ESPN No Crossover: The Trial of Allen Iverson

• Trueblue23

  

  By far the worst of all of the 30 for 30 series.
• Trueblue23

  

  Wow.
  
  The blacks who are comparing Iverson to MLK and Ali are really degrading their "heritage"
• SportsAndLady

  

  I'm recording this and watching it later tonight..interesting you think it's so bad, I was looking forward to it.
• Trueblue23

  

  SportsAndLady wrote: I'm recording this and watching it later tonight..interesting you think it's so bad, I was looking forward to it.

  Let me know what you think about it.
• iclfan2

  

  I'm not watching it, but sounds shady he was pardoned.
• Trueblue23

  

  Synopsis of entire show:
  
  Iverson was a superstar thug, racism, crime, racism, conviction, racism.
  
  Oh and racism.
• raiderbuck

  I actually thought it was pretty good. But I had never heard of the trial anyway...I was 7 when he was in high school lol. I have enjoyed all these 30 for 30 stories, it's nice to watch ESPN show some real journalism for once.
• Firad

  

  Anyone know when this one will re air?
• SQ_Crazies

  

  Firad wrote: Anyone know when this one will re air?

  Yeah..your cable box or whatever kind of service you have knows.
• Trueblue23

  

  Probably right after Sportscenter
• 3reppom

  

  It was a good production, not as good as The U or Winning Time but still very good. Defiantly better than Muhammad and Larry or Small Potatoes which are to date the worst that 30 for 30 has done.
• 2quik4u

  

  I thought it was pretty good. Charging a kid as a adult and giving him 15 years reduced to 5, I thought was pretty ridiculous for just being in a brawl.
• Firad

  

  SQ_Crazies wrote:

  Firad wrote: Anyone know when this one will re air?

  Yeah..your cable box or whatever kind of service you have knows.

  sweet
• SQ_Crazies

  

  You're welcome.
  
  Don't ask stupid questions just because you're lazy.
• Heretic

  

  I remember when this happened, Sports Illustrated had a big article talking about how shady the whole conviction/penalty was. I don't really remember the article, but wasn't the main point of contention that it was essentially a white-vs-black argument with no video proof that Iverson did what he was accused of, so he basically got hammered due to nothing more than hearsay?
• gusjohnson7

  3reppom wrote: It was a good production, not as good as The U or Winning Time but still very good. Defiantly better than Muhammad and Larry or Small Potatoes which are to date the worst that 30 for 30 has done.

  I thought this one was not bad. But i cannot believe anyone would not like small potatoes i thought that was great.
• Firad

  

  SQ_Crazies wrote: You're welcome.
  
  Don't ask stupid questions just because you're lazy.

  Who needs Google when you have Ohio Chatter! lol
• ronniecoleman

  I loved it. I was only 1 when it all happened so I wasn't very informed about it previous to watching it.
• hoops23

  

  I thought it was very well done and people know I'm not the biggest Iverson fan..
  
  Point blank, he was targeted and used as an example. The punishment DID NOT fit the crime, which is one of the reasons I believe he would be awarded 10 months with good behavior.
  
  I also thought Iversons perspective during his 2005 interview with the loud one SAS was very mature and "big" of him to admit.. And the way he respected his WHITE teacher really brought the whole thing around 180 degrees. Big respect for that.
  
  Not my favorite, "winning time" still holds that title, but it's definitely FAR from the worst.. It's probably #3 for me. I found the whole thing interesting with all the conspiracy theories and what not..
• 3reppom

  

  gusjohnson7 wrote:

  3reppom wrote: It was a good production, not as good as The U or Winning Time but still very good. Defiantly better than Muhammad and Larry or Small Potatoes which are to date the worst that 30 for 30 has done.

  I thought this one was not bad. But i cannot believe anyone would not like small potatoes i thought that was great.

  Small Potatoes just didn't work for me. I knew the essential plot points before hand because I did research project on the USFL and how and why it failed about a year ago. More to the point there is a ton of interesting material that could have made a great flick, but Tollin's approach negated much of that material IMO. It was a little too clinical for my tastes.