clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

Stern Reaction

New, comments

When the news first broke of David Stern's decision to rethink the league's gambling rule rather than discipline all 56 referees for breaking that rule, I opted not to post anything about it because we already had two discussions on the topic in the diaries by Ladmo and JSun. However, for anyone curious about my reaction, it's this: An absolute ban on legal gambling out of fear it might lead to another Tim Donaghy makes about as much sense as an absolute ban on alcohol because someone might become an alcoholic. I have no problem at all with the gambling rule being updated. In general, I think the less a company interferes with how its employees spend their personal time, the better. But that said, I only wish David Stern had found this new level of common sense back in May when he declined the opportunity to rethink another outdated rule. Because doing the right thing now only makes the prior decision seem that much more dubious.

But enough about what I think of the latest decision from Stern. What's more important is what the Suns think. Steve Nash unloaded with both barrels in this quote from Paul Coro's latest blog entry:

"I'm not into worrying about what Stern is doing. I figure I'm not going to win that battle anyway. I've lost it in the past so why bother getting involved."

"If I let it, it'll distract me. I'll be (ticked) off all the time. And that's like every other week, a decision comes down that you don't understand. So just stay out of it. Bowen stepped on Amaré's ankle and kneed me in the balls. No suspension, whereas other guys (with) maybe less infractions get suspended on the first one. I'm not in the office. I don't know why they decide what they decide. Therefore, I'm not going to even bother to start judging their decisions because I don't get it."

In the previous Coro blog entry, it sounds like Mike D'Antoni and I have the same opinion about the gambling rule:

"Two wrongs don't make a right," D'Antoni said of the ruling on referees. "They needed to do that and move past it."

I also agree with his take on the bench rule:

"There should be a change (in the rule) so you can arbitrarily look at it and make it so there's different interpretations, like whether your team even started it. There are different circumstances. If I run out of the house to shoot somebody or if I see my family getting beat up and go out to defend them, one is a little bit different punishment. With one, you throw the key away."

As for the two guys who were directly affected by the rule, Amare Stoudemire and Boris Diaw, they're both taking the "time to move on" approach. Can't say I blame them since, as Diaw says, "it's too late" to change what happened.

That Paul Coro blog entry is worth reading for more than just his and the Suns' take on the ruling inconsistencies. At the bottom, there's a terrific bit on several of the Suns and other celebrities they resemble. There are also some notes on what became of several recent Suns who are no longer with the team. I guess next time I need information for a Where Are They Now? feature, I'll know where to start.