Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mick
The first time, and each time, I saw it, I thought that the defender did undercut the shooter with intention.
Was he just trying to cause the shooter to alter his shot? I don't think so.
Was he trying to injure the shooter? I don't think so.
They don't even do that undercut in the NBA. The defender steps away and watches because the repercussions would be enormous.
The defender angled under him and slowed. in order to be in the path. He knew exactly where the shooter was, and he knew exactly what the result was going to be.
Then why wasn't the intentional called? Because the defender made no other overt move at the shooter, because the shooter didn't get hurt and because the officials did not think the game would be better for such a call [much like the no-call on the 25' bouncy ball].
Did the defender know what he was doing ? You can take it to the bank.
|
Sure he tried to be in his way (isn't that defense). But it was far from flagrant. He had not intent to harm or injure or create vicious contact. He didn't bend over to submarine him. He just got in front of him.