On March 15, Beijing time, let's continue to pay attention to Chinese basketball and CBA games. Recently, CBA officials said that in the game between Guangdong Hongyuan and Shanxi men's basketball team, when the game was 2 minutes and 29 seconds left in the second quarter, Du Feng entered the game venue illegally, questioned the referee's decision, and interfered with the normal progress of the game, and the above improper behavior had a negative impact on the league. According to official regulations, Du Feng was suspended for 1 game and fined 50,000 yuan. Such penalties have also attracted widespread attention from fans.
Coincidentally, careful fans also found that for the same reason, Liaoning men's basketball coach Yang Ming was suspended for three games and fined 30,000 yuan, what is the reason? In the match between Beijing Shougang men's basketball team and Liaoning men's basketball team on December 27 last year, with more than 2 minutes left in the fourth quarter, Yang Ming entered the game venue in violation of the law, questioned the referee's punishment, and interfered with the normal progress of the game, and the above misconduct caused a negative impact on the league, and he was suspended for three games and fined 30,000 yuan.
Faced with the same reason, but received different punishments, what is the reason? The real reasons for the different punishments were also exposed, and the punishment bases of the two parties were different. The punishment against Du Feng was based on Article 23 of Chapter II of the Disciplinary Guidelines for the Chinese Men's Professional Basketball League, and Du Feng was suspended for one game and fined RMB 50,000. Yang Ming's penalty clause was based on Article 48 of Chapter IV of the "Disciplinary Guidelines for the Chinese Men's Basketball Professional League", and Yang Ming was suspended for three games and fined 30,000 yuan. It can be seen that the interpretation of the selected clause is different, Du Feng violated Article 23 of Chapter II, and Yang Ming violated Article 48 of Chapter IV.
The basis for such punishment has also raised questions from fans and the media. In response to such a situation, the well-known journalist Li Yinan also expressed his views, he posted on social media: Du Feng's sentence of 1 game suspension is relatively light, and it has little impact on the Guangdong team.
Yin Lipeng, a well-known media person, openly questioned the sentence, saying in a social post: Yang Ming and Du Feng's improper behavior, CBA company issued a punishment announcement eighty percent is not a person, it is estimated that he has not even read the "Disciplinary Code" document, punish Yang Ming with the criteria of Article 48, and punish Du Feng with the criteria of Article 23, the first sub-article. What's even more ridiculous is that the CBA company lists the same evidence of violations of the two coaches, and according to the punishment regulations are different, does the CBA company not read the rules set by itself?
The same reason the punishment is different, and don't blame the media and fans for questioning the credibility of the CBA, there is no unified standard will definitely go wrong. For such a penalty, CBA companies must have their opinions, and some media believe that this is a decision made by CBA companies patting their heads. Some people are their own sons, and some people are targeted punishments.
What do you think about such a topic? I also hope that everyone will leave a message in the message area to discuss. Well, thank you all.