiece at referee Joey Crawford in the Heat's Game 1 victory over Chicago on Monday.

In Artest's case, though, this was about more than message-sending. The rules clearly state that intentional contact above the shoulders will result in a one-game suspension. For anyone.

Deliberate contact above the shoulders in a 30-point game?

That pretty much seals the deal. Whatever your name and history is.

The league undoubtedly deemed Artest's hit to be a cheap shot -- after an earlier cheap shot -- that left them no choice, even though Ginobili wasn't injured and even though the encounter didn't escalate into something bigger.

The angry Kings and their loyal subjects believe that Artest, because of his history, gets less leeway than anyone else in the game. And they're right.

But there's a difference between the elbow Artest took from Ginobili on the game's opening possession, which required three stitches to close a cut on Artest's lip, and the third-quarter extracurriculars. The league deemed Ginobili's elbow to be unintentional.

However . . .

In spite of all of the above, I'm holding off on the Same Ol' Artest analysis. He's been too good for the Kings until now to be written off this quickly.

I can't pretend to tell you, furthermore, that I have a conclusive feel for how he'll respond from here.

Who does?

Who knows? Maybe, in a weird way, this makes the Kings even more dangerous in Game 2. They've sure got nothing to lose now on Tuesday night and are bound to play looser.

Who knows? Maybe Artest comes back from suspension and dominates Game 3 with a King-sized chip on his shoulder. Maybe he'll be so amped, fueled by the roaring denizens of Arco Arena, that Artest won't even notice the nagging pain in his sprained right thumb.

This much I do know: Artest's history of volatility is not why Sacramento placed only 15th last week in my 16-to-1 ranking of each playoff team's championship chances. The Kings were 15th because they were playing San Antonio in Round 1, simple as that.

Artest comported himself so well post-trade and made such an impact defensively that, until Saturday's lapse, I had almost forgotten about his dark side.

Almost.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playoffs2006/columns/story?columnist=stein_marc&id=2420082
______________________________________________________________________________________
He fails to mention if say Duncan, for example, would've received the same punishment for doing the exact same thing. It's a double standard at it's best.

cdep73 · Apr 25, 2006

Marc Stein is a moron.

Elise10 · Apr 25, 2006

What I find ridiculous is this comment:

If it wasn't a flagrant then why wasn't Manu suspended, I guess a busted lip is just an "oops, my bad"

Then to further illustrate his point here's the following:

Never mind he first said Mike, care to comment on Bruce.

Ok.........right Stu

Knowing fully that Mike could only hit a person short as Earl Boykins in the head with his elbow

http://www.sacbee.com/content/sports/basketball/kings/story/14247529p-15065116c.html

BigWaxer · Apr 25, 2006

What concerns me is this... Take a visit over to pacersdigest and see the thread about this on there. Makes me think HMMM more for TDOS talk lets just get through the playoffs first.

Diehard Jim · Apr 25, 2006

"Had any player made contact with another player's head with his forearm, during what I would consider a nonbasketball play, they would have been suspended," Stu Jackson

IF you are playing a game of basketball and "SUPPOSED" to protect the paint, then how is this a non basketball play????

Manu was running through screens and into the painted area which we all know is supposed to be protected in the game of basketball. the fact that Artest stated "It wasn't even a payback shot," Artest said by phone. "It was just like defensive aggressive awareness. I'm in the paint, and it's just, You're not going to be into my lane. Both elbows were pulled back. I pulled them back so they wouldn't hit anybody, you know what I'm saying?"
So basically the Kings especially Artest are no longer ALLOWED to stop guys from running into the paint, because this is a non basketball play

This is the part that disgusts me, this is no way was headhunting, it was good hard basketball, knock the guy down off the screen, I in no way believe he was purposly trying to hit Manu in the head. I do believe he was trying to put a shot into Manu but not to the head.

Plus has the league done anything to Pop for yelling at Ron? If this was a player doing it he would have been fined or suspended. there is such a double standard in the league it is ridiculous.

Popovich is the most crybaby coach in the NBA with Jerry Sloan right behind him. These guys complain about every call which does not go there way and complain more than any other coach in the game!

Also,
Was Robert Horry Fined/Suspended or anything for his head shot on Mike Bibby in the last regular season game against the Kings, Which was an Obvious Flagrant Foul! NO!

This is the most flagrant double standard approach I have seen!

BigWaxer · Apr 25, 2006

Diehard Jim said:

Includig myself I think that is the thing that bothers all of us. The complete double standard we have. Addon the ball in the stands by Bonzi and we have us one very jacked up front office in the NBA.

SLAB · Apr 25, 2006

= Clean hard-nosed defense.

= Clearly malicious shot with intent to injure.

quick dog · Apr 25, 2006

I find it amusing that Stu Jackson has the audacity to accuse Ron Artest of administering a "payback" shot. Payback? For what? The League apparently judged that Ginobili did not commit a flagrant foul. By their pathetic logic and administrative conduct, what deed requires a payback?

Stu Jackson is a human termite. Remember Dick Bavetta and Game 6!

KingKong · Apr 25, 2006

quick dog said:

Yes, very amusing. What exactly did Ginobli do to warrant such a payback to begin with? Although it could be construed as payback for the drubbing we got during Game 1.

Evenstar · Apr 25, 2006

quick dog said:

I find it amusing that Stu Jackson has the audacity to accuse Ron Artest of administering a "payback" shot. Payback? For what? The League apparently judged that Ginobili did not commit a flagrant foul. By their pathetic logic and administrative conduct, what deed requires a payback?

Stu Jackson is a human termite. Remember Dick Bavetta and Game 6!

WORD

vladetomiller · Apr 25, 2006

does any one feel that dick bevetta will be at the suns lakers game this wednesday

When I say that the league is run as a business by stern and co with certain business motives people question it, but this thread is full of double standard concerns which point to some favors to either the spurs or the lakers.

EXACTLY - the league helps certain teams win games and dont help the other teams that much (game 5)

Rowdyone · Apr 25, 2006

OK, Ron is out for tonight under the current rules and policies. Nothing can be done about it. But this incident, besides hindering our chances, brings up several points that need to be address for the future. First, and foremost, you cannot allow more physical play "in the playoffs" because no one knows where the line is since one set of rules is applied during the game and another lone individual has the power to change the complexion of the teams playoff chances by reviewing tape and applying his own set of rules and independently decide on a players "intent" at the time if a controversial play. If this policy is retained then at least there should be a committee of more than one to filter out prejudices and pre-conceptions. Secondly, the player's past should not be the issue...the play in question should be the only determining factor. In this instance we have Stern saying, "No, Ron's past had nothing to do with it" while Jackson says "Yes, his past is a consideration"....so which is it guys? Apparantly they're just making it up as they go.

atxrocker · Apr 25, 2006

SLAB said:

excellent point SLAB!

tradepeja · Apr 25, 2006

i love the point, and pun on "hard nosed"

Dime Dropper · Apr 25, 2006

This may be good for us. Emphasis on may. GO KINGS!!!

Viking · Apr 25, 2006

I just heard this and all I have are three letters.

W.
T.
F.

bibbinator · Apr 25, 2006

SLAB said:

IOKIYAS = It's OK If You're a Spur

jon e · Apr 25, 2006

why doesnt the league just review every game and every call after games have been played and start penalizing guys for calls that have been missed. hey, why dont they go back and change sumaki walkers 3 in game 4 that shouldnt have counted. give me a break

Viking · Apr 25, 2006

jon e said:

I made this point in another thread. I'd like our 2002 NBA Championship.

thesanityannex · Apr 25, 2006

Ron's out for 1 game. Does it suck?......sure. Did it seem a bit unfair?.....sure. Does it mean there is a conspiracy going on in the league?.................probably not. Some of these theories I've read are quite absurd.
It seems he was simply suspended for it being a "blow to the head". Ron and his teammates seem to be taking this better than some fans. Lets just all take a deep breath and realize he'll be back for game 3.

Viking · Apr 25, 2006

thesanityannex said:

Ron's out for 1 game. Does it suck?......sure. Did it seem a bit unfair?.....sure. Does it mean there is a conspiracy going on in the league?.................probably not. Some of these theories I've read are quite absurd.
It seems he was simply suspended for it being a "blow to the head". Ron and his teammates seem to be taking this better than some fans. Lets just all take a deep breath and realize he'll be back for game 3.

1 playoff game is kind of a big deal.

thesanityannex · Apr 25, 2006

Viking said:

But what are we going to do about it? I'm done with all the b'ing and moaning. Time to look forward.

Diehard Jim · Apr 25, 2006

Viking said:

EXACTLY!

There are a MAX of 7 games in a playoff series, so 1 game is at the very least 14% of the series or if the series only goes 4 games than it is 25% of the series!

To make this even more in perspective if this percentage was put into the regular season it equals 11-20 games missed.

So this is really a big deal, and some one stated earlier the players are not saying anything, this is complete BULL! the players cannot say anything or they will be fined/suspended by the league. Ron was quoted as saying he did not think it was fair, heck even the press writing in San Antonio thinks it is a bit overboard!

So to say this is not a big deal is a major understatement!

VF21 · Apr 25, 2006

It's a huge deal but what's done is done. We cannot change it; we have NO voice in this whatsoever. Any type of action fans might think of taking would hurt the individual teams and not the league itself.

I do suspect, as I've said elsewhere, that there is something going on at NBA headquarters. This is the first time I can recall when Stern and Jackson both issued statements and they weren't on the same page....

quick dog · Apr 25, 2006

The Kings have not lost Game 2 yet! Maybe it is worth losing Ron for one game to light a fire under another players butt. No names mentioned!

thenbakings · Apr 25, 2006

thesanityannex said:

Ron's out for 1 game. Does it suck?......sure. Did it seem a bit unfair?.....sure. Does it mean there is a conspiracy going on in the league?.................probably not. Some of these theories I've read are quite absurd.
It seems he was simply suspended for it being a "blow to the head". Ron and his teammates seem to be taking this better than some fans. Lets just all take a deep breath and realize he'll be back for game 3.

By game 3 it will be too late.

Artest Has Been Suspended for Game 2!!!!

Bench

Starter

Starter

Bench

Starter

G-League

Starter

Starter

Bench

Starter

Hall of Famer

Starter

Starter

Starter

Bench

Bench

Starter

Starter

All-Star

Starter

Bench

Bench

Starter

thesanityannex

Guest

Starter

thesanityannex

Guest

Bench

Super Moderator Emeritus

Starter

G-League