The long-simmering love-hate relationship between Philadelphia star Allen Iverson and his coach, Larry Brown, is bubbling once again.

After getting eliminated from the playoffs, Brown went public with comments about Iverson's habit of sitting out practice.  He talked about the need for star players to practice and "set an example" for the rest of his teammates.

Brown and Iverson had a summit meeting to talk about their differences, after which Iverson held a press conference.  Iverson pointed out that he's the reigning MVP, that he carried the Sixers to the finals last season, and that he's been injured.

As with so many disputes, both guys make excellent points.  The absolute truth lies somewhere in the middle, but both Iverson and Brown are right.

Iverson has not practiced on many occasions.  Each of those times, he has cited an injury or illness, and in nearly every instance has been present during the practice, but not on the court.

Brown is not questioning the veracity of the myriad infirmities.  But, for the way he coaches, he needs Iverson on the floor.  More than any coach in the league, he regularly tweaks the team's plays and adds new ones.  If the star isn't able to practice, the timing cannot be nailed down and it's difficult to use these changes in games.

What bugs Brown is that Iverson sits out practice because of injury, but plays in games with the same ailment.  Iverson believes that games are more important and that he should take rest if he feels he needs it to be ready for the games.  Brown believes that if he can play games with the injuries, he ought to be practicing with them as well.

Of course, the clash over practice habits is hardly the beginning of the dispute.  Iverson is hurt that Brown would take the dispute public.  He has certain ideas about loyalty and honor, and by criticizing Iverson to the media, Brown has violated those notions.  To Brown, basketball approaches the status of religion and things should be done certain ways.  Iverson missing practices but playing in games violates Brown's basketball code.

As I mentioned, both guys are right.  Brown needs his players to practice and is within his rights as coach to demand his players practice.  On the other hand, no one plays with more effort and passion than Iverson, and he should make the ultimate determination of when he plays and practices and when he doesn't.  No one can say that when it matters (games) Iverson isn't there.

Ultimately, though, I come down more on Iverson's side.  Brown wields enormous power within the Sixers' organization, but has not taken the necessary steps to correct this problem internally.  He should never have taken this public.

Iverson is right to feel that his character is being assassinated.  If Iverson missing practice was as disruptive as Brown says it was, Brown could've solved the problem with a no practice-no play policy.  Considering the competitor Iverson is, I suspect he would've been on the court quickly.

Instead, it appears that Brown let Iverson do what he wanted, then blamed Iverson when he got a result he didn't like.  Brown is as much responsible for Iverson not practicing as Iverson is.

Brown's biggest mistake was enlarging the disagreement by taking it to reporters.  He should've had the conversation with Iverson privately and taken steps to resolve the problem internally.  He expanded the conflict by making it public, which makes the rift more difficult to mend.

The Philadelphia soap opera is far from over.  Brown has his own press conference scheduled, and writers will have all summer to rehash whether Iverson will be traded or Brown will walk away.  Can they work it out?  I'll be watching.