NBA playoffs (NBA haters stay away)
 

In the Boston Atlanta game the other night, there was an interesting situation. Bill Kennedy called a foul in the open floor and was bowled over by JR Smith in the process. Kennedy was lucky he wasn't seriously hurt. What was unique is that we got a rare close up of the interaction between Kennedy and Steve Javie. Before getting back up, Kennedy verified with Javie that the foul was on Smith and that it wasn't a clear path foul. Neat to see that he was still focused on reporting the call even though he had been knocked down pretty hard.

And last night in a very physical game in LA, there were 5 technicals and a flagrant 2 foul called. Joe Crawford called every technical and the flagrant as far as I could tell. The NBA brass might have suspended him last year but you've got to think they were glad he was doing the game last night. He took control the way you expect a veteran crew chief to do so.

I thought the same exact thing about Crawford. He's the man! He didn't really and truly call the flagrant. He was the one who went to the monitor and confirmed it though.

Glad to see there is at least 1 NBA viewer on this site. haha

NBA Question?
 

Atlanta vs Cleveland tonight. Early second quarter. Cszerbiak (sp) makes a nice spin move and banks the ball in on a nice fall away jumper. He falls to the ground. Two Cleveland bench players in sweats, jump up and onto the court and help him to his feet so he can hustle down court to get back on D as the ball is going the other way quickly. Anything in the NBA rules on that?

It sure looked weird as I can't recall ever seeing it in one of my HS games.

Joe Crawford and the rest of the crew were certainly on top of things and did what I think was a good job in maintaining order. Quick question:

The Ron Artest ejection. Almost all the talking heads at ESPN, TNT, etc, were commenting on how Ron shouldn't of been ejected. I thought the fact that Artest jogged almost the length of the court to confront Kobe, and the fact that after Joe got between the two and he was still being demonstrative and confrontational even after being told to calm down, made the ejection all that easier. Thoughts?

That kind of display shouldn't be allowed at any level. what does it have to do with basketball?

No brainer. Crawford had already had to go into both teams huddles to warn the teams that the jawing was getting out of hand.

Bryant as usual, gets the benefit of doubt as he wasn't suspended for an elbow above the shoulders.

Serious question, what's a clear path foul?

If a fast break starts in a team’s backcourt and a defender fouls any offensive player when the team is going to score an easy basket, a clear path foul has occurred. When the foul happens, no defender can be ahead of the ball where he could establish a position between the ball and the basket.

**2 shots and the ball side out

From everything I saw, that elbow was below shoulder level.

I'm pretty surprised that Artest got a Flagrant 2 in Game 3 against the Lakers. Looked like an intentional to me at worst.

Intentional fouls are not in the NBA rulebook

My bad. Flagrant 1 then? Maybe I'm not surprised seeing that it was Artest. I just don't think it normally would merit an ejection.

The end of the Mavs/Nuggets game shows in a nutshell everything that is wrong with the NBA.

A team is upset that they committed an illegal act (fouled) on purpose in an attempt to benefit from it and lost when the official didn't reward them by whistling it and opponent was able to play through the contact and make the winning shot despite it.

The "league" is now even publicly stating the officials missed the foul on the play. :(

So much for competing with honor and actually trying to play good, legal defense against the opponent. Here's an idea, instead of trying to gain an advantage through an illegal act, make a great play and block the shot.

The guys just don't get it.

I just saw the replay. I can see why there was no foul called. The defender bounced off the Carmelo and Carmelo continued to play. There could have been a foul called, but there wasn't one called. Life goes on. This is the very reason I stopped watching the NBA on a regular basis for years. Every thing that happens is about whining. And the Dallas Mavericks are at the top of this.

Peace

Here's an Article on the "Non-Call" in the Nuggets/Mavs Game
 

If you really believe that, then you have to say that it also shows everything that is wrong with basketball at ALL levels, which might be true. I don't know. But teams at ALL levels strategically foul at the end of games for a few different reasons.

I'm not sure why this shows what's wrong with the NBA.

No different than a high school game where one team is trying to stop the clock and commits a foul.

Would you have passed on the contact in a HS or college game?

If they were trying to prevent a 3-pt shot and put the guy on the line for FT's - it's a smart play, one that we see at every level.

I agree with the NBA saying there should have been a call. Perhaps it should have been Flagrant-1 (intentional), but still should have been a whistle.

My $0.02

Not likely, but then again this was not a typical end of game foul situation. And since the contact did not really affect the play, I might have possibly passed. Not saying I would have actually passed on the play, just saying I understand in a split second why they passed.

Peace

I take issue with the NBA mentality. They really believe that this tactic is okay. I say that it is nothing more than cheating. The team is attempting to gain an advantage by doing something illegal.
Let me point out that the NBA is the same league that doesn't allow a secondary defender to stand in the area under the basket. That has been deemed to not be legitimate defense. :rolleyes: How about a rule change that any deliberate foul in the final 24 seconds (That's one shot clock period.), results in three FTs for the opponent. It doesn't matter whether the fouled player was in the act of shooting or not. It's an automatic three FTs. That would stamp out this silliness. It's simply not legitimate defense.

HS and NCAA have both clearly stated that "wrapping-up" and opponent is an intentional personal foul. It's not a basketball play. It's a tackle.

However, look at what the coaches are teaching and the players are discussing at the NBA level. :eek:

===============================
Updated: May 10, 2009, 6:41 PM ET
Rivers instructs Celts how to foul <script type="text/javascript">var stobj = SHARETHIS.addEntry({ title:"Rivers%20to%20Celtics:%20Foul%20right%20way ,%20not%20Wright%20way", url:"http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playoffs/2009/news/story?id=4156063", published: "2009-05-10" }); stobj.attachButton(document.getElementById("espnst link")); </script>


<cite class="source"> By Chris Sheridan
ESPN.com

</cite>

<!-- end mod-article-title --> <!-- begin story body --> <!-- template inline -->ORLANDO, Fla. -- On the morning after one of the more controversial nights of the NBA playoffs, Doc Rivers sent a message to his team: If we have a foul to give, make sure you commit it the right way.
<!-- start sidebar table -->
In other words, not the Wright way.

<!-- end sidebar table -->The controversial ending to Saturday night's Nuggets-Mavericks game was one of the primary topics of discussion at the Celtics' morning shootaround Sunday, with the teaching emphasis on having players use both arms to wrap up an opposing player on the perimeter to ensure the referee whistles the foul.
"The wrap-up also takes longer than raking a guy across the arms, and it reduces the chance that he can get off an attempt and get three foul shots," Rivers said.
In the Nuggets-Mavs game, Antoine Wright appeared to intentionally foul Denver's Carmelo Anthony twice when Dallas had a foul to give, and the NBA took the highly unusual action of issuing a statement after the game saying the referees had not made the correct call.
Among the Celtics' players, the lingering impression was that Wright was as much at fault as anyone because he did not commit the foul in the proper manner -- especially when he had the perfect opportunity at the moment when Anthony bobbled the ball before regaining control and sinking the game-winning shot.
Other than the lecture on proper fouling techniques, Rivers said the Celtics concentrated on cutting down the Magic's ability to use dribble penetration play to initiate their offense.
The defending champion Celtics trail the best-of-seven series 2-1 heading into tonight's Game 4. Game 5 is Tuesday night in Boston.
"People think we're going away, and we're not. We are who we are. We're a group of fighters," Rivers said.
Chris Sheridan covers the NBA for ESPN.com.

I guess you'll have to explain to me how the situation in the original scenario (not the "wrapping up", as you mention in your most recent post) is different from a HS player fouling to stop the clock and force the opponent to shoot a 1-and-1; or how it's different from a college player fouling near midcourt before the bonus, simply to force the trailing team to inbound the ball again and waste time before getting off a final shot.

These are both examples of using an "illegal" action -- a foul -- to a strategic advantage. Isn't that what Dallas was trying to do at the end of that game?

Note that I'm not even discussing whether there should or should not have been a foul called in that situation. I'm only wondering why the NBA play is "cheating" and the HS and college plays are legitimate strategy.

I agree that was not a Flagrant-1. I might have passed on that contact early in the game but at the end of the game, when the entire crew knows the game situation (even at my level we always go over TO's available, foul count, time on clock, arrow and anything else we can cover) and the game is physical...60+ fouls called...I would definetly get the first contact so there would be no question if I should have called a flagrant.

When did I say anything about this being a Flagrant (NBA or non-NBA Standard)?

Peace

For the record, I think that the entire strategy of fouling on purpose is bad for the game and needs to be addressed with a rule change, but the NFHS, NCAA, and obviously the NBA governing bodies disagree with me.

When FTs will be awarded there is a tangible penalty as the opponent can score. It's debatable whether 1-1 is the right number of FTs to award given the increased impact of the 3pt shot on the game.


That's the one that needs to cease. That's blatant unfair play at any level. At the HS and NCAA level, the intentional personal foul can and should be called. I don't know exactly how the NBA handles such, but a simple rule could take care of this unfair tactic.

In a nutshell that is what I have a serious problem with-- using an illegal action to gain a strategic advantage. It's taking advantage of the rules and we know that the NFHS book says right in the front that a team shouldn't be allowed to gain an advantage not intended by the rules. Does the NBA have a similar provision or statement? That's why it is different. It's not in the spirit of fair play and is clearly against the NFHS philosophy, but it doesn't seem to be against the pro philosophy.

In my opinion, Dallas was trying to cheat, and justice was served when it didn't work out for them.

Well, I have 2 cents and they are not really mine. Last weekend I went to a camp where the instructor was Mr. Ed T. Rush. The other instructor was an NBA observer, and member of the Court Club.

1) Game management by refs means they know they have a foul to give.

2) Get the foul when it occurs.

3) Since the foul occurred (as I recall, correct if wrong) above the free throw line and 3 pt line, we have a freedom of movement foul. It is immediate, no let's see if they can play through it. So ref blew it.

4) Off topic - Official's Grade for 2008 D1 Tournament - 68% That percent is what the crews got. It is not an individual score. You are a team on the court.

5) NBA refs probably average 2 hr pregame, view video of games worked and graded every game. In a league by themselves. The rest of us need to remember what league we are in --the minors.:)

Ronald - Do you have any other notes, insights, feedback, etc from this camp? I really wanted to make it down but had a family wedding. I'm doing the Next Level Camp at Villanova which will probably espouse the same ideas, etc so want to know what to look forward to.

Let me know, thanks!!

Fellow Court Club Member,

Brad

bradfordwilkins

I took notes and can share them. Is the appropriate manner to share them in a general discussion or by pm?

I am not a member of the Court but the instructors are.

I have never been to any camp as I am just a JV/rec ball guy.

Biggest tool is video breakdown.

Not good enough to know definitions--must master definitions.

Let me know how to share notes or instructor's insights.

Ron

I'm going to repeat myself, because people keep bringing this up. There's no way that's an accurate number. Either the evaluation method was flawed, or the evaluators wanted to make a point and skewed the reviewable plays.

There's no way that even ONE official on each crew missed 32% of his calls in ONE game. So it's inconceivable that 100 of the best officials in the country ALL missed a full third of their calls over the course of 64 games.

I'm nowhere near one of the best 100 officials in the country -- nowhere near -- and I haven't missed 32% of my calls in a game (let alone over the course of 64 games) since I was working 5th grade games.

Until I see every call they charted and see which ones they charted as incorrect, I consider this "study" to be completely non-credible.

Some NBA Fun last Night's Cavs/Hawks Game....Or was it?
 

Compliments of USAToday:

Late in the third quarter, James had some fun with an Atlanta police officer standing guard over the officials while they reviewed a shot by Wally Szczerbiak to determine if it was a three-pointer. James backed away playfully when the officer shooed him away from the monitor, then eased his way close enough to get a look before the officer noticed.......

Not that I'm hating, but did anybody see the GT/BI called by the L early in the 1Q of the Cavs games?
I believe it was an alley-oop pass to James.
Just thought it was odd to be called from that position. Thoughts?

Where was the L? Was that the pass that was made from way in the backcourt? Weren't the T and C in the backcourt at the time?

From what the tv showed (nothing like seeing it live) the L was on the endline at A. I thought it was a 1 on 1 matchup in the b/c so the C should've been in the front court. Not sure though, the camera don't show us too often.
Just thought it was strange to see the L come off the endline & count it.

For the disbeliever.

someone pointed out how it works. any play that the evaluator can not determine with certainty goes to the official. In other words, any call that is iffy, benefit of doubt to official.

The game is scored not an individual ref. I think you know that.

There is no flaw in the system. The evaluators review every second of a game. They see every call that was made and missed. They score it.

For you it might be flawed based on how they score it. For example, A1 goes for a shot is in the air, and B1 taps A1 on the hip or knee. If you called a foul, good job, correct call as this is not a basketball play and is an automatic call. If you passed on it, incorrect call.

A1 head fakes, B1 takes fake and goes up, A1 even initiates contact.

No call, incorrect.
Foul on defense, correct.
Foul on offense, incorrect.

Miss a travel, incorrect call
Call a travel that is not a travel, incorrect call.
Oh, that looked strange, must be a travel. Repaly shows that player stepped with non-pivot foot picked up his pivot foot and shoot. Looked ugly but legal. College ref called travel, incorrect call. Player did not travel. Don't guess a travel. Replay does not lie.

A1 goes up and islightly tapped on head by defender but plays through it and lays it in. Foul, Correct call. No harm no foul, incorrect call.

Hope that gives you an idea of how they are evaluating plays. Of course, you may argue they are wrong but I believe John Adams buys into it and PAC ten officials will as that is how they are going to be evaluated.

Well,

From the final of the WCC championship, they missed 14 out of 41. They got 27 out of 41 correct. 65%.

Video breakdown

19:10 As the SMU offensive player takes the ball to the rim, the secondary defender #42 Gonzaga jumps into the offensive player and although the block is clean, this body contact is excessive, no call incorrect.

Video does not lie. It will make you a better referee.

14:19 Positive example of allowing the develop and finish on this play at the rim. Correct call.

10:30 Watch during this rebounding action as the SMU defender #50 and GU offensive player #42 go after a loose ball, the SMU defender #50 literally grabs with "2 hands" asn pulls #42 to the side in attempt to secure the ball, a loose ball rebounding foul is necessary, no call incorrect.

See how it works. Review your game, be honest and make progress.

NBA refs do this. They are not perfect but must get in the mid to high 90's or they do not stay around. 90% is not good enough for them

Thanks for verifying that this review process is total BS.
The NBA philosophy of OVER-penalizing the defense is evident.

When A1 initiates contact, B1 shouldn't be penalized. That's just wrong.

Who decides if contact is incidental or excessive? That's in the eye of the beholder. Most people feel that some contact with the body is acceptable when the shot is blocked cleanly up top.

Is touching someone on the knee a foul?

It seems that the NBA wants a foul called even when the contact does NOT place the player at a disadvantage. How wonderful. :rolleyes:

Not quite but close...Here is the exact rule...

The ball and an offensive player must be positioned between the tip-of-circle extended in the backcourt and the basket in the frontcourt, with no defender between the ball and the basket when the personal foul occurs.

There must be team possession and the new play must originate in
the backcourt, including throw-ins, and the offended team must be deprived of an opportunity to score an uncontested basket

I see that Boston employed their previously discussed strategy of "wrapping up" the opponent in fouling near the end of the game. They did this with under ten seconds remaining while ahead by three in order to prevent an Orlando player from attempting a game-tying three point shot.

Did the NBA officials call anything other than a normal foul? Nope.

Boston is allowed to cheat and benefit from it. :(

It's not cheating when by rule, they couldn't have called anything else. There is is no intentional foul in the NBA. How many times have we seen Shaq wrapped up like that for a common foul? I really think it would improve their game to add an intentional foul to the book. I'll never understand why it's not there. They want the most entertaining product and yet players are allowed to do that within the rules with no additional penalty. It makes for far too many plays where the defender doesn't even try to play defense legally. It could be such a beautiful game more often and more continuously. Instead, it's - oops, my man just beat me, let me wrap him up. Ridiculous.

To back up what others have said: either you are only "grading" a small portion of the game, or missing quite a bit. In that game, there were 28 personal fouls called. That means that there were only 13 no-calls for fouls, violations, and no-calls for violations. That seems a bit low for a 40 minute game.:rolleyes:

I hope that when they were evaluating the number of plays correct, that the rule book allows a certain amount of contact to be ruled as incidental.

John Adams is going to adopt alot of the philosophies used by the NBA when it comes to trying to get their officials as proficient as possible. He is being paid to be sure that the NCAA doesn't have to answer these type of NBA conspiracy theory calls.

These two sentences don't make sense together. If the NBA has problems every year with "conspiracy theories", then why would the NCAA adopt the officiating philosophies of the NBA? Especially if you're trying to avoid those conspiracy theories?

So um....that LeBron guy's pretty good.

I missed the game, can someone explain to me what happened with the Mo Williams/Dwight Howard play? It looked like Williams threw the ball at Howard after Howard blocked a shot on a fast break. The lead was right there and saw the whole thing, no technical, nothing. Any idea why?

I'm pretty sure the lead didn't see the play cause it was a no-brainer technical foul. In fact, I think they even asked the officials about it during the following commercial break, and they as much admitted to that.

The L and C had a double whistle on the foul on Lebron James. Williams and Howard were on the endline when williams threw the ball at Howard. Both calling officials were focused on the foul and were not looking at the players on the baseline. That left the trail who was out of our picture. I can only imagine that he did not see it either because it was a no brainer. A lesson for all officials about not losing your focus after the whistle.

Thanks. Like I said, I missed the game so didn't hear that.

Is an 8-second violation (For not getting the ball across the division line) called a backcourt violation in the NBA? Just curious because the play-by-play guy in the Lakers/Nuggets game said that there "Have been several backcourt violations in the playoffs" for not getting it across in 8 seconds. I know the NBA's terminology is way different than other rule sets, but I'm pretty sure a backcourt violation is the same everywhere. :confused:

Good lord. Carmello just fouled Areza on a loose ball (clearly displacement) and the PBP guy is saying "Well Areza didn't have the ball"..what a moron. Van Gundy said "That's playoff basketball, they should let it go".

You inquire about the terminology for a violation because how a TV guy states it worries you, then in the next breath you note how low the rules knowledge of these people is and how idiotic some of their comments are.

So what do you think are the chances that the play-by-play guy is right about the 8-second violation? :rolleyes:

Hmmmmmmmm...... :p

Sorry. I was trying to use sarcasm in the first paragraph, but I couldn't get it to sound right.

Here is the rule (from NBA rule book)

Guess technically they should call it an "eight-second violation"

Section IX-Eight-Second Rule
A team shall not be in continuous possession of a ball which is in its backcourt for more than 8 consecutive seconds.
EXCEPTION (1): A new 8 seconds is awarded if the defense: (1) kicks or punches the ball, (2) is assessed a technical foul, or (3) is issued a delay of game warning.
EXCEPTION (2): A new 8 seconds is awarded if play is suspended to administer Comments on the Rules-N-Infection Control.
PENALTY: Loss of ball. The ball is awarded to the opposing team at the mid-court line.

What the heck is that? Is it really written that way in the NBA rule book? :eek:

I see that the league office is supporting the officials again. :rolleyes:

:(:(:(

A guy clearly throws an elbow. The officials are on top of it and make a strong call. Now the league comes back and rescinds the decision. :mad:

NBA rescinds flagrant against Orlando Magic's Anthony Johnson - ESPN

ORLANDO, Fla. -- The NBA has rescinded the flagrant foul against Orlando Magic guard Anthony Johnson for elbowing Cleveland's Mo Williams in Game 3 of the Eastern Conference finals.

If he'd have elbowed LeBron, Johnson would be suspended.

"Ooooohhhh....Conspiracy theory!" :D

It is correct, just written very poorly. Comment N discusses what to do in the event of a player bleeding (infection control). One of the consequences of a bleeding player is that the offensive team will get a new 8 seconds.

This is an apology to the people who were unhappy with my now deleted hip-hop comment.

It was intended in jest, but could easily be taken as offensive.

The humor was supposed to be a reference to the Salt 'N' Pepa rap group.

While I don't see a problem with making a joke about the sentence structure of NBA rule book, I should not have included the final words about the players. That was over the top.

My point of view on the education level of the NBA players is probably negatively skewed by my personal experience in college with Allen Iverson.

Sorry to those who were offended.

You can get off your soapbox now. Even with the best officials in the NBA working the postseason games, the league office is frequently announcing that their decisions are incorrect. There is no way that they are grading out in the mid to high 90s IN THE VIEW OF THEIR OWN REVIEWERS.

The league office simply refuses to back its officials as yet another T was declared incorrect and rescinded today.

NBA rescinds technical foul on Orlando Magic's Dwight Howard in Eastern Conference Finals - ESPN

The NBA announced Wednesday that it has rescinded Howard's sixth technical foul of the playoffs, which he was given for taunting Anderson Varejao after a layup in the fourth quarter of the Magic's 116-114 overtime victory Tuesday night. Cleveland's forward had draped his arms around Howard in a failed attempt to stop him from scoring.
Howard's total of technicals for the postseason is thus back down to five.


This was one of several technical fouls revoked by the league office this postseason. Denver's Kenyon Martin is the most prominent example, with three of his six playoff technicals rescinded already.

This is the worst I've seen the officials in the NBA. It could be a case of being told to do one thing and then when they do that the league changes the decision. Regardless, the playoffs aren't shaping up the way Stern wants them to.

On a side note, one of my posts was deleted and I didn't say anything offensive. Is it like that now or did it have something to do with having a quote in my post?

The moderators on our forum do a great job and they show more patience than I do.

When I have to get involved (as I did today) I am not going to pick through every post -- the initial one that started a turmoil and all responses -- to see which are ok and which are not. If anything looks off-topic and/or related to the first post that started everything, it's going.

Fortunately, I don't have to get involved that often :)

Brad, I can understand that and now I know. I can see how what I said, including the quote, could continue what was started. Also, I asked Nevada the question and didn't look at the thread again until my post above.

More on NBA Playoff Officiating....
 

Thoughts by Derek Fisher:

"We'll go to Denver (Friday for Game 6), and the game will be called differently. That's just the way it is. I mean, in high school, you go across town, and you know you aren't getting calls. At the highest level of the sport, why would it be any different?"

Rest of the article:

Lakers, Nuggets downplay refs' whistles ahead of Game 6 - USATODAY.com

Obviously, the answer is to play at a neutral site. :D

I wonder what Fisher would think of meeting up with the Nuggets in Salt Lake City. ;)

How do you know what they get?

Ever heard of the guy named Ed Rush? How many NBA finals did he work? Have you ever met him? I was struck by his humility. One of the top refs in NBA and a down to earth, humble man from limited contact. In his contacts with the campers, he was approachable and showed no signs that he was too important or unwilling to talk or chat with anyone about anything. I have been to other type of camps where the guest speakers, amateurs, don't have the time of day for attendees. Rush is a class act. Humble person.

Check your bias and hating.

Have you ever met any of the observers and evaluators of the NBA? There are 11 of them. One of them is a D1 college official and lives somewhere in MD. I do not have any inkling of why the NBA chose him to be one of the eleven but I imagine they saw that he had some basketball acumen or they would not have hired him for that position.

The time I stated that the officials got something like 68 percent of the calls correct in their college game, that game was broken down by video by one of the officials from the game. That was his evaluation of a game he did. D1 official evaluating his game and scores it 68. That guy will get better not the guy who thinks no way his crew is only getting 70 percent of the calls right.

Yes, actually I have. I know one of the evaluators for the NBA fairly well. Former D-1 official and now an assignor for some small college ball out here. I asked him if he had ever had a game he evaluated where he graded the officials as low as what you are claiming, and he laughed. He said if it was that low, they would no longer be working in the league.

I have as well. There are 60 officials in the NBA. They are divided into four groups of 15 and each has a group supervisor.

Guess where one of those group supervisors lives? ;)

The grade was for college not NBA. That was the reference I understood.

The game the official graded was a D1 conference championship.

Then why did you ask if anyone knew any of the NBA evaluators? What does one have to do with the other???:confused:

Question was for Nevada.

And now that I have answered, what is your response?

I learned the part about the number of officials.

You argument using one changed call per game by the league office in the last week does not significantly affect the grade of a crew unless we are talking 10 to 20 calls in a game. Then it could range from 5 to 10 pts. It sounds good and looks good and may have provide a perception issue but it is not statistically relevant. Argument was week at the foundation. Extrapolation was flawed.

You stated you know people and have talked to them but failed to mention any strong evidence to counter Mr. Rush's statement that NBA refs need to grade out much higher than 68% and that actually they need to be higher than 90%. You just stated that it could not be with no proof. If you have some, cite it or comply with the thread starter's request.
:)

Mr. Rush was in charge of officials for some time so his info and expertise qualifies him as a expert and so your argument needs to cite another expert with similar credentials.

Basket Interference?
 

Tonight, 1st qtr of the Orl vs LA Game, an Orlando player appeared to block the shot of an LA player as the Orlando's player's hand went up through the basket from below - ball was not in the cylinder.

NFHS 4-6-3 - this would be a violation, correct? What's the NBA Rule?

Thanks.

The NBA has rules? :eek:

It should have been a goaltend. I didn't get to see it but from what I heard was that not a sole noticed it, not even the LA players, but regardless if he reaches through and contacts the ball its illegal.

my informants lied to me! A couple of coaches and Gasol reacted to the hand up through the rim

RULE NO. 11-BASKETBALL INTERFERENCE-GOALTENDING
Section I-A Player Shall Not:
h. Touch the ball at any time with a hand which is through the basket ring.

PENALTY: If the violation is at the opponent's basket, the offended team is awarded two points, if the attempt is from the two point zone and three points if it is from the three point zone. The crediting of the score and subsequent procedure is the same as if the awarded score has resulted from the ball having gone through the basket, except that the official shall hand the ball to a player of the team entitled to the throw-in. If the violation is at a team's own basket, no points can be scored and the ball is awarded to the offended team at the free throw line extended on either sideline. If there is a violation by both teams, play shall be resumed by a jump ball between any two opponents at the center circle.

In the future, you can look these things up for yourself at NBA.com - Official Rules of the National Basketball Association

Thanks for the answer and link.

Rough Play in these NBA playoffs? Nah!
 

So, I'm a lookin at Youtube and I stumble upon some classic old NBA footage. Ah, tempers do flare from time to time, yes? :eek:

Grab your popcorn!

YouTube - Laimbeer and Bird

YouTube - Parish punches Laimbeer

YouTube - Kevin McHale Clotheslines Kurt Rambis

<link href="http://www.latimes.com/stylesheets/entnews.css" type="text/css" rel="stylesheet"> <style type="text/css"> <!-- /* layout */ #main_wrapper { width:826px; } #center { width:500px; margin-left:10px; overflow:hidden; } * html #center { width:500px; margin-left:4px; } /* related items */ #article_related.box_striped { padding-left:10px; min-height:160px; } #article_related.box_float { float:left;margin:4px 10px 0 0; } * html #article_related.box_float { padding-right:0; } * html #article_related {padding-right:0;} #article_related .content { background:white; padding:8px; margin-right:6px;} #article_related h5 { font-size:14px; font-weight:bold; } #article_related li h2 { display:inline; } #article_galleries { float:left;list-style-type:none; margin-top:0; } #article_galleries li { float:left; padding:0; margin-right:12px; } #article_galleries .photo_article img { border:2px solid #d0d0c4; } #article_galleries .photo_article div { width:140px; height:40px; background-color:#fff; margin-bottom:0; margin-left:2px; overflow:hidden; line-height:19px; } #article_galleries .photo_article strong { color:#ff984d; } #article_stories { float:left; } #article_stories ul { margin-top:10px; font-size:11px; list-style-image:url(/images/raquo-article-related.gif); list-style-position:inside; } #article_stories li { margin-left:6px; } * html #article_stories { margin:0 12px 0 -10px; } * html #article_stories li { text-indent:-2px; margin-left:2px; } #story_paging { margin: 6px 0px 30px 0px; float:right; vertical-align:baseline; } #story_paging ul { list-style: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; } #story_paging li { float: left; margin: 2px 4px; padding:2px 0; font: normal 12px Arial; line-height:10px; } /* article page */ #gradiantbox_listed_story { height:220px; padding:13px; } /*different from entnews*/ .ad_mrec_title_article { background-color:#FFFFFF; color:#CCCCCC; font-size:10px; position:relative; top:-26px; width:120px; margin:0 auto -23px; } .ad_mrec_article { border-top:1px solid #EEEEEE; margin-bottom:18px; padding-top:18px; text-align:center; } #socialnet { border-bottom:1px solid #EEEEEE; border-top:1px solid #EEEEEE; margin:0pt 1px; } #socialnet a { margin-left:27px; } #socialnet img { border:1px solid #CDCDCD; margin:4px 0pt; vertical-align:middle; } /* yourscene box */ .YSArticleHeader { font:normal 24px Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; margin:-2px 2px 5px 2px; } .YSArticleHeader span {font:normal 18px Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; } .YSArticleContent { background-color:#FFFFFF;padding:18px;line-height:16px; } --> </style>

Robert Gauthier / Los Angeles Times

Dwight Howard of the Magic was not called for goaltending on this shot by Pau Gasol of the Lakers in the first quarter of Game 2.


NBA FINALS
Controversies arise over goaltending non-calls


http://www.latimes.com/media/photo/2009-06/47408828.jpg

So Ronnie, do you still want to contend that the NBA refs grade out in the mids 90s?
For the record, I haven't given just one example, I've cited several calls that have either been stated to be wrong by the league or overturned by it.
This is simply one more.