Bowen is a dirty player, no doubt.
But the fact that this series is most likely going to be determined by a cheap shot by Robert Horry is absolute garbage. Yes, the letter of the law says that the Phoenix players can't leave the bench, but in the spirit of the law should they have really been suspended? I mean, Bowen with his cheap shots earlier in the series, with all of the tension that has escalated in the three prior games, and then culminating in the Horry foul just brought all of the conflict to a head.
I was listening to Colin Cowherd this morning (bad choice most days, but he brought up some good points today), and he said a couple things of interest:
1. Tim Duncan, in the second quarter, left the bench after a hard foul. Now, I don't have any confirmation of this as I did not see it, but he seemed adamant that it happened. Obviously, it was not to the level of the Horry play, but if he left the bench (I guess the issue was how far he left), shouldn't he be suspended as well under the letter of the law?
2. The rule itself is very ambiguous and open to interpretation. While "rules are rules", the rule states that "During an altercation, players not in the game cannot leave the vicinity of the bench", or something like that. What defines altercation? What defines the vicinity of the bench?
I just think the NBA dropped the ball on this. Horry, a lesser player than Stoudemire and Diaw, by hip checking Nash into the scorer's table, has given his team a tremendous advantage.