OT: Ron Artest Pulls A Cheap Shot, Gets Ejected
Ron Artest just took a cheap shot at James Harden, throwing a hard elbow to Harden's head, and was ejected. This play was probably one of the dirtier plays that I've seen happen for a while. I'm guessing that Artest is gone for at least 5 games, if not more. There's no place in any sport for that type of move, just a terrible decision by Artest. Harden is fine though, and he'll still be able to play.
UPDATE: Looks like Harden is out with concussion symptoms now. Artest is an idiot.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=so3TR0bcx9k
Jump to 1:06 if you just want to see it slowed down.
Update #2: GIF
Sorry what is the point you're making? That World Peace is less to blame because Harden put himself in that situation? Or that you are amazed that anyone would get close enough to World Peace during a basketball game to get themselves elbowed in the side of the head? Not sure what you're getting at here...
The point is that if Harden did get in his way on purpose, he needs to accept some of the blame. How much blame? Maybe one percent, but either way, if you want to be annoying on the court, you run the risk of getting hurt.
Once again, I'm not condoning what Artest did, but at the same time, you have to be pretty dumb to do something like that (assuming that Harden did do it on purpose). Because I wouldn't get in Artest's way, would you?
How many times do unintentional bumps like this happen in a game, without even causing a foul on one team or the other? 30? 40? Yes Hardin did contribute somewhat to this event occurring by being in that location and bumping MWP, but he's nowhere near the proximate cause (also to blame: his automaker that manufactured his car that allowed him to drive to the stadium, and his choice of NBA as profession).
This logic is extremely flawed, and your last sentence, rather than acquitting MWP, would almost seem to argue that he is too dangerous to remain in the NBA at all...
"How many times do unintentional bumps like this happen in a game"
Talk about extremely flawed logic. How do you know it was unintentional?
"also to blame: his automaker that manufactured his car that allowed him to drive to the stadium, and his choice of NBA as profession"
See above.
"rather than acquitting MWP, would almost seem to argue that he is too dangerous to remain in the NBA at all..."
Who said I was on Artest's side? You have a dangerous habit of making assumptions. Do you not remember me saying that Artest should be suspended for at least the rest of the year?
It's fair to call it unintentional when the same thing happens on half of made baskets.
Also, even if you replace 'unintentional' with 'intentional' or 'slightly malicious' or 'provocative' my point remains the same and MWP remains 100% the transgressor..
Really, so if I intentionally keep bumping into you, and you react to it, are you 100% the transgressor? Yes I know this may not be the same case as what happened between Artest and Harden, but I would just like clarification.
As is your explanation. It is great to see you digress to personal attacks, but don't worry about my feelings, your post says more about yourself than it does about me.
Or you cannot explain your "point" so you hide behind a generic response.
"No, Harden didn't keep bumping into him all game, so that point is stupid as fuck."
Never said he did, check your facts.
"No, even if he actually kept lightly bumping into him, that wouldn't make him at any fault."
Lightly bumping was never my argument.
"Your logic of "man, this guy is fuckin crazy...would you bump into him" is beyond the dumbest logic I've ever read on this sight."
So would you intentioanlly bump into Ron Artest? It seems you like many others here are glazing over the fact that I keep stating an assumption that Harden may have done it on purpose.
"There is no excusing it."
Never said Artest was not at fault.
Maybe you should have realized why no one else responded. Because there was nothing to go off of except my assumptions. I will give you credit though, at least you "tried".
Your second post started off saying if he bumped into him on purpose, he has to take some blame for getting elbowed in the head. No he doesn't.
It ends with you saying Harden was dumb for getting in Artest's way because he is crazy. That isn't an endorsment for Artest. It is proof that he is not mentally stable enough to play in a league that people bump into each other on purpose and accidentally all the time. In no way does this mean that Harden should accept any blame at all. When this same thing happens after nearly every play and no one normally gets concussed, that tells you that Artest is 100% to blame.
Your reasoning is horrid. And you are also coming off pretty dumb.
April 22nd, 2012 at 10:08 PM ^
First of all, I could care less about your opinion of my intelligence. I knew I was in the minority and expected a lot of backlash for it. Could it be that my reasoning is horrid because you don't agree with it? Does it make you mad when others don't agree with you?
"Your second post started off saying if he bumped into him on purpose, he has to take some blame for getting elbowed in the head. No he doesn't."
Sounds like a difference of opinion. You really want to argue that? Let me save us both the time and tell you how it will end: no change of opinion.
"It ends with you saying Harden was dumb for getting in Artest's way because he is crazy."
I'm not going back to see exactly what I typed, but my implication was that Harden is dumb if he did that on purpose (somethong that you could have derived from many of my other posts).
"That isn't an endorsment for Artest. It is proof that he is not mentally stable enough to play in a league that people bump into each other on purpose and accidentally all the time."
This has been brought up several times, and everytime I have said that this is not my argument.
I'll ask this question again (I can't remember who I've asked it to, but I don't believe anyone has answered it). Would you ever intentional bump into someone you thought was unstable? Please show me how smart you are...
April 22nd, 2012 at 10:23 PM ^
"could care less?" I'm surprised no one has said anything yet.
April 22nd, 2012 at 10:34 PM ^
I'm surprised anyone other than BigBlue02 and I are reading this garbage...
April 22nd, 2012 at 11:45 PM ^
let me distill this:
your point - harden isn't entirely innocent in that he bumped into artest
the rest of humanity's point - artest's reaction is completely brutal, not acceptable within the league, and could/should leave him out of the playoffs as punishment.
ok there, I clarified.
April 23rd, 2012 at 12:04 AM ^
You definitely did better than everyone else. But here it is again:
My point: IF Harden bumped Artest on purpose, he is not completely innocent. BUT, regardless it was completely brutal and unnecessary and ...
Everyone else's point: Artest is completely to blame even if they don't know anything other than what they saw in that 10 second clip.
If I elbow you in the head, then yes, I am 100% the transgressor. Mild intentional and unintentional contact is a part of the game of basketball.
I'll obviously agree with that, but you are not Artest and I just said react (I should have explicilty said shoved or pushed).
somewhere around 1000 times more than the provocation, the provocation becomes irrelevant.
Please link the site to calculate this...
Yeah, this was flamebait. Neg away.
you should consider whether being a Ron Artest fan is good for you.
I can distinguish between being a fan of someone and someone as role model. Can you?
has anything to do with seeing him as a role model. However, you have made a large number of posts on this thread, trying to mitigate his culpability, frequently going off on irrelevant tangents and taking shots at other posters. I'll give you credit for generally making better arguments than you have here today.
Artest is a punk. It's not easy to be a fan of punks, so you are trying too hard to see him some other way.
"However, you have made a large number of posts on this thread"
Almost all my posts have been responses to others.
"frequently going off on irrelevant tangents"
Sure, I'm the one who is the catalyst for the irrelevent tangents... /s
"and taking shots at other posters"
I'm pretty sure I took shots at others only after I was "attacked". But I could have jumped the gun, I am defending my point against at least 10 others.
"Artest is a punk. It's not easy to be a fan of punks, so you are trying too hard to see him some other way."
What other way am I trying to see him? I for one like to see both sides of a story. I have maintained that regardless of Harden's intent, Artest is almost fully to blame. I think you are trying to somehow use me as your outlet for your hatred of Artest. Were you at the Malice in the Palace? For what that's worth, I think Artest got screwed over on what happened there (yeah, I know, I'm an idiot for having a different opinion blah blah blah...).
OK, let's play the flawed logic game.
So if I punch someone in the face after every other made basket, it must be unintentional since it happens on half of made baskets? /s
Look, I really don't want to belabor this point anymore than I have. You can call it whatever you want, but only one person knows if Harden intentionally bumped Artest. So in my opinion, it is not fair to call it unintentional in this case without a disclaimer that it is an assumption.
It's all well and good to conjure up some kind of hypothetical situation where fisticuffs happen after every other basket, but that deals in a world that does not exist. The world that does exist is one where players bump into each other after baskets, because large men occupy a small space.
"Intent" is the wrong measure here, because it implies what was in Harden's head matters. It doesn't. What matters is the practice of NBA basketball as it is played, in which players bump into each other after baskets and they almost always go on their way without any confrontation. Harden's intent does not matter, because the type of contact he engaged in is part of the accepted practice of playing NBA basketball. Reacting to it, particularly with violence, is not.
Ok, so you're point is that Artest is 100% to blame? I am saying Harden might be 1% to blame...
"Intent" is the wrong measure here, because it implies what was in Harden's head matters. It doesn't.
I bet it mattered to Artest...
"Reacting to it, particularly with violence, is not."
I never said it did.
Yes, that's my point. I think he's 100% to blame because he is the one who transgressed the accepted practices of the NBA.
And Harden's intent couldn't matter to MWP, because he had no access to it. Intent is always internal unless it becomes manifest in speech or overt acts. His perception of Harden's intent mattered, but even if he perceived ill-intent, his response was so over the top as to place him 100% at blame.
"And Harden's intent couldn't matter to MWP, because he had no access to it."
What? If Artest thinks it was Harden's intent to bump into him, then I bet Artest felt it was justifiable to react the way that he did.
"His perception of Harden's intent mattered, but even if he perceived ill-intent, his response was so over the top as to place him 100% at blame."
If I saw someone intentionally bump into Ron Artest and get elbowed in the face, I would call that person a dumb ass. Would Artest still be greatly at fault? Of course. And please don't say "how do you know Harden did that on purpose". Because I don't know, my whole point is based off an assumption, so if my assumption is wrong, my point it moot (something you could have figured out 5 posts ago).
"If Artest thinks it was Harden's intent to bump into him, then I bet Artest felt it was justifiable to react the way that he did."
What "Artest felt" says nothing about Harden's intent, which, unless Harden was saying something that doesn't show up on camera, was entirely unspoken and thus hidden. What we can see is Artest's perception of physical contact that was utterly normal within an NBA game and what we can judge is whether than perception and his reaction was reasonable, which it clearly wasn't.
Sure, so how does this discredit anything I've previously said?
You've been consistently arguing that Harden's intent matters. I've been arguing it doesn't.
Double post.
"You've been consistently arguing that Harden's intent matters."
Not exactly, I've been arguing that Harden's intent mattered to Artest. I do have a conditional argument based upon Harden's intent. But since I don't know Harden's intent, I have reserved judgement on how much blame Artest should receive.
Ah, I see, a frame of mind vs. reasonableness of actions difference.
And... scene.
I would have said the same thing too if I didn't have a good response...
edit: You do know we are talking about Ron Artest?
1% to blame because he ran into him? I mean come on man. You're not that nieve, are you? I bet if you ran into someone, and they KO'd you, you wouldn't be too happy and didn't think you were to blame either.
The problem isn't Harden running into Artest, or really even the elbow, it's Artest's track record. It's not like this type of behavior is new to him.
sign... read above.
Should have said ultimate cause, not proximate cause...
So I guess Nicole Simpson got in the way of OJ?
Well I guess my prediction came true. What logic are you referring to? When did I say Harden got what he deserved? I believe all I did way pose a different point of view, does that make you mad?
But honestly, you can't put any of this blame on Harden. This one is all on Artest.
Honestly did you watch the entire game? Honestly did you watch Artest and Harden through out the game? Honestly do you know if they have a history or don't like each other?
I honestly don't know the answer to any of these questions, so I honestly can't say this is entirely Artest's fault. Do I think this is 100% Artest's fault? Yes, but I honestly don't know for sure.
What if Harden was doing a lot of little things to get under Artest's skin thoughout the game? Did Harden deserve what he got, well no, but he can't be surprised that it happened (see assumption above) and he can't expect zero blame.
Unfortunately I do not possess answers to your questions, but I did count six "honestly"s in your post.
I honestly never asked you.
At least you're honest.