Draymonds a douche but this sets a terrible precedent. So basically you can retaliate if you feel like you were wronged the possession before. wtf is that? Shouldn’t it be double techs?
It helps fix a loophole. Past few seasons the Jazz had some players got hit with some flagrant fouls. Refs couldn’t go back and review.
In one play, a Jazz player got hit dirty, the other team knew it, so they immediately take fouled to stop a review. Jazz wanted to have refs go look. Refs were stuck by the rules that they could only look back one play and they could only look at the intentional take foul.
huge difference between feeling like you were wronged and actually being wronged, i think punishing the instigator more is actually good precedent, especially since he should’ve been thrown out before anything else would’ve happened. Draymond probably would’ve been let off scot free if mitchell did nothing, i think getting heavily punished for effectively correcting the refs mistake would be nuts
Only voice of reason I’ve found in replies to this comment. Mitchell isn’t running around shoving people. Ever. The initiators should always be punished more so we disincentivize these events from occurring in the first place.
If guys like Draymond know they can get away with zero repercussions because of bullshit double techs then why wouldn’t he do it to try to give his team a spark down 10 in the 3rd?
Draymonds a douche but this sets a terrible precedent. So basically you can retaliate if you feel like you were wronged the possession before. wtf is that? Shouldn’t it be double techs?
It helps fix a loophole. Past few seasons the Jazz had some players got hit with some flagrant fouls. Refs couldn’t go back and review.
In one play, a Jazz player got hit dirty, the other team knew it, so they immediately take fouled to stop a review. Jazz wanted to have refs go look. Refs were stuck by the rules that they could only look back one play and they could only look at the intentional take foul.
It’s just a foul, not like Mitchell stabbed him ffs.
huge difference between feeling like you were wronged and actually being wronged, i think punishing the instigator more is actually good precedent, especially since he should’ve been thrown out before anything else would’ve happened. Draymond probably would’ve been let off scot free if mitchell did nothing, i think getting heavily punished for effectively correcting the refs mistake would be nuts
Only voice of reason I’ve found in replies to this comment. Mitchell isn’t running around shoving people. Ever. The initiators should always be punished more so we disincentivize these events from occurring in the first place.
If guys like Draymond know they can get away with zero repercussions because of bullshit double techs then why wouldn’t he do it to try to give his team a spark down 10 in the 3rd?
If refs don’t protect players they’ll protect themselves
Green gets 10 warnings a game before he gets a tech, can Mitchell get 1?
Retaliation wouldn’t be necessary if the refs made the right call in the first place LOL
Mitchell handchecked Raymond for a common foul. Draymond stuck out his elbow to intentionally push over Mitchell. Automatic tech if the refs catch it.