What about the first T?
 

The second technical was questionable, but, probably based on Perkins' reputation as a whiner, and maybe what he said, might have been deserved, even if he was walking away. BUT, It was the first T that was completely undeserved, as Perkins was trying to give a hand to help Pierce up, his hand slipped, and his elbow flew back...don't even think there waqs much contact, if any. Bad call...this is the T the league will rescind.

It is? If that is the case we would not have some people calling this marginal and others calling it a no-brainer. Also I have never been told in a rulebook what is actually profanity and what is not. I would think a police officer has similar judgment to decide when certain laws are violated like disorderly conduct or even a speeding ticket. I know everyone does not get a speeding ticket for going one mile per hour over the speed limit, but if we are we are still guilty.

Peace

I had a buddy tell me once that profanity was anything you wouldn't say in front of your grandmother. He didn't know my grandmother. :D

I agree with Hugh Hollins. I think Rush didnt realize, at the moment, that it was Perkins 2nd.

The second T should, and I believe will, be rescinded. And I don't believe this NBA policy shows up its officials at all. Perkins still got tossed and didnt play most of a critical playoff game. To suspend him for another playoff game would be too severe IMO.

It's good that the have the rule on the accumulation of techs and also, in this instance, the rule that allows the office to rescind one, b/c Perkin's actions don't warrant sitting out an additional game. Again, IMO.

5 out of the 6 were part of dual technicals, which have nothing to do with yapping at officials, etc. Some of 'em were things like double elbows, etc.

And the NBA rescinded the second technical foul today, so Perkins avoided the suspension.

I just think the "walking away" argument is weak. "Walking away" doesn't make it all right to say whatever you want. Now, if you want to debate whether "flailing his arms" and the specific profanity are worth the T, that's one thing, but to say that "walking away" while doing so makes everything alright, well I find that to be a weak rationalization.

OMG, we must be related. Although she doesn't hold a candle to my mother in law!

Really? You let coaches and players ***** more about a call you weren't sure of than a call that your were sure of? If you weren't sure, why'd you make the call in the first place? This sentiment is nonsense.

From the guy who wrote a scathing post about us not supporting our fellow officials at that level and making fun of the league for its practices, I find this to be truly ironic.

Nothing could be more undermining than for the league to come out and rescind the technical foul and lift the suspension. The league is telling the entire viewing world that the official was wrong and they aren't backing him.

:(:mad:

Well, it's already been rescinded.

Another reason I have trouble watching NBA.

Same here.

Peace

I wonder how the other officials will look at any of Perkins' actions during the next game. I would probably have a short leash.

I think the problem is David Stern's god complex. If this was Dennis Rodman or Ron Artest I think the T would stand. But because of the situation it was certain to get lifted and it did.

On another note, from my TV Paul Pierce is one of the biggest jerks/cry babies in the league. I don't understand how he does the things he does on both offense and defense. I have always had a problem with players getting someone in the air and then launching their bodies into them. I especially don't like this when they (the offensive players) do this in a direction that isn't towards the hoop. It isn't natural for me to jump sideways while shooting. At least one of these plays should have been a play on last night.

I don't find it ironic at all. My beef is the way some people on this board choose to characterize the NBA game and it's overall officiating. Specifically referencing it as the NBE, comparing it to pro wrestling, and implying that what the officials are asked to do, and what they do, is somehow not officiating basketball.

I never said that individual officials are not open to criticism though that's what some tried to spin the discussion into. Personally, I feel that individual officials, just like any other human being, are subject to criticism. In this instance, I disagree with Rush's judgment in issuing the second T.

The fact that the NBA has a ruling calling for a suspension after a certain number of Ts is a good thing. And I also thinks it's a good thing to give the office the discretion to rescind a technical so that a player is not unfairly suspended. This does not, and should not, undermine an official. It's a fair policy that works in the best interest of everyone.

If someone from the league office came down at halftime and said the second T doesnt count and allowed Perkins back in the game that would be undermining Rush. But as I said in my earlier post, the T was administered, and Perkins got tossed. What the league policy does is allow the office to rescind a T for the sake of the accumulation toward a suspension, which IMO, is more than fair.

So my position here is consistent in that I support the NBA and its overall officiating process. Rush's T was enforced and the player got tossed. But given time and the advantage of replay to access the entire situation, the league made the correct decision, IMO, that a further suspension was not warranted. It's called common sense and looking at the big picture.

Got it. Doesn't really change things IMO.