What I am comparing is that he did not do anything. And this is in the fanboy thread, not the officiating thread, which means that if you listened to any media the claim was that emotion should be apart of the game. But for the record Cole was pushed, not knocked down, but certainly pushed. And he did "nothing" on the level that Tyler H did and Cole was ejected and and Tyler H was given just a T.

Now you tell me why a guy that made no contact what so ever is ejected and a guy that makes a chest bump should be given a complete pass?

Again I was not the one making the claim Tyler H's behavior was acceptable. So I would like an explanation why these situation are so different? Something tells me I am not going not going to get a good answer. ;)

Peace

They were both ejected for what appeared to be not much, except like it was said before, a, "its a f@#$@$ blowout so stop acting like petulant kids and go sit".

Apples to oranges. I always hate garbage time in my games, because more often than not you have to be more alert.

Hansbrough stood up and was then chest bumped by Anderson. He moved less than a half foot from where he stood up. Cole turned around and assumed a fighting pose and was ready to go.

Again, if you think those two things are equal, good grief.

The only thing different, and the only real justification for the call here, is the game situations. Not sure I agree with the call, but I understand it.

Actually, I think Cole did do something that Hansbrough didn't do and that was exchange obscenities with the opponent. If you're a couple of garbage timers and you're gonna be stupid enough to do that with Kenny Maurer standing 5 feet away, you're gonna get tossed. Maurer don't play. Just search him on YouTube.

BTW, Hansbrough did not receive a technical foul as it was rescinded by the league.

I think the officials in each situation handled it perfectly.

I think the LeBron-Muhammad situation was handled perfectly.

I think the Tyler H-Anderson situation was handled perfectly.

And I think the situation last night was handled perfectly.

Each situation officials were right there and I do not expect all officials either to consider everything in the same way. I was just pointing out that we were told that Tyler did nothing but in my opinion helped escalate the situation and stayed in the game and a guy only got ready in a stance and got ejected. I think that is hypocracy when you call for Tyler to not get anything if what happened last night was so over the top. I guess I do not look at officials and expect different officials with different levels of experience with different situations in each confrontation to do the exact same things across the board like robots. That does not happen at any level even at the NBA level. That is really the point. ;)

Peace

This has been pointed out several times (in this thread and in the other) that the NBA rescinded H's Technical...now if they rescind Cole's ejection, then I will conceded that I am wrong on this. If they don't rescind his ejection - thus telling everyone that the two actions were NOT the same - will you be able to concede that you were wrong? ;)

I know what the NBA did, but that does not mean we all agree with those decisions they make after the fact.

And if that happens at other levels, I would not see a single supervisor of mine saying to not T Tyler H in that situation. I can see any official in my experience and who I work for easily be supported for that type of call. Getting knocked down and getting up in someone's face is not an excuse IMO. Actually I could see one of them saying to me, "Did you need to eject Cole?" But if explained what was said or knowing what was said, that opinion could change. And Tyler said something to Anderson, he was not totally innocent.

Peace

Didn't think so...

What else did you expect?

I'm no Hansbrough fan by any stretch of the imagination but he didn't do anything. He just got up. Maybe he braced himself once he realized he was about to be shoved again, but that is about it. He certainly didn't get in anyone's face. Sure, he may have said something but unless we know what he said, you can't assume it was problematic. He may have said "What was that for?" since there was no reason for him to have been chucked to the floor. If those are T'able words, the Rut must never make it to halftime with any players left.

He got up and got in Anderson's face. He did not stay down or go in the other direction. And his mouth was moving, so he was not silent either.

Peace

You say you can't assume what he said was problematic, yet you somehow assume it wasn't. Use a LITTLE bit of common sense here. He was just knocked on his ass. Do you really think he got up and thanked his opponent? Do you REALLY think he simply said, "What was that for?"

This is kind of ridiculous - you say you can't assume, and then you not only make an assumption opposite of what he made, but you further project that assumption onto Rut and assume he would T someone up for saying something innocuous. Sorry ... not KIND OF ridiculous. EXCEEDINGLY ridiculous.

Almost as ridiculous as saying that Hansbrough's and Cole's actions were the same thing.

Almost as ridiculous as saying that Hansbrough got up and got in Anderson's face.

I actually did not say they were the same thing. I more or less asked why they were seen as so different? But to act like their are no similarities is also very silly when both Cole and Hansbrough said something to their opponent after a physical confrontation of some kind. The one guy that made no contact after the fact and was ejected. Yes not the same, just like the push that Anderson did to Hansbrough was not the same as Muhammad's push on James. But one was ejected and the other was not for some reason. But these situations are certainly similar in nature and was asked when the situations took place on this site and other places.

Peace

Agreed... although no one actually said that.

I love people that put words in other people's mouths and then ridicule them for what they didn't say.