Buddy suspended for Duke

[br801]

Coleman, Seikaly and Brower going ham on Cornell…those are “throwing” punches. So much pearl clutching in this thread. Yes, he should have gotten a flagrant foul in game and probably been ejected. But the refs failed to call it or review the play afterwards. You disagree with Bilas? He thinks Buddy shouldn’t be suspended, and neither do I. ESPN playing that clip over and over and Greenberg and Ellis immediately advocating for a suspension made this a thing.

This wasn't on any ESPN talking heads. Anyone with half a brain watching in real time knew it was "a thing" and that there was a very good chance Buddy would face some consequences once the league reviewed the play.

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

Hyper-technical loophole: ACC suspended Buddy Boeheim, not Jackson T. Boeheim.

 

[Louie and Bouie]

After 39 pages, I notice the underlying delight (not well masked) of some in this thread that Buddy is suspended on a questionable post-game decision is equally correlated to those that have had enough of his father at the helm of the program.

 

[kmart128]

Syracuse really needs to appeal suspension right before game time. That is smartest... cause even if we lose atleast he would have got to play his last game. And if we somehow pull of a miracle id rather not have Buddy against Miami/BC than Duke

 

[CDNCuse]

After 39 pages, I notice the underlying delight (not well masked) of some in this thread that Buddy is suspended on a questionable post-game decision is equally correlated to those that have had enough of his father at the helm of the program.

What makes the suspension "questionable"?

 

[donniesyracuse]

What sucks is this kid’s career is over if we lose.
Between this and the Miami Senior game it honestly sucks.

Kid deserved to leave his sneakers on the court at the end of his last game.

Are people ruling out a CBI invitation?

 

[OttoMets]

Personally with what weve seen in this world the last whatever years, I’m just strongly against debating reality even if it affects what I want or like.

he punched him. It happened. Want to debate the punishment, cool. Want to blame the refs for not doing it during they game, cool. But I hate what Jim said and posters suggesting it didn’t happen.

I've been wondering why for the past 18 hours I'm stuck in this "Somebody's wrong on the internet and needs to be corrected!" mode.

This is why.

The "black is white" crowd, coupled with the player's dishonest (and, naturally, school sanctioned) "I feel bad that I swung my arm" excuse, is just infuriating in this broader context.

I don't care if you're a superfan, hate the ACC, think officiating is arbitrary and capricious (me), deplore the physicality of the game that's come to allow that type of box-out to happen every time down the floor (again, me). But don't pee on my leg and tell me it's raining.

 

[xc84]

What makes the suspension "questionable"?

ask Jay Bilas

 

[OttoMets]

I’m just going to assume that everyone saying Buddy shouldn’t have been suspended also didn’t think Howard should be suspended and/or fired. I mean, there’s no reason for anyone to go through that thread and compare notes, is there?

I think there should be a different set of standards for coaches than players. But, yeah, there are probably going to be some gross inconsistencies if we compare takes between the two analogous arm-swinging incidents.

 

[Bayside44]

Yes buddy was the root cause. But the refs have a job and they didn’t do it.

So refs are supposed to go to the monitor every time a player complains? Serious question.

 

[Bayside44]

It’s crazy that we have Jay Bilas in our corner arguing that Buddy shouldn’t be suspended, and we have Cuse fans arguing in favor of Buddy’s suspension.

You do know that fan is short for fanatic, right? Fans aren’t supposed to be rational, especially in the heat of a moment like this. We could use a little more fanaticism on here in defense of Buddy, at least in the immediate aftermath of a 40 point win. I guess everybody just hates this season and wants the misery to be over with.

He punched a guy.

I appreciate Jay coming down from his mountaintop to address the masses but that wasn't his best work.

 

[Louie and Bouie]

What makes the suspension "questionable"?

There was no flagrant foul called during the game so no automatic review for post-game suspension. No in-game fighting so no review triggered by that. ACC, I guess, has the ability to review every game after they are over as to conduct warranting suspension. Not sure they do that so this seems to be a special circumstance based upon the nature of the game and the eyeballs on it.

Is this happening throughout the season where all games are reviewed after conclusion for suspendable conduct? Is review triggered by a complaint of one of the schools participating? That didn't happen here. Its questionable because its arbitrary. If its not consistently done throughout the season in the same manner its unfair.

Additionally, I haven't seen anyone reference an automatic suspension provision that the ACC used in this matter so its an subjective punishment which by definition could be argued and questioned.

Whether its a flagrant 1 or flagrant 2 is a red herring. Those are in game calls that can be reviewed and changed in game. This was a conduct call made after the game and not governed by those rules to my knowledge.

People obviously have their own opinions as exhibited here but the I'm 100% right, you're 100% wrong crew overstates their argument throughout this thread in my opinion.

If you dare disagree, they name call and shout you down. That is bothersome as I strongly believe its a subjective post-game call pressured by national media where reasonable minds could and have disagreed.

 

[xc84]

"He punched" (1) all punches are not equal (2) as if a "punch" as in this case is worse than an elbow (Wilkes's point) which is rarely called and even more rarely reviewed after a game

Bilas is right.

 

[Bayside44]

Coleman, Seikaly and Brower going ham on Cornell…those are “throwing” punches. So much pearl clutching in this thread. Yes, he should have gotten a flagrant foul in game and probably been ejected. But the refs failed to call it or review the play afterwards. You disagree with Bilas? He thinks Buddy shouldn’t be suspended, and neither do I. ESPN playing that clip over and over and Greenberg and Ellis immediately advocating for a suspension made this a thing.

Really? Those guys are in their 50s.

Lets pull up some targeting hits from that era too!

Michael Barrow hit on Vanover

Miami Hurricanes Michael Barrow hit on Tamarick Vanover from Florida State

www.youtube.com

 

[Grbac]

Guys get punched, elbowed, scratched, tripped, stomped, all the time in basketball. It happens. It’s a physical sport.
The guy he “hit” isn’t mad and doesn’t think it warrants a suspension.

Where is the precedent that would justify this suspension? Does the ACC routinely dissect games to watch for suspension worthy actions?

If the ref missed it then that should be it. Do we go back and watch every game to issue uncalled fouls now?

This is nothing but the ACC overreacting to a viral slow motion clip of Buddy issuing a receipt on the court.

 

[OttoMets]

"He punched" (1) all punches are not equal (2) as if a "punch" as in this case is worse than an elbow (Wilkes's point)

Bilias is right.

Oy, I gotta let this one go. Maybe not yet, though.

On (1), we might agree to disagree here. In a game where refs struggle to use discretion (ahem, block/charge), it's easiest to have black and white rules. For disciplinary purposes, then, all punches are equal. Obviously the gut-punch is much less dangerous than a shot above the shoulders, a sidearm less dangerous than a haymaker, that's obvious. But nobody wants refs parsing those moves, so a punch is a punch.

(2), again, sure. Elbows can do more damage than punches, but if anything the pendulum has swung too far in penalizing elbows (in particular, I remember both Fab and Rautins picking up absurd flagrants when they were simply protecting the ball while getting handchecked). More often than not, an elbow is the consequence of a legitimate basketball move. A punch never is.

 

[rrlbees]

So refs are supposed to go to the monitor every time a player complains? Serious question.

Yes when said player is also on the ground. Something happened. I’ve seen them check the monitor for far less to see if something was intentional.

 

[xc84]

Oy, I gotta let this one go. Maybe not yet, though.

On (1), we might agree to disagree here. In a game where refs struggle to use discretion (ahem, block/charge), it's easiest to have black and white rules. For disciplinary purposes, then, all punches are equal. Obviously the gut-punch is much less dangerous than a shot above the shoulders, a sidearm less dangerous than a haymaker, that's obvious. But nobody wants refs parsing those moves, so a punch is a punch.

(2), again, sure. Elbows can do more damage than punches, but if anything the pendulum has swung too far in penalizing elbows (in particular, I remember both Fab and Rautins picking up absurd flagrants when they were simply protecting the ball while getting handchecked). More often than not, an elbow is the consequence of a legitimate basketball move. A punch never is.

So you agree not all punches are equal but you disagree with me in that you think they should all be treated the same way even though there is a vast range of differences.

as far as elbows, they are no more "legitimate" than what Buddy did. They are frequently intentional and you point out that because they use an elbow instead of a fist, they are "legitimate".

 

[Bayside44]

Yes when said player is also on the ground. Something happened. I’ve seen them check the monitor for far less to see if something was intentional.

Guys flop constantly. Might as well give soccer tops and cards to refs.

 

[senorpalmer]

Coleman, Seikaly and Brower going ham on Cornell…those are “throwing” punches. So much pearl clutching in this thread. Yes, he should have gotten a flagrant foul in game and probably been ejected. But the refs failed to call it or review the play afterwards. You disagree with Bilas? He thinks Buddy shouldn’t be suspended, and neither do I. ESPN playing that clip over and over and Greenberg and Ellis immediately advocating for a suspension made this a thing.

The glory days! Who could forget the rumble with Providence in the 87 Final 4? Not one suspension, of course the rules on fighting were less established back then if non-existent. The rules of course have changed since then.

1987 NCAA Final Four Semi Final Syracuse vs Providence

Description

m.youtube.com

Fight is at the 43:00 mark in the video. Good times, DC throwing haymakers and catching one right in the face. Ah the memories….

 

[dollarbill44]

Every time we win big in an ACCT tournament game, something bad happens.

I know right? I mean, BOTH times!!!

 

[orange79]

View attachment 215387
Who asked this….?

 

[rrlbees]

Guys flop constantly. Might as well give soccer tops and cards to refs.

Guys do flop which has nothing to do with this. There’s no denying refs often go to the monitor to see if some act was flagrant or intentional. Many they don’t see and I assume it’s the opposing coach calling it out to them.

 

[Fly Rodder]

JFC, some you make me embarrassed to be an SU fan. Cut the homer crap. It’s sad.

 

[OttoMets]

So you agree not all punches are equal but you disagree with me in that you think they should all be treated the same way even though there is a vast range of differences.

as far as elbows, they are no more "legitimate" than what Buddy did. They are frequently intentional and you point out that because they use an elbow instead of a fist, they are "legitimate".

Yeah, pretty much that.

I think you're right that there are some vicious elbows (illegitimate in a basketball context) that are deserving of ejection/suspension, but the distinction is that the elbow can be a basketball move while a punch cannot. Because officials struggle when there's a gray area, punches are treated differently.