I anticipated a fine of this nature. Gleeson is a flog, Bogut is arrogant, let's move on.

Anyone remember what the repercussions were when Joey took a swing and one of our trainers/players?

"The repurcussions were, Perth were to blame."

I guess Perth were to blame too when Childress charged Wagstaff...

No Childress had to write an apology letter, and then stay after the game to write lines on the white board.

I anticipated a fine of this nature.

Yes there's no "rule" against what Bogut did. But anyone who tries to get in a huddle from the other team is a massive douche

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/basketball/adelaide-36ers-coach-joey-wright-and-perth-wildcats-star-james-ennis-charged-over-fight-20140217-32vtt.html

If I remember correctly it was the Hire 3pt shot at the end of the game when it was over that caused this?

Fan of the mighty cats here. Fair result, let's move on.

Slow news day on the forum.

Well at least it has its own tread now, so people can argue back and forth here.

Just one question, for all those pointing out that Bogut broke no rule, can you please point out exactly which rule Gleeson broke?

Seriously, AD? lol... That's as stupid as people now trying to make it about the 36ers and the futuristic whataboutism, anticipating that someone would get overtly physical if someone else tried it...

This was hilarious and I'm surprised that the NBL showed any backbone here... A token fine that any reasonable fan would be ok with, move along and use it for material for their next match up...

Found this on brief inspection of the FIBA rules. I don't necessarily agree or disagree.

Tech foul definition includes: "Baiting and taunting an opponent"

Everyone keeps saying Bogut was trolling, so he should have received a tech foul by the rules.

"A technical foul by team bench personnel is a foul for disrespectfully communicating with or touching the officials, the commissioner, the table officials or the opponents, or an infraction of a procedural or an administrative nature."

Sounds like Gleeson broke this rule by being bench personnel touching an opponent.

Disqualifying foul: "A disqualifying foul is any flagrant unsportsmanlike action by a player or team bench personnel"

Don't feel like Gleeson or Bogut crossed this line.

"Just one question, for all those pointing out that Bogut broke no rule, can you please point out exactly which rule Gleeson broke?"

Well I'm guessing he broke the rule in the NBL Code of Conduct, hence why he was fined. *facepalm*

Surely it was obviously for shoving Bogut on the chest.

I liked Bogut's approach in this. There was no timeout. There is no reason for Bogut to not try to negate any strategic advantage Perth might be seeking. There is no rule about other players entering opposition huddles on the court. There are well defined opportunities for teams to strategise without opposition knowledge; they are called timeouts. Basketball is a game of strategy, so let teams strategise. This includes counter-strategic measures as Bogut attempted.

I don't know if people criticising Bogut are doing so from personal prejudices against him, or they just fail to understand the rules of the game.

Damn...No suspension for Gleeson, as a Cats fan I'm disappointed by that.

I have no issue with the fine but I'd now expect this to be a thing teams do from now on...which will then force the league to start cracking down on non-timeout huddles.

"league to start cracking down on non-timeout huddles."

Why? Teams have been doing this forever, the only difference is usually both teams head off for a huddle, this time Kings didn't. It's not illegal, just like Bogut moving into the opponents huddle is not illegal.

The fine? I called it earlier today.

I actually thought the fine would be $1000, reduced to $500 for an early guilty plea.

The NBL saved Gleeson the trouble of pleading guilty early.

The "huddle" of Perth wasn't an official time out. Therefore it doesn’t have any protections under the rules (I’m pretty sure players must be at their benches during official time outs).

I also don’t think other players will try to “do a Bogut” unless the game is on the line or the opposition is on a run and they need a momentum changer.

Of course Bogut was talking to the refs. He was reminding them of the rules and arguing for a Tech to Gleeson. Refs showed restraint and good judgement. Bogut showed cunning. Gleeson showed...

Bogut is allowed to stand on the court . Coach caint stand on the court and push a player...... technically speaking...although your coach thought bogut should get a tech and he was all ok .... make up for refs costing you the game...

Was Bogut being antagonistic? Yes. Did he act outside the spirit of the game? Yes. Did he do anything illegal and outside of the rules? No. Gleeson however was on the court when he shouldn't have been, as the rules state, and he shouldn’t have pushed Bogut in the chest which is also illegal. Granted it was a light push that was never going to hurt Bogut but the rules are the rules and he should have received a tech foul. Bogut was acting like a bit of a half back flanker but Gleeson really should be better than that and ultimately got away with it with no penalty impacting the game. There can’t be a grey area here or provisions against a tech because Bogut was being a dick. Smart, but a dick.

Saying Bogut did break any rules is correct, so lets have opposing players enter team huddles after fouls and during every umpire review from now on?

Pretty sure players have been "accidentally" getting into impromptu team huddles after fouls forever, just no-one has been quite so obvious about it...

Didn't Ingles do something with James Harden a few months back regarding a huddle?

"Did he act outside the spirit of the game? Yes. "

That "outside the spirit of the game" sounds like a vague argument when you can't really articulate why there is a problem. The spirit of the game is to be competitive and fair and respectful, to play under the rules of the game. How exactly is it outside the spirit of the game? How is it disrespectful to counter opposition strategies like that?


That Ingles incident was hilarious: https://youtu.be/wqw0BJPKci0?t=15

Gleeson incident cf Ingles incident:

I don't think Gleeson could reach Bogut’s shoulder.

Looked like Ingles wanted to start a singalong of Waltzing Matilda.

Harden be like, "Who’s Matilda."

Look, i made a mistake. Yes i shouldn't of used my hands. Perhaps i should of simply called him names during the team meeting on court when he was within ear shot of us.

I'll pay the fine, but let me tell you this, i'll be instructing my entire team to stand next to Sydney every time a similar situation occurs. Mark my words.

Trev

Trev

So you want your team to gain the great advantage of learning from the NBL's greatest ever coach?

Then when the game re-starts the Kings will just run plays called by their on-court leaders.

Genius move. I hope the bookies don’t read this thread before the next Wildcats v Kings game.

Genius.

Senator11


I guess Perth were to blame too when Childress charged Wagstaff...

A dopey retaliation to a cheap shot, one that the refs failed to call, none of Wagstaff, the refs or Childress are free of blame.

It looked like they formed a huddle right in front of Bogut so he just stopped on the spot and joined in. Ingles joined a Rockets huddle last year I reckon. Nobody had a tantrum though.