Need opinion from the objective masses

[mogrovejo]

Sig bet, Cry Havoc? Are you a chicken?

You've already openly stated that you think touching another player is a foul.

No I didn't. Pull a quote or stop repeating a lie.

Anyway, sig bet?

Yes or no?

Are you going to be a coward?

[mogrovejo]

~ You quoted the rule yourself ... tell me where it distinguishes between low post and perimeter.

------

I can tell you where the rule distinguishes between low post and perimeter.

Sig bet? It only takes a simple "Yes" or "No, I'm an ignorant chicken".

[Shastafarian]

That's not a foul in the picture. Of course Dampier does it all the freaking time. You don't know the rules.

What is Dampier's left arm doing?

[Cry Havoc]

Sig bet, Cry Havoc? Are you a chicken?

[mogrovejo]

What is Dampier's left arm doing?

I don't know, it's not visible. Are you saying he's fouling Duncan but the problem is that we can't see it?

"Yeah, there's a foul, it's just not visible in that photo". Okay.

[mogrovejo]

Are you answering or not?

Will you man up and take the bet?

What does it tell about you if you accuse others of not knowing the rules, you dare them to prove their point and then you are unwilling to put your money, or sig, where your mouth is?

Come on, girl. Sig bet? Are you too weak and coward for that? After all, if you're right, what's your problem?

Or were you talking just out of your mouth?

[Shastafarian]

That's not a foul in the picture. Of course Dampier does it all the freaking time. You don't know the rules.

I don't know, it's not visible. Are you saying he's fouling Duncan but the problem is that we can't see it?

"Yeah, there's a foul, it's just not visible in that photo". Okay.

I'm saying you're being a huge prick for no reason. The guy posted a picture that might or might not be a foul. If Dampier's arm is up on Duncan, which he also does, then it's a foul. But you jump to conclusions.

Here ya go big guy:

[mogrovejo]

I'm saying you're being a huge prick for no reason. The guy posted a picture that might or might not be a foul. If Dampier's arm is up on Duncan, which he also does, then it's a foul. But you jump to conclusions.

Here ya go big guy:

Which part of, and I quote that same guy:

~ You quoted the rule yourself ... tell me where it distinguishes between low post and perimeter.

you don't understand?

Am I jumping to conclusions?

And he posted the picture to illustrate that Dampier "fouls" (according to his poor understandign of the rules) Duncan the same way McDyess was fouling Dirk. Are you saying that he posted a picture where no foul is visible to make that point? Really? Is that your point? well, thanks for your contribution, then.

[Shastafarian]

Which part of, and I quote that same guy:

~ You quoted the rule yourself ... tell me where it distinguishes between low post and perimeter.

you don't understand?

Am I jumping to conclusions?

And he posted the picture to illustrate that Dampier "fouls" (according to his poor understandign of the rules) Duncan the same way McDyess was fouling Dirk. Are you saying that he posted a picture where no foul is visible to make that point? Really? Is that your point? well, thanks for your contribution, then.

I couldn't give a what he was trying to say. I'm trying to point out that

1) you dismissed the picture he posted even though there might actually be a foul being committed, regardless of what rule is being broken or not.

and

2) You're acting like a chick on her period. Maybe even worse.

#2 is the main thing.

Is it because you realize the Celtics are gonna get curbstomped in round 2? I'll go with "likely".

[badfish22]

Spur Fan creates thread asking for objective opinions

Spur Fan then gets butthurt when those objective opinions don't help their argument.

[mogrovejo]

I couldn't give a what he was trying to say. I'm trying to point out that

1) you dismissed the picture he posted even though there might actually be a foul being committed, regardless of what rule is being broken or not.

and

2) You're acting like a chick on her period. Maybe even worse.

#2 is the main thing.

Is it because you realize the Celtics are gonna get curbstomped in round 2? I'll go with "likely".

Whatever. Make shorter posts.

------------


Cry Havoc and War Lord, I keep waiting for your answers. I'll keep reminding you till you actually bother to answer or you admit you were completely ignorant of the rules of the game.

[Shank]

Spur Fan creates thread asking for objective opinions

Spur Fan then gets butthurt when those objective opinions don't help their argument.

[Shastafarian]

Whatever. Make shorter posts.

Thanks for the advice

My advice for you would be to take a break, cool down, come back and see if you can talk to people without calling them all re s.

[Cry Havoc]

Cry Havoc and War Lord, I keep waiting for your answers.

I'll keep waiting for you to show me quotes where I stated that no fouls should have been called on that sequence.

[DarrinS]

Umm actually I LOVED WATCHING BASKETBALL IN THE 80's, but that has NOTHING to do with this thread.

Would I love basketball to be that physical again....yes

But guess what buddy, it's not and you're not even making a relative point to this topic by bringing it up. If the NBA let everybody be physical to everybody (like they did in the 80's) that's one thing, but when they don't allow players to be physical to everybody and just against one player....that's called inconsistentcy......which is called TY OFFICIATING. Regardless of how physical they were back in the 80s which has absolutely nothing to do with the inconsistency of today's officiating.

If they let everybody beat the out of each other then go ahead....as long as it's consistent I don't give a rats ass, but they aren't even officiating their own rules...no other league does that. Every other league calls the game by the rule that is written. The NBA is the only league where different rules apply to different players and it's ty. LeBron could walk all the way to NY and he would never be called for traveling.

I already said Dirk got screwed on that call based on today's rules. I just happen to think that today's rules are lame and were created to enable "exciting" (i.e. soft) teams like the Mavs and Suns to run back and forth trading jump shots.

[mogrovejo]

Thanks for the advice

My advice for you would be to take a break, cool down, come back and see if you can talk to people without calling them all re s.

I don't call all people re s. I only apply that word to re s.

I'll keep waiting for you to show me quotes where I stated that no fouls should have been called on that sequence.

That's not what the bet is about. I'm not saying you stated that no fouls should have been called - even though it's nice to see everybody is in agreement that fouls should have been called. Don't try to pedalback or to confuse things.

Sig bet or not?

[mogrovejo]

I already said Dirk got screwed on that call based on today's rules. I just happen to think that today's rules are lame and were created to enable "exciting" (i.e. soft) teams like the Mavs and Suns to run back and forth trading jump shots.

Completely disagree; it's precisely the opposite. Without today's rules you'd see a lot more of jump-shots/a lot less of penetration and dribble drives.

[TD4THREE]

Please, somebody tell me this guy is trolling!?!?!?

IT DOES MATTER IF A PLAYER IS ABOVE THE ELBOW OR IN THE LOW POST,
STUPID.

HOW CAN YOU PRETEND TO BE A BASKETBALL FAN AND DON'T KNOW THIS?

I only quoted the part of the rules applicable to the situation.

The rules to Dampier guarding Duncan in the low post are different!! Dampier has his forearm on Duncan and he can do that! McDyess has his hands all over Dirk, puts an hand on Dirk's back when he's on the move and he can't do that!

It's a foul.

Are you serious?? How many times have you seen a guard back the ball up the court when there's pressure, and then the defender puts his forearm on his back?? It happens all the time. Unless he is impeding the movement of a player it's incidental contact. Same thing with Dice's hand on Dirk's back.

[mogrovejo]

~ You quoted the rule yourself ... tell me where it distinguishes between low post and perimeter.

Ready to do that... as soon as Cry Havoc/War Lord are man enough to agree to a sig bet.

Put your money where your mouth is.

[mogrovejo]

Are you serious?? How many times have you seen a guard back the ball up the court when there's pressure, and then the defender puts his forearm on his back?? It happens all the time. Unless he is impeding the movement of a player it's incidental contact. Same thing with Dice's hand on Dirk's back.

Sig bet?

[Tmac&Luther]

I already said Dirk got screwed on that call based on today's rules. I just happen to think that today's rules are lame and were created to enable "exciting" (i.e. soft) teams like the Mavs and Suns to run back and forth trading jump shots.

That is why it was created.... Stern (who people act like he's this great commissioner, regardless of the fact that he's ruining the game of basketball) wants stars/great individual "guard" play and not great teams. So he has rules that completely favors the guards today (well atleast "his star guards" ) and kills good post play/post defense.

David Stern sucks and I can't wait until his ass is gone. What kind of commissioner doesn't allow teams to question the quality of their officials when it's obvious that the officiating is EXTREMELY questionable at best.

[Shastafarian]

Just because someone is a re doesn't mean you have to point it out.

[DarrinS]

Completely disagree; it's precisely the opposite. Without today's rules you'd see a lot more of jump-shots/a lot less of penetration and dribble drives.

Well, I guess my point being that the league wants higher scoring games, whether that be from jumpshots or from transition-type (i.e. garbage) points. If defenders are afraid to defend, they are more likely to allow the easy points near the basket.


I think similar rules have hurt the NFL, where you can barely touch a QB these days.

[DarrinS]

That is why it was created.... Stern (who people act like he's this great commissioner, regardless of the fact that he's ruining the game of basketball) wants stars/great individual "guard" play and not great teams. So he has rules that completely favors the guards today (well atleast "his star guards" ) and kills good post play/post defense.

David Stern sucks and I can't wait until his ass is gone. What kind of commissioner doesn't allow teams to question the quality of their officials when it's obvious that the officiating is EXTREMELY questionable at best.

I don't disagree with any of this. As a sport, I think the NBA is the worst in terms of consistent officiating.

[mogrovejo]

Well, I guess my point being that the league wants higher scoring games, whether that be from jumpshots or from transition-type (i.e. garbage) points. If defenders are afraid to defend, they are more likely to allow the easy points near the basket.

I agree with the bolded part. But jump-shots generally aren't easy points near the basket and and I don't see how the rules changes affected the transition game that much - in fact, if harsher defence was allowed, it would pump up transition scoring (more steals, turnovers, etc).

If the rules were still the same, you'd actually see more jump-shots and more transition scoring.