Wednesday, 16 May 2007

Thursday Debate: Should Amare Stoudemire and Boris Diaw have been suspended?

I've got a new thing on here called the Thursday Debate... since it's Thursday, we have another one. Funny how that works.

This has really been talked and talked about, but I thought it might be interesting to pointedly ask the question and add the poll at the end... should these two guys have been suspended for Game 5?

In my opinion, I think the suspensions were warranted. Both players clearly violated the rule, and they should be suspended for it. They both obviously knew about the rule... and for those that claim that it's just a natural reaction and they couldn't stop themselves, well, I would argue that everyone else on both benches was able to.

Let me also mention that I don't like the rule... I think and I hope it will be revised some in the offseason. But that's not the point. The rule is in place, and you can't amend that rule just because the guys are important to the Suns and it's a great series that was greatly affected by the suspensions.

Also, I didn't really see the Tim Duncan thing as being comparable at all. People are saying that if Amare and Diaw are suspended, why wasn't Duncan? Well, Duncan took 2 steps towards a teammate on the ground during a non-altercation... I didn't see that as at all similar to the Suns players running 20+ feet towards an altercation.

In my opinion, the rule is flawed, and the fact that the suspensions wound up having an effect sucks... but, I agree with the decision to suspend them. Fact is, the rule is in place, they violated the rule, and bending the rules just because it's a great series is a dangerous precedent. So basically, I think this was the lesser of two evils.

But I'd love to hear your thoughts in the comments and in the poll.

Should Amare Stoudemire and Boris Diaw have been suspended?