Here is the Dann issue that led to his fine

NBL:

While Scott's charge is the only Tribunal citing to come out of the game, the NBL is still considering whether to impose sanctions to other parties involved in the incident.

I know he hit Madgen but I don't think Scott should be facing the tribunal. Madgen's deliberate bump to Scott that prompted the open hand hit should definitely be taken into account.

Points of discussion for this are:

Dann fined for less
Hinder was behind Dann when he connected with a hand
Dann not cited by refs but by Chuck Harmison; penalty handed down the week following the incident.

Scott had Madgen infront of him
Lined Madgen up and swung at his head when he could have pushed back
Madgen instigated the issue and contact, Scott over reacted.
Refs reported Scott on the night

Result?
NBL will have to fine Scott based on their fine of Dann for a lesser infraction.i am guessing $1000 fine.
Will also issue a warning to all players to lift their game etc etc
Possible warning going to Bruce and Madgen.

Rubbing salt to the wound.

"Let's be absolutely clear on this: the NBL will not tolerate players making deliberate contact to another player’s head, full stop," Mr Harmison said.

“We’re taking a zero tolerance approach to this kind of unsportsmanlike behaviour, and we’ve instructed our referees to do the same.
Chuck Harmison

Similar case to Dann, should be a fine but nothing more is necessary given Scott was sent from the court. Madgen a warning perhaps.

On a separate matter, should putting a player in a headlock and throwing him to the ground warrant the attention of the tribunal? I thought Tovey's foul on Adam Gibson on Friday night was reckless to say the least.

^^ +1 to that.

anyone got vision of it?

Scott was provoked by the bump, but the important thing is the hit, which was silly heat of the moment stuff.

In the scheme of things a bump is a bump and just a sign that you're not going to put up with crap, a hit with an open or closed fist is a lot harder contact and could lead to more serious injury.

Madgen should be cautioned, but then again, if I was Madgen I would have said "I was just walking over to talk to my teammate and didn't see him there so our bodies made contact accidentally"

AFL would probably be one week, in the NBL probably a small fine!

I would've given Madgen and Scott a double-foul on the night.

Dann was unlucky. Looked like he was going for a hit to the chest more than anything? Scott's is more deliberate, but provoked.

Soft. Small fine.

In another post on ranking imports I mentioned that I rated Scott lower because he appeared to be someone an opponent could pysch out of the game easily.

By reacting in that manner and clobbering Madgen on the head, he has set himself up to be niggled the rest of the season.

This could go either way, I have little faith in a body that demonstrates so much inconsistency like the NBL and its tribunal.

Dann should of gotten a warning (at best), Scott has already been punished by getting tossed from the game (is there an automatic fine??), and just to re-enforce the leagues stance, I'd chuck in a 1-game holiday which I'd suspend, to be enforced if Scott has to face the tribunal before the season ends.

Madgen needs to balls up as well, cheap shot when the ball isn't even in play. I don't blame Scott for giving him a love tap.

Madgen and Bruce are cheats.

The second coming of Casey Calvary?

Absolute flop by Bruce should face a suspended fine. dont flop and the rest doesnt happen.

what would scott get if he closed his fist and knocked him out. Ben Madgen is the biggest SH1T Stirer ive seen, i dont know how scott held himself back.

If Madgen is to be sanctioned for that little bump on Scott, " Cheapshot Shawn" should definitley be out of the game. He does that dozens of times throughout any game and probably throws harder punches than Scott's as well every game.

I can just imagine Chris Anstey in the timeout saying "Seth mate, that was a good effort but next time use your elbow, you're sure to get away with it"

Personally I thought a tech would have done the job for Scott's hit, but from the distance of the TV view it's hard to know for sure what the contact was like and how hard it was.

I'm assuming that getting referred to the tribunal is a formality after his ejection. I'm thinking he has already served enough of a penalty for what IMO was a pretty tame hit after clearly being provoked.

1. From the footage it is impossible to determine what actually went on to initiate such behaviour.

2. Players who flop are more of a problem than the player who bumps and causes a reaction.

3. If officials would do their job and call the initial contact that occurs during games, players would not carry on like this.

4. Basketball has rules, contact is illegal, officials should read and apply the rules, fewer unsportsmanlike issues there after...

Good Point.

Missing the last quarter and a half of a crucial game is already too much of a penalty.

If they suspend him as well, the league is a farce.

He would have been cited as the contact was deliberate and to the head.

Madgen should get a warning for his cheap shot.

I think Scott should be suspended for the next game. Anyone who deliberately hits another player in the head should serve a minimum one game suspension, despite him having been ejected from the game.

A bit of topic but how much better would AFL be if you get ejected. Its such a better punishment than a 1 match game ban, instant and you cant bring in a replacement.

On this matter though Madgen should be just as harshly punished, he instigated contact and was the initial aggressor, Scott could claim self defence in any other situation.

Bear, contact is not illegal!

Yeah that's what I said.

What Dann did was way worse. A flying elbow compared to a hit on the head. Intention is what the decision should be based on. I'm gonna go out on a limb and say a flying elbow to the face hurts a little more than an open hand to the back of the head.

Out of interest, what is the problem with flopping? If it's a foul, who cares if he falls over? if it isn't a foul, the player has taken himself out of the game and the other team can exploit the advantage. Is it just about the look? If so, NBL has more problems with rampant holding bumping pushing and uncalled heavy contact that is a worse look than a few players laying down and giving the opposition a gift.

"Scott has until 12:00PM Midday AEDT tomorrow, Tuesday 20 November, to respond to the charge and determine if he wishes it to be heard by telephone interviews or in a formal sitting of the NBL Tribunal."

Peter John. The Bruce flop is a perfect example of what is wrong with the flop. The contact from Goulding (by memory) was below the chin. Bruce threw his head back grabbing his face ( a good 10 cms from the point of impact) What that did was incite/ suggest to the crowd that he had been hit in the face, a much less forgivable sin than the actual push lower down on his body. For everyone not at home watching the replay they would be thinking that Goulding belted him and would be screaming for action to be taken.Not only is that unfair on the player (who didn't hit him in the face) but it makes the already difficult job of reffing the game that much harder because the refs don't get the opportunity to explain to the crowd that its not the logies and what Bruce is suggesting happened by his staging, didn't actually happen.
On a different note, as a coach, every time your player flops you are now playing 4 on 5. I had it drummed in to me and I have consistently pushed the message to all players i have coached in all sports, STAY ON YOUR FEET!!

Spursfan, are you talking about Dann's strike that saw him fined? If so, are you sure he made contact with his elbow?

Okay Isaac, well done you got me. The contact was with what looked like a fist/hand, but he had a cocked arm. Nice pickup buddy.

A flick of the fingers more like. Questionable whether he was aiming for the head and not the chest.

The reality is that regardless whether what Madgen did was right, wrong or otherwise, if Scott didn't react he wouldn't have gotten ejected, nor would he be facing the tribunal. He only has himself to blame, and needs to accept that responsibility.

^ this

As a Tigers fan, I'm apportioning the blame in several directions.

1. First and foremost Scott- he overreacted. He retaliated. Madgen won that battle, big time.

2. Anstey and other Tigers players- for not getting Scott out of the picture. He was spoiling for a fight and was frustrated. Sub him off or at very least make sure he stays away.

3. The men in grey. Ejection was too far. A USF would've been enough.

Oh and I hope Madgen gets fouled hard and hits the deck next time he drives the lane against the Tigers. That'll teach him!

LV - gotta agree - Anstey showed poor coaching by not sitting him down earlier to let him clear his head.

Melbourne Tigers import forward Seth Scott has elected to have his striking charge heard by telephone by the National Basketball League Tribunal.

Scott was charged by match officials with 'Striking - other' yesterday following an on-court incident in Melbourne’s 72-67 home loss to the Sydney Kings at Hisense Arena on Sunday afternoon.

No fan of Bruce, but wonder if this one was in fact a 'flop'. Certainly looked like initially, but from the replays on TV it looked to me like he got a finger in the eye, or there-abouts - from a team-mate [possibly Dann?] also in the action. The team-mate jumped in the air in an attempt to block, I seem to recall, and as he came down a hand made contact with Bruce's face.

I read the hands to the face as an instinctive reaction to the contact from the team-mate.

Of course, lying motionless on the floor for what seemed an overly long time after the contact, whatever it was, would seem to suggest he decided to milk it.

Thanks Prisoner of Gravity - your point is well made and confirms my view that people largely think it it just doesn't look good.

POP, watch it in slow-mo and from all angles. From the main angle, you can see that Dann misses Bruce by 5+ cm.

Goulding's grab gets Bruce's shoulder and then looks like it possibly glances his lower cheek. Bruce grabs at the upper regions of his face and then takes a nap. Definitely a flop, in my opinion.

POP, check out this vision (Provided by Dunkin' Dan) to see Dann's finger never touched Bruce's face

Bruce Flop

This brief note is in reference to the situation regarding Seth Scott and the altercation that took place last night with the Sydney Kings. It seems unfair that Seth Scott is being questioned regarding this and the instigator of the incident is not even mentioned. I refer to what happened at 3:58 of the third quarter when the Sydney Kings player intentionally shoulder bumped Seth as he walked by him. At that time Seth was just standing there. His reaction was not an open handed blow with force but a minor swipe at the player. The players reaction was greatly exaggerated in the hopes of getting at least a technical foul called. This over exageration occured in many places throughout the game...the most noticed one was when a Melbourne player got the rebound (I think it was Rush) the Sydney player was trying to grap the ball and was all over the Tiger player which then shook him off wirh his arm. A foul was called on the Tiger player. Then realizing a fould was called the King player then grabbed his face and went down. If you look at what occured it is obvious that the Sydney player's face was never touched. In fact, it took him a second or two to pretend to get hit and grab his face and fall to the floor. I felt like I was watching a football/soccer match with all the over acting and dramatics. In every occasion the ref's bought into it.
As a basketball coach I did not see much respect for the game with all those theatrics going on...it's a shame that winning a game must resort to obvious tactics other than just playing the game like it should be.
As a former college and professional player I understand that the governing bodies do not want a fight to happen but it is very difficult not to react in some way when you are on the receiving end of continual cheap shots and nothing is called except when it reaches the boiling point and then what is seen is not the cause but the reaction. A player does not go into a game with the idea of getting into a fight but when it does happen it is almost always the cause of poor officiating. Unfortunantly, the ref's are very seldom repremanded. Considered judgement should be handed out to all involved...that goes for the person who reacted AND the person who initiated the reaction, the ref's for not controlling the game early, and the coach of the Sydney Kings for allowing his team to play in that manner. The coach can deny any responsibility for what happened but I know that considering the frequency of theatrics and what happened that the actions of the Kings was if not discussed ahead of time as part of the game plan it was surely made known by the players during time outs and/or half-time. Also, if Seth Scott really wanted to hit the Kings player with intent to cause harm that player would have been laying on the floor for a while.
Dan Fry

Sorry...it wasn't brief like I mentioned but when I got started the words just kept coming.
Dan Fry