You are correct. You did not say they were the same thing. My bad.

You actually said that what Hansbrough did was worse than what Coles did...

And for the peanut gallery...

You are correct also. My bad.

Rutledge said that Hansbrough's actions were worse.

He can't get up? Or say "What was that for?"

???

Not at all. I'm saying that unless you KNOW what he said, you can't penalize him for what he said. If that is assuming, then that standard means that you must T every player who appears to talk at an opponent when you can't hear what they're saying. I really doubt you're proposing that.

Put simply, his mouth moving is fully insufficient to warrant any penalty.

Ah... so you're not saying that WE don't know what he said (which is what I thought you were saying), but the referee on the spot didn't know what he said. OK. If that's true, I agree. However, I assume (there's that word again) that the referee who actually chose to penalize the player did hear what he was penalizing him for.

I think I have a right to my opinion as Cole only exchanged words with the opponent and Hansbrough exchanged words (look at the tape) and came forward to Anderson. Yes, not that far towards Anderson, but he did not back up like Cole did. And I can understand Cole backing up because the guy he was going up against was much bigger then him. Hansbrough is about the same size as Anderson and walking away would not have been a good look. Just ask LBJ as he is being ripped apart for not coming at Muhammad. ;)

Peace

Evidently, that too would be a bad assumption.

Had he actually said something worthy of a T, the league would not have rescinded the technical foul.

He couldn't. He was too busy flopping on his a$$. :D

As I said before. Different officials, different experiences and different games and situations. I have no problem with how the 3 situations were handled and think it is unrealistic that all situations will be done the exact same when the game situations were not the same.

Peace