Fortson suspended 3 games

[LRB]

Fortson was suspended 3 games. Denver, Minnesota, and Washington.

[sike]

only one more game until we get the potato back!....oh yheaaaaaa![img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-confused.gif[/img]:

[superheadcat]

cuban's take:

Cuban says rule change unnecessary
Fortson Penalty is ’Fair’

Bob Young
The Arizona Republic
Dec. 1, 2003
Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban, in an e-mail reply to questions from The Arizona Republic, responded to Suns Chairman Jerry Colangelo, who wants a change in league policy because the penalty handed out to Danny Fortson of the Mavericks for a flagrant foul against Zarko Cabarkapa isn't substantial enough.

Fortson was suspended for three games without pay after committing the foul late in a Phoenix victory over the Mavericks. Cabarkapa suffered a fractured right wrist in the resulting fall. Colangelo has said he will consider legal action against Fortson and will ask the NBA to change its policies, making players guilty of a flagrant foul in which a player is hurt sit out as long as the injured player.

"I can appreciate and respect Jerry's passion and standing up for his player," Cuban wrote. "While I may not agree with him on this issue, I thought the penalty was fair, I truly hope he brings the same level of intensity to the many other issues the NBA faces, and that the other 28 owners follow his lead in being active on issues they believe in. It would be a welcome change."

Colangelo said he will ask for a special meeting to discuss the issue.

"There are many changes that could and should be made today in the NBA that can make the game better on the court and for fans," Cuban continued. "If Jerry feels this is an important one, I hope he does call a special meeting of the Board of Governors. . . .

"Unfortunately, most issues never see the light of day and die in committees that the same six owners only are privy to, or for lack of not only owners not partaking in discussion at Board of Governors meetings, but not even showing up.

"Among the many issues that he hopefully will be just as articulate on are NBA players in the Olympics and the injuries they face, doing away with weakside defenders stepping in front of a player headed to the basket with no intention of making a basketball play, but merely hoping to get run over to get a charge (which, by the way, is a far more dangerous play than what Danny did, although currently legal, and which led for the second time in the past three years to Dirk Nowitzki getting injured in our game with the Suns), the officiating, and many, many more.

"It's unfortunate that Zarko got hurt, and I know Danny Fortson is just as sorry at what happened. But if Jerry's passion on this issue leads to a new level of activism rather than apathy, I will be there to support his efforts."

[grndmstr_c]

Mark rocks.

[madape]

This article just shows that Cuban is in this for himself and not the good of the game. When one of his players gets injured on a legal play, he whines and cries. When one of his own players breaks a guy's wrist in one of the most blatant cheap shots I've ever seen, he plays it off as just another part of the game. I've lost a lot of respect for Cuban because of this. I used to admire his desire to make the league better. His double-talk on this issue makes it clear to me that he just wants what's best for himself. Every time he cries about the officiating, I'll know he's just looking for a scapegoat for a Mavericks loss. Everytime he proposes a rule change, I'll know it's because he thinks his team got shafted. Every time he opens his big mouth, I'll suspects it's purely self-serving.

What ever happened to looking out for your peers? Jerry's team was the victim of a player who's blatant disregard for the rules virtually ended a promising young player's first NBA season. This completely blatant and disgusting cheap-shot is costing the Suns and it's owner, dearly. Yet Cuban is NOT diciplining his player at ALL. However, in the same sentence in which he defend's Fortson, he manages to both criticize Coangelo for being upset, AND blame the league for Dirk's nagging ankle injury. Shameful.

[u2sarajevo]

ape... normally I agree with you but can't seem to on this one.

I think it is part of an owners job to support his players... and has been Cuban's MO since day one. I think it would be sad if Cuban was calling for Fortson to be suspended longer, as it would give the appearance that the club is not behind him.

It was obvious that Fortson did not mean to break anything to me, and he said that publicly as well.

[superheadcat]

which owner is NOT self serving?

the suns' owner's outbreak is for suns' benefits, is it not? cuban even said he'll support him if he goes beyond seeking apathy. how many other owners will do that?

[madape]

Originally posted by: u2sarajevo
ape... normally I agree with you but can't seem to on this one.

I think it is part of an owners job to support his players... and has been Cuban's MO since day one. I think it would be sad if Cuban was calling for Fortson to be suspended longer, as it would give the appearance that the club is not behind him.

It was obvious that Fortson did not mean to break anything to me, and he said that publicly as well.

Cuban has the power to dicipline Fortson on his own. He doesn't need the league to do so. In fact, I think even a small suspension leveled by the team would send a more powerful message than anything the league can impose. Cuban needs to be strong in saying that he does not support this kind of behaviour out of his players. I would expect the same kind of quotes to come out of his mouth that I've heard come out of Nelson's mouth: that what Danny did has no place in the game. Instead, all I've heard from Cuban is crap like "he was ejected, that should be enough of a penalty". Now, instead of addressing the issue of Fortson's dirty play, he's taking the opportunity to complain that league should be protecting DIRK better. Are you kidding me? How can you take this stance seriously when he allows his own players to hack and cheap-shot defensless players with nary a slap on the wrist from the team. We haven't heard of any action on Cubans part to remedy the situation. On the contrary, he's defended Fortson's action at every turn. And now he has the gall to blame the league for Dirk's ankle injury? It's preposterous.

If owners are supposed to defend their players to the end, that's fine. But it does harm their credibility when they talk out of two ends of their ass on the same issue. Cuban is not on the side of the players in general. He's only on the side of his own players. He doesn't want to improve league play. He only wants to improve his own team's chances of winning. All I'm saying is that from now on, I'm going to interpret Cuban's whining and crying a little differently. I am now more aware of his self-serving, scheming, flim-flam. He is less capable of taking a moral stand, in my eyes, than he was before this Fortson hullabaloo. If I was a little naive beforehand, I'm sorry. I have now seen the light.

[Psychedelic Fuzz]

We are not talking about broken ribs from being pushed so hard, we are talking about a kid landing on his wrist. We are not talking about a punch blatantly and unquestionably intended to hurt someone. It was a cheap shot, no one is denying that. As I said before, was the intent to put him on his back? was it to injure the guy, no. Did he show remorse? Yes.

6-8 weeks for his wrist to heal is not "ending his season" and personally I hope the Chupacabra has a career game the next time he
plays against us.

I don't recall Cuban calling out teams for not punishing players. He's fighting for better officiating. That is a league issue. The same league that is sitting fortson and lightening his wallet. I'm not buying the hypocrite argument.

You're rants are one of the most enjoyable things on this site, but you're off base on this one.

[grndmstr_c]

If the Mavs suspended Fortson on top of what the league did (you've got it backwards, it's not that Cuban has power and therefore doesn't need the league. It's that the league has power and therefore there's no need for Cuban to do anything else), it would completely ruin his confidence. This team is still trying to win a championship, and we'll need our bigs to play well in order to have a shot. Fortson was punished about as severely as the CBA allows. That's plenty.

As for your comments about Mark, I don't have a clue what you're talking about. Mark has been tireless in his efforts to stimulate reform in the league. He's not asking for special treatment. He's asking to have his arguments heard and debated in an open forum, and he's working for changes that will affect every team in the league the same, as he sees it, positive way. His feeling, and I'm inclined to believe him, is that the league is commonly quite apathetic concerning change. For the first time in a while there's another owner in the league who's screaming at the top of his lungs that changes need to be made, and Mark is seizing the opportunity by speaking out in support of Colangelo's activism, even if he may not agree with the specific issue. In my mind that is to be comended.

[madape]

We are talking about a blatant cheap shot that Cuban has done nothing to address. By not punishing Fortson, or even speaking harshly against his action, he is tolerating this behavior. He complains to the league about everything that goes wrong with the Mavericks. But when his team is clearly at fault for something as serious as this, he does nothing. No, he just takes the opportunity to do even more whining and complaining. Over the past week, I have not seen the actions of a classy organization. I have seen a self-serving owner politicising his own team's dirty play into a ploy to bend the rules is own interests. He's pointing a lot of fingers at other people and not trying to address the problems on his own team.

The organization knew of Danny's reputation before they brought him here. They chose to trade for him anyway. Once he was here, they chose to insert him in the starting lineup with only a couple of practices under his belt. Now that a forseeable regrettable event has occurred, the organization hasn't done a damn thing to discourage it from happening again. It seems to me that Cuban is in fact encouraging the very type of behavior on his team that he's condemning publicly to the league. That's hypocritical. All I'm saying is he should clean up his own mess before complaining about the mess of others.

[dallas_esq]

As for your comments about Mark, I don't have a clue what you're talking about. Mark has been tireless in his efforts to stimulate reform in the league. He's not asking for special treatment. He's asking to have his arguments heard and debated in an open forum, and he's working for changes that will affect every team in the league the same, as he sees it, positive way. His feeling, and I'm inclined to believe him, is that the league is commonly quite apathetic concerning change. For the first time in a while there's another owner in the league who's screaming at the top of his lungs that changes need to be made, and Mark is seizing the opportunity by speaking out in support of Colangelo's activism, even if he may not agree with the specific issue. In my mind that is to be comended.

You have a promising career ahead as Cuban's media control guru.

I mostly agree with you grndmstr_C. I think it's Cuban's/organization's decision to bring this cat here in the first place that should be under fire right now. Cuban is handling this ugliness about as well as I would expect him too. I don't see that he has a duty to go beyond what the league has done unless he wants to just cut the kid.

Madape-

We are talking about a blatant cheap shot

- I could not agree more. However, if you give the Mavs the benefit of the doubt then you want to see them make this kid into a better/cleaner player. If you feel that "reforming" Fortson is a good idea then you have to support him in his efforts. That doesn't mean dogpiling when the world is against him, they are still a team.

[grndmstr_c]

The thing you have to keep in mind is that none of us know what has been said to Fortson behind closed doors. I, for one, would be very surprised if Nellie hasn't told Danny that those types of fouls won't be tolerated, and that if this started happening on a regular basis there would be consequences within the organization, but that's just not the kind of thing that they'd be in a hurry to air out in public, especially after the firestorm started by Colangenlo.

Edited: spelling

[madape]

Admittedly, this was Fortson's first flagrant foul as a Maverick, so I do think that he deserves a second chance. What I worry about is whether the message the Mavericks sent was clear enough, or if a message was even sent at all. Nothing that Cuban has said or done leads me to the conclusion that they have done anything as an organization to address the issue. Therefore, I expect to see this kind of thing happen again, both from Fortson and from other Mavericks players now that they've witnessed the proverbial "green light" from the organization.

Hopefully, the Mavericks brass has done privately what should have been done publicly.. but I guess we'll have to wait unill the next bone snaps to know for sure.

[kg_veteran]

I'm not buying what you're selling this time around, ape.

If Cuban wanted to send the wrong message, he would have griped about the suspension. He didn't. He said it was appropriate. Nelson was harsher in his criticism of the play, but both handled the situation professionally and appropriately.

Other than games against the Lakers, though, you can bet Nelson will bury Fortson on the end of the bench. He hates play like that, and I'm willing to bet he'll effectively impose a suspension on Fortson by banishing him to the land of DNP.

[madape]

Let's hope Nelson benches him, KG. I think it would speak volumes if Nelson held him out of the Lakers game.

Perhaps I am being a bit premature of condeming the Mavericks organization on this. I really should wait to see what Nelson does with Fortson before being too critical. But while I reserve judgement on the Mavericks as a whole, I will not reserve judgement on Mark Cuban. You can call him "professional" all you want, but this whole mess stinks of low-class to me. Don Nelson has both condemned Fortson's actions and apologized to the Phoenix fans. Cuban has done none of that. What he has done and said publicly has rubbed me the wrong way, and I think it should rub others the wrong way, too. Maybe I've set the bar too high for Mark. It certainly seems so based on the reaction by Mavericks fans to my opinion. But don't worry, that bar has been lowered.

[kg_veteran]

ape - I will definitely agree on this point that you make. Why did Cuban have to turn his response into a bitch session about everything else that's wrong with the league? It's almost like he was saying, "I know my guy broke your guy's wrist, but let's talk about bigger issues." And then he had to turn it into how the Mavs are getting screwed (how does taking a charge injure Dirk's ankle? That makes no sense. Also, what does the Olympics have to do with anything?). I hate that kind of crap.

Fact is, our guys stand in and take 'weakside charges' just like everybody else. That's perhaps Eddie Najera's best attribute. Every guy on the team tries to do it during the course of a game. To complain that it should be illegal is a bit hypocritical, unless the Mavs are going to instruct their players not to attempt to take those types of charges because they are such a "dangerous play." Otherwise Cuban is just saying, "Change the rule because it's dangerous, but until then we're going to take advantage of the rule, injuries be damned."

I guess what I'm saying is, I can kind of see why you might be pissed at Cuban.

[kg_veteran]

I think it would speak volumes if Nelson held him out of the Lakers game.

Indeed. I'm afraid it won't happen, but I'd be very happy if it did.

[grndmstr_c]

I have to disagree, KG. If you want to make changes you have to take advantage of the opportunities that present themselves. I don't blame Cuban in the slightest for trying to harness this. It's a very savvy thing to do, and it's how things get accomplished.

As for the charge rule stuff specifically, I don't see the problem. The team's trying to win, and they would be negligent if they didn't do everything possible within the rules of the game. Cuban and Nellie (who also feels that the charge rules should be changed, though his proposed solution is different) can lobby for the rules to be altered all they want, but unless the rest of the league decides they're going to voluntarily stop trying to draw these secondary charges I would neither ask nor expect the Mavericks to stop doing it on their own. Similarly, if they feel the rules should be changed, I don't see why they shouldn't try to get them changed.

[Tarzan]

Why is there so much whinning about the Fortson foul? It wasn't even a very hard foul. It is unfortunate that a good young player got hurt. It is because he landed wrong. Harder fouls are committed in every other NBA game.

I don't like malicious, dirty play. For example, the way Karl Malone plays. However, the Fortson play was not malicious or dirty. Let it go.

[kg_veteran]

I have to disagree, KG. If you want to make changes you have to take advantage of the opportunities that present themselves. I don't blame Cuban in the slightest for trying to harness this. It's a very savvy thing to do, and it's how things get accomplished.

Where you and I differ is that you think that Cuban's complaints were in some way related to the complaints made by Colangelo. They weren't. If Cuban was commenting on a related issue that he had a complaint about, that might be something. But he tried to turn a complaint about one specific hard foul into an excuse to bitch about the Olympics and weakside charging calls, neither of which were even on topic. You call that taking advantage of an opportunity. I call it changing the subject.

As for the charge rule stuff specifically, I don't see the problem. The team's trying to win, and they would be negligent if they didn't do everything possible within the rules of the game. Cuban and Nellie (who also feels that the charge rules should be changed, though his proposed solution is different) can lobby for the rules to be altered all they want, but unless the rest of the league decides they're going to voluntarily stop trying to draw these secondary charges I would neither ask nor expect the Mavericks to stop doing it on their own. Similarly, if they feel the rules should be changed, I don't see why they shouldn't try to get them changed.

If you're going to complain about a rule being dangerous to the players, how can you advocate taking advantage of that rule UNLESS you don't really care about the health of the players at all?

[grndmstr_c]

Some of Cuban's comments were in response to the substance of Colangelo's comments (cf., "It's unfortunate that Zarko got hurt", and "I can appreciate and respect Jerry's passion and standing up for his player"). Others, like the stuff regarding charge rules and the Olympics, were injury-related issues that Mark has been trying to get the league to address. As such, they are not so unlike what Colangelo is lobbying for (ie., a rule change he wants the league to address that would be expected to reduce injuries to players). Mark's adding particulars to a subject, not changing it.

Again, on the charge rule, specifically. It's pro sports. I'd buy and second your argument if we were talking about peewee ball here, but we're not. We're kidding ourselves if we think that subjective sportsmanship is going to keep anybody at this level from doing what they are allowed to do by the rules. And the broader issue is that following rules and advocating changes to those same rules are not mutually exclusive actions. Yes, there are plenty of causes and issues in the world that have been and could be well served by magnanimity such as what you are suggesting, but...well, it's pro sports.

[sike]

wanted to see if anyone else had read this crap!



Inside the Mavericks: Fortson's foul may help club
09:13 PM CST on Sunday, November 30, 2003




Hard as it is to believe, there might be some good that comes out of Danny Fortson's flagrant foul in Phoenix, although it takes a little imagination to make the scenario work.

First, remember that the Mavericks are viewed as one of the NBA's softest teams. Anything that helps chip away at that image is welcomed, even if it comes in a manner that is unpalatable to just about everybody.

If the flagrant foul Fortson leveled on Phoenix's Zarko Cabarkapa makes future defenders think twice before they cavalierly ramble down the paint to the bucket when Fortson is in the game, then there has been some positive fallout of a bad situation.

The Mavericks need an enforcer and while Eduardo Najera does a lot of dirty work, he doesn't have the same kind of edge to his image that Fortson does. The 6-8 Fortson has been a quality individual since joining the Mavericks, save for the Phoenix incident. He's been jovial and respectful to teammates and coaches.

But if his reputation grows as a player who isn't afraid to dish out punishment, then that will serve the Mavericks well later in the season.

Incidentally, for anybody worried about payback from the Suns, the two teams don't meet again until March 8. By then, Cabarkapa will be back and any ill will the Suns have should have subsided.

In the interim, it wouldn't be the worst thing in the world if Fortson continued to cultivate his rugged personality on the court. It will do nothing but help the Mavericks. It's the same reason Nick Van Exel was so effective. Opponents didn't know exactly what to expect from him. For somebody who is six inches and 75 pounds heavier, that's a great weapon to have.

so Eddie in his chubby wisdom is not so subtlely telling Fort to hit people......and the NICK comparison is just stupid.....oh well, its pays to be a homor...just ask Sefko!
[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-confused.gif[/img]

[LRB]

Originally posted by: sike
wanted to see if anyone else had read this crap!



Inside the Mavericks: Fortson's foul may help club
09:13 PM CST on Sunday, November 30, 2003




Hard as it is to believe, there might be some good that comes out of Danny Fortson's flagrant foul in Phoenix, although it takes a little imagination to make the scenario work.

First, remember that the Mavericks are viewed as one of the NBA's softest teams. Anything that helps chip away at that image is welcomed, even if it comes in a manner that is unpalatable to just about everybody.

If the flagrant foul Fortson leveled on Phoenix's Zarko Cabarkapa makes future defenders think twice before they cavalierly ramble down the paint to the bucket when Fortson is in the game, then there has been some positive fallout of a bad situation.

The Mavericks need an enforcer and while Eduardo Najera does a lot of dirty work, he doesn't have the same kind of edge to his image that Fortson does. The 6-8 Fortson has been a quality individual since joining the Mavericks, save for the Phoenix incident. He's been jovial and respectful to teammates and coaches.

But if his reputation grows as a player who isn't afraid to dish out punishment, then that will serve the Mavericks well later in the season.

Incidentally, for anybody worried about payback from the Suns, the two teams don't meet again until March 8. By then, Cabarkapa will be back and any ill will the Suns have should have subsided.

In the interim, it wouldn't be the worst thing in the world if Fortson continued to cultivate his rugged personality on the court. It will do nothing but help the Mavericks. It's the same reason Nick Van Exel was so effective. Opponents didn't know exactly what to expect from him. For somebody who is six inches and 75 pounds heavier, that's a great weapon to have.

so Eddie in his chubby wisdom is not so subtlely telling Fort to hit people......and the NICK comparison is just stupid.....oh well, its pays to be a homor...just ask Sefko!
[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-confused.gif[/img]

But this is exactly what the talking empty heads keep saying, indirectly, but saying nonetheless. The Mavs are soft. The mavs need to take the hard foul. Yada, yada, yada.... Guess what, this happens if you keep trying to intimidate people with the hard foul.

[dude1394]

Well my position about this is still that the NBA, the media, the fans, the ex-players, the commentators glorify the "hard foul". I for one will be cheering when fortson enters the game against the lakers.

[dude1394]

Fact is, our guys stand in and take 'weakside charges' just like everybody else. That's perhaps Eddie Najera's best attribute. Every guy on the team tries to do it during the course of a game. To complain that it should be illegal is a bit hypocritical, unless the Mavs are going to instruct their players not to attempt to take those types of charges because they are such a "dangerous play." Otherwise Cuban is just saying, "Change the rule because it's dangerous, but until then we're going to take advantage of the rule, injuries be damned."

I guess what I'm saying is, I can kind of see why you might be pissed at Cuban.

I don't see why griping about the "rules" and using the rules is some sort of hypocritical situation?? If the rules say that you can do x and doing x gives you an advantage of course you do it. Are you saying that we should have a set of "good guy" rules. Maybe I would agree with you if we got extra points for playing by them but certainly not when it puts you at a disadvantage, that's silly.

[kg_veteran]

Some of Cuban's comments were in response to the substance of Colangelo's comments (cf., "It's unfortunate that Zarko got hurt", and "I can appreciate and respect Jerry's passion and standing up for his player"). Others, like the stuff regarding charge rules and the Olympics, were injury-related issues that Mark has been trying to get the league to address. As such, they are not so unlike what Colangelo is lobbying for (ie., a rule change he wants the league to address that would be expected to reduce injuries to players). Mark's adding particulars to a subject, not changing it.

Colangelo wasn't talking about "injury-related issues." He was talking about what he perceived to be a dirty, intentional foul. Injuries that occur when players play in the Olympics or that occur when opposing players attempt to take charges are hardly of the intentional variety. But I digress, because I don't think this is really worth arguing about. We both agree that Cuban took the opportunity while commenting on the matter to change the subject and address issues he wanted to address.

Again, on the charge rule, specifically. It's pro sports. I'd buy and second your argument if we were talking about peewee ball here, but we're not. We're kidding ourselves if we think that subjective sportsmanship is going to keep anybody at this level from doing what they are allowed to do by the rules. And the broader issue is that following rules and advocating changes to those same rules are not mutually exclusive actions. Yes, there are plenty of causes and issues in the world that have been and could be well served by magnanimity such as what you are suggesting, but...well, it's pro sports.

Whether it's peewee ball or the NBA, it doesn't matter. Cuban claims that taking charges "is a far more dangerous play than what Danny did" and "led for the second time in the past three years to Dirk Nowitzki getting injured." If that's what he believes, and it's really that dangerous, then he should instruct his team not to do it, whether the refs will call it a foul or not. Otherwise, he either really doesn't care about injuries to players or really doesn't believe it's dangerous.

Originally posted by: dude1394
I don't see why griping about the "rules" and using the rules is some sort of hypocritical situation?? If the rules say that you can do x and doing x gives you an advantage of course you do it. Are you saying that we should have a set of "good guy" rules. Maybe I would agree with you if we got extra points for playing by them but certainly not when it puts you at a disadvantage, that's silly.

It's really pretty simple. Cuban claims to be worried about injuries to players. And he has said that he believes that taking charges is dangerous to the players. If he's TRULY worried about injuries to players, then this isn't just about taking advantage of the rules as they are interpreted by the refs. This is about player safety. OR, perhaps Cuban was just talking out of his ass and really doesn't believe that taking charges is that dangerous at all.

He can't have it both ways.




Edited for typo

[MavsFanFinley]

Notebook: Players group weighs action for Fortson
Colangelo's comment defames, players association head says

Monday, December 1, 2003
By EDDIE SEFKO / The Dallas Morning News

The NBA players association will explore its options in the aftermath of Phoenix Suns owner Jerry Colangelo calling Mavericks' forward Danny Fortson "a thug."

Billy Hunter, executive director of the NBAPA, was at American Airlines Center on Monday to speak to the Mavericks on several matters. Afterward, he said Colangelo's statement certainly got his attention.

"We have to address that," Hunter said. "As far as recourse goes, we have two avenues. We can appeal to the commissioner. Or we can move to arbitrate it.

"And the reality could end up being a cause of action, because we're talking about defamation."

Fortson received a flagrant foul when he pushed Phoenix's Zarko Cabarkapa to the floor Wednesday. He will serve the last of a three-game suspension Tuesday night against Washington.

Hunter used retired center Andrew Lang as a precedent for Fortson's situation. Lang was responsible for the flagrant foul that knocked Patrick Ewing out during the 1998 season.

"And nobody called Andrew Lang a thug," Hunter said.

Hunter also spoke to the Mavericks about the state of the collective bargaining agreement with the league. Hunter said he had a meeting set with commissioner David Stern on Monday. The league has until Dec. 15 to extend the current CBA through the 2004-05 season.

If they don't do so, the league could be looking at another protracted labor negotiation next summer.

[grndmstr_c]

Colangelo was absolutely talking about injury-related issues, as evidenced by his stated goal of changing the rules so that players who committed a flagrant foul that led to an injury of some sort would have to serve suspensions that last for the duration of the injured player's incapacitation. If it weren't for the reality that flagrant's are more likely to lead to injuries we wouldn't even be having this conversation.

I can certainly respect your opinion that if the Mavs are opposed to the rules that allow secondary defenders to draw charges because of injury risks that they shouldn't have their players position themselves to draw charges. It's admirable, but if you actually expect anybody in the NBA to adopt such a stance you're being unrealistic, and if you are going to single out Mark and Nellie for that, you're being unfair. I seriously doubt that there is a single coach, player, or owner in the league who is not aware of the physical danger that charges pose, yet none of them have proven willing to take the steps that you propose to eliminate the risk. In fact, I would argue that by advocating rule changes Mark and Nellie are distinguishing themselves in a positive way from the many others who have done nothing. This in itself may very well fall short of the standard that you would prefer they adhere to, and that's fine, but if you're going to criticize them for speaking up, I would argue that your indignation should fall even more heavily upon the shoulders of the idle.

[LRB]

Originally posted by: dude1394

I don't see why griping about the "rules" and using the rules is some sort of hypocritical situation?? If the rules say that you can do x and doing x gives you an advantage of course you do it. Are you saying that we should have a set of "good guy" rules. Maybe I would agree with you if we got extra points for playing by them but certainly not when it puts you at a disadvantage, that's silly.

Actually some of the rules are silly and so is the two faced way the NBA goes about enforcing them. But them's the rules and that's what we's got to play by unitl or if we can get them changed. So yea, I say go ahead and take advantage of a rule, even if you'd like it changed. Not only is it silly not to, but it's down right stoopid not to.

[MightyToine]

MadApe,

Why should Fort be held out of the Lakers game? Why should Cuban have to do ANYTHING MORE than what the League did?

If say Amare Stoudemire Broke Travis Best's wrist, and the League gives out only a 3-game suspension, YOU ACTUALLY THINK THAT FAT-ASS COLANGELO WILL "Do the Right thing" and Add to the Penalty of his PLAYER?? HAAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Foolish...FOOLISH little man. [img]i/expressions/rolleye.gif[/img]

[kg_veteran]

I can certainly respect your opinion that if the Mavs are opposed to the rules that allow secondary defenders to draw charges because of injury risks that they shouldn't have their players position themselves to draw charges. It's admirable, but if you actually expect anybody in the NBA to adopt such a stance you're being unrealistic, and if you are going to single out Mark and Nellie for that, you're being unfair. I seriously doubt that there is a single coach, player, or owner in the league who is not aware of the physical danger that charges pose, yet none of them have proven willing to take the steps that you propose to eliminate the risk. In fact, I would argue that by advocating rule changes Mark and Nellie are distinguishing themselves in a positive way from the many others who have done nothing. This in itself may very well fall short of the standard that you would prefer they adhere to, and that's fine, but if you're going to criticize them for speaking up, I would argue that your indignation should fall even more heavily upon the shoulders of the idle.

Hey, I'm not the one who brought it up, and I'm not really indignant. Personally, I don't think taking a charge is any more dangerous than a number of other activities that occur in every single NBA game. But you've conveniently ignored my point.

If the NBA changed the rules so that it was NOT a foul to knock players to the floor like Fortson did, do you think it would be acceptable for the Mavs to go around knocking players to the floor, as long as the rules permit it? Surely not. That is, not unless you didn't really care whether players got hurt.

The EXACT same rationale applies to this situation. In fact, Cuban said that trying to take a weakside charge is "far more dangerous." So either Cuban really doesn't care about players getting hurt, or he really doesn't think it's that dangerous.

Your argument about how I'm being "unrealistic" is really irrelevant. For the record, I don't expect Cuban, or any other team owner, to take this stance (that his players shouldn't take charges because they're dangerous). I just expect Cuban to either be consistent, or keep his mouth shut.

[kg_veteran]

Actually some of the rules are silly and so is the two faced way the NBA goes about enforcing them. But them's the rules and that's what we's got to play by unitl or if we can get them changed. So yea, I say go ahead and take advantage of a rule, even if you'd like it changed. Not only is it silly not to, but it's down right stoopid not to.

Fine with me. I'm all for taking advantage of the rules. I'm even okay with people advocating for rules to be changed. But if you're going to claim that a play is dangerous to players, and you claim to be concerned about injuries to players, it's hypocritical to send your team out on the court and have them engage in the play that you claim is so dangerous.

[grndmstr_c]

Hey, I'm not the one who brought it up, and I'm not really indignant. Personally, I don't think taking a charge is any more dangerous than a number of other activities that occur in every single NBA game. But you've conveniently ignored my point.

If the NBA changed the rules so that it was NOT a foul to knock players to the floor like Fortson did, do you think it would be acceptable for the Mavs to go around knocking players to the floor, as long as the rules permit it? Surely not. That is, not unless you didn't really care whether players got hurt.

The EXACT same rationale applies to this situation. In fact, Cuban said that trying to take a weakside charge is "far more dangerous." So either Cuban really doesn't care about players getting hurt, or he really doesn't think it's that dangerous.

Your argument about how I'm being "unrealistic" is really irrelevant. For the record, I don't expect Cuban, or any other team owner, to take this stance (that his players shouldn't take charges because they're dangerous). I just expect Cuban to either be consistent, or keep his mouth shut.

Outside of evaluating how accurate Cuban is in his own appraisal of the dangers inherent in taking charges (for the record, as many instances as there are of guys sliding under opponents already in the air to take illegal charges, I think he's not that far off), it doesn't really matter if charges are notably more or less dangerous than other currently legal basketball activities. What's important is that: a) they do carry a significant injury risk, and b) they are, in the estimation of both Cuban and Nellie, not really good basketball plays since they don't involve making a play on the ball. Aside from the legality issue, this is very close to a description of what was wrong with what Fortson did.

Now, what if the NBA changed its rules as you hypothetically suggested? One word: Football. It happens all the time in football. And people get injured worse than Cabarkapa all the time, sometimes tragically worse. But it's legal, so coaches coach it, players do it, and fans love it. Do you watch football? Now, football and basketball are different sports, and that's fine with me, because I like both of them, but it's just not accurate to suggest that if the NBA decided to suddenly allow flagrants like the one Fortson commited that they would be blazing a trail of unprecedented disregard for human safety that fans should object to on principles alone, becuase other sports have their foundation built on that sort of violence.

As to Cuban either really not caring if players get hurt, or really not thinking the play is that dangerous. This issue doesn't exist in a vaccum. That logic only works if there are no mitigating considerations in the mix. But there are. Money and competitiveness spring to my mind right off the bat. Cuban wants to win, and he wants to continue to be financially succesful. In order to do that, given the level of competition in the league, you have to take advantage of the rules. It doesn't mean that he has no concern for the players' safety, and it doesn't mean he's making stuff up. It means that his desire to win and have money outweigh any impulse he might have to do the right thing, as it were. Hey, I never said he's a saint, just a good owner.

And I didn't say that you were being unrealistic. I said if you were expecting someone to swear off a legal play because they thought there was an injury risk, you were being unrealistic. Obviously, since you don't think that, you're not being unrealistic.

[kg_veteran]

Now, what if the NBA changed its rules as you hypothetically suggested? One word: Football. It happens all the time in football. And people get injured worse than Cabarkapa all the time, sometimes tragically worse. But it's legal, so coaches coach it, players do it, and fans love it. Do you watch football? Now, football and basketball are different sports, and that's fine with me, because I like both of them, but it's just not accurate to suggest that if the NBA decided to suddenly allow flagrants like the one Fortson commited that they would be blazing a trail of unprecedented disregard for human safety that fans should object to on principles alone, becuase other sports have their foundation built on that sort of violence.

I've been watching football for just as long as I've been watching basketball, and I have never heard a football owner complaining about a legal (permitted by the rules) play as being dangerous to the players. And we KNOW that many/most football plays are. Given the fact that football sells violence, however, such a complaint would be even more hypocritical than the complaint that Cuban makes here.

Also, I didn't understand the rest of your comments here. Are you saying that fans wouldn't object to the legalization of flagrant fouls, or that players wouldn't commit them?

As to Cuban either really not caring if players get hurt, or really not thinking the play is that dangerous. This issue doesn't exist in a vaccum. That logic only works if there are no mitigating considerations in the mix. But there are. Money and competitiveness spring to my mind right off the bat. Cuban wants to win, and he wants to continue to be financially succesful. In order to do that, given the level of competition in the league, you have to take advantage of the rules. It doesn't mean that he has no concern for the players' safety, and it doesn't mean he's making stuff up. It means that his desire to win and have money outweigh any impulse he might have to do the right thing, as it were. Hey, I never said he's a saint, just a good owner.

Exactly. He cares more about winning and money than he does about player safety. Good for him, and good for us. I just don't want him pretending his priorities put safety ahead of winning, or money. Because they don't.

[sike]

I have not cought all this stuff, .....
I've been watching football for just as long as I've been watching basketball, and I have never heard a football owner complaining about a legal (permitted by the rules) play as being dangerous to the players. And we KNOW that many/most football plays are. Given the fact that football sells violence, however, such a complaint would be even more hypocritical than the complaint that Cuban makes here.


but what about just a few years ago when they insitituted all the rules for the QBs and the no helmet to helmet contact...are you saying that owners did not complain that their guys were getting hurt....and that is at least part of the reason that those rules got inforced???....they complained and the rules got changed!

[kg_veteran]

Even when those rules were added/changed, I never heard an owner complaining publicly prior to the time that the rules were changed.

[Eman]

Tough Enough
Do You Want Mavs To 'F 'Em' Or Not?

By Mike Fisher -- DallasBasketball.com
‘F ‘em!’
Only a few shorts months ago, that became the Nick Van Exel-led battle cry of a long downtrodden, long dormant franchise. ‘F ‘em!’ wasn’t just about how the 2002-03 Mavs were perceived as being soft; to all of us, it was about how the Dallas Mavericks have always been perceived.
Now comes the Danny Fortson flagrant foul issue, and some questions we must ask ourselves.
When we said ‘F ‘em!’ did we mean just the Kings, or can we ‘F’ the Suns, too?
When we said ‘F ‘em!’ did we mean just Chris Webber, or can we ‘F’ Zarko Whatshisname, too?
When we said ‘F ‘em!’ did we mean just for playoff games, or can we ‘F’ our regular-season opponents, too?
The oddest analysis of the Fortson deal comes from the folks who believe it was not only the contact that was inappropriate, but the timing, too.
‘It’s one thing,’ goes the argument, ‘to hammer Shaq while he’s driving for the winning dunk in Game 7 of the NBA Finals. It’s another to do it to a meaningless guy in a meaningless moment in a meaningless game.’
Ridiculous. And hypocritical. For years, Mavs fans have screamed for this team to take a strut down the Mean Streets, to employ a bad boy or two who isn’t afraid of contact, of walking the walk, of pushing back – maybe even of pushing first.
And now we’ve got it. So what are we crawfishing for?
In terms of machismo, we’ve seen a transformation of the franchise. First the owner was ready to sprint onto the court to fight. Then Steve Nash brought his tough-kid-in-an-un-tough-package routine. Then, all chin-first and blue-collar, came Eduardo Najera. Nick Van Exel stepped it up from there. And now the Mavs are more nasty than ever, with surly Antoine Walker and defensive-tackle-like Danny Fortson providing the Mavs some much needed ‘tude.
And you want. … what? Walker to only strut when he’s winning? Fortson to only foul guys when the score is close?
Fortson didn’t undercut the guy. He didn’t throw a punch. He didn’t pull a Karl Malone, who will not only foul you intentionally on a part of your body where he knows you’re hurting, but will even foul you intentionally when he goes up for a jump shot (that leg kick extension makes me back up from the TV screen on ever Malone jumper).
What Fortson did – without thinking about it, really – was exactly what you’ve been asking Shawn Bradley to do for years! You never wanted Shawn to hurt anybody. … but you damn sure wanted him to plant somebody in the third row!
Zarko gets six-to-eight weeks with a broken wrist. That’s too bad. Fortson gets a guilty conscience and a three-game suspension. That’s fine. The next opponent who drives to the hole gets a mili-second flashback of what Fortson did to Zarko.
And I don’t want the Mavs to ‘be careful,’ or to go softer when the score is lopsidedm, or to save their ‘F ‘em!’ approach for opponents or moments that they think ‘matter.’ Given the way these Mavs this year have seemed to mentally float through games, frankly – opponents’ injuries aside – I think they need more brutality-within-basketball-bounds, not less.

I think this article does a good job of explaining why we need Fortson (part of the reason) on the Mavs.

[grndmstr_c]

I don't think fans would appreciate the legalization of flagrants. I know I wouldn't. But my reason for opposition would be that it would uglify the game and just turn it into rugby with a twist. As for the players, well, who knows. That's not how today's players were taught, but eventually it would change the game and I would expect the players to take full advantage of the rules just as they do in every professional sport.

Perhaps we just differ primarily with regard to what we consider hypocritical. To me, Cuban's stance on charges would be hypocritical if he were taking advantage of the rules as they are currently written and at the same time chastising other teams for doing the same. But that's a very different thing from what he's doing. He's been critical of the leauge being slow and reluctant to address issues that he feels need to be addressed, but he's not calling out teams for making a legal play that I'm aware of.

[grndmstr_c]

Originally posted by: kg_veteran
Even when those rules were added/changed, I never heard an owner complaining publicly prior to the time that the rules were changed.

Public outcry or not, the changes wouldn't have been made if the owners didn't support them. Also, remember that Mark isn't the only owner who's been airing his complaints publicly this past week.