yseJ
Empire strikes back
lol at you not even being able to do math rightyall bringing up 15 year old shyt
2006 was 15 years ago ? 
lol at you not even being able to do math rightyall bringing up 15 year old shyt
2006 was 15 years ago ? 
Oh, and fukking LOL at Pop equating this to literal murder, get the fukk outta here bitter old ass motherfukker![]()

What did Draymond do after the tech? Followed the ref down the court and yelled at him for like 2 minutes. Anyone else does that = ejection.how are they getting away with anything? didn't they call a foul on the play? Draymond got a Tech yesterday as well i believe. All this talk about the Warriors getting away with stuff is ridiculous.
What did Draymond do after the tech? Followed the ref down the court and yelled at him for like 2 minutes. Anyone else does that = ejection.
answer me this, is what zaza did right or wrong?lol at you not even being able to do math right2006 was 15 years ago ?
![]()
It's still special treatment. If JR even look at the ref the wrong way, he would get a tech. Warriors are allowed to do more and they are the most stacked team in history. Does the NBA want competition?he does get a ton of leeway talking to the refs... i wont even argue with that.. but Draymond talks.. its all about the content in that situation.
Typical pop. He even smirked after the rant
LOL at you changing the subjectanswer me this, is what zaza did right or wrong?

It's still special treatment. If JR even look at the ref the wrong way, he would get a tech. Warriors are allowed to do more and they are the most stacked team in history. Does the NBA want competition?
Which is why the association will never catch the NFL in popularity. It don't matter who meet in the super bowl, viewers gone tune it and support it.nba wasnt gonna allow anyone to threaten a durant vs lebron finals anyways....adam silver would have jumped on the court himself to trip kawai if he had to
Except intent does have a huge issue to do with punishment for said action.
He didn't equate this to murder. He used the manslaughter vs murder analogy to explain that lack of intent doesn't negate the consequences of the action.

