Anyone see the Miami blarge?

mplagrow · #1 (**permalink**) Sat Mar 08, 2003, 08:48am

The following is from a Miami Herald article. I didn't see the game and was wondering if anyone knows: is this accurate at all? I'd like to hear an unbiased view of what happened. It seems like a strange overrule to me, but I didn't see it. Also, what do you think about local papers printing ref's names like this?

. . .Caron went up with a layup attempt over a moving Steve Nash.

The official underneath the basket, Ken Mauer, immediately signaled a blocking foul against Nash, which would have put Butler at the free-throw line with a chance to tie the score.

But the official at halfcourt trailing the play, Bernie Fryer, was adamant that Butler was guilty of charging, turned to the scorer's table and made the call without conferring with Mauer.

Riley ran onto the court to try to convince the officials to talk about the call, but to no avail.

''It was a huge call,'' Riley said. ``My argument was that Ken Mauer had jumped out with a blocking call, very visibly called it. He was the one under the basket. He saw it. And the other guy just pointed the other way. . . .

Mark Padgett · #2 (**permalink**) Sat Mar 08, 2003, 12:16pm

I didn't see the play, but I have no problem with the paper printing the ref's names. Their names are listed in the box score anyway, plus many times they are even "introduced" if the game is on TV.

This is the NBA. It's entertainment, not basketball.

JugglingReferee · #3 (**permalink**) Sat Mar 08, 2003, 02:22pm

Pat Riley has been commenting about the officiating quite a bit this season. I think I recall him being fined on one or more than one occasion this season.

If contact occurs such that one official sees the play as a defensive foul, and another official sees the play as an ofensive foul, and both officials give a signal as to what they saw, then you have to either:

- give each player a foul and go with a jump ball (in the NBA presumably between the two players involved)
- get together and decide who will take the blunt of the ooopsie

Neither was done. I think the officials screwed up large. I think that Pat Riley has a right to use the media to rip. Either rip the league for not having a provision how to handle such a situation (I don't think this is the case), or rip the officials for not following procedure. On a judgement call, you cannot have two officials telling everyone what they saw (by signalling) then not doing anything about it. They saw the play and made up their mind, as a professional referee. They're accountable.

As for printing the names, I have no problem with that. As the previous dude said, the names are already available elsewhere. It's no biggie to print them in a local paper. Most people won't care anyways. They'll talk about it for a few days, then that's it.

Mike

Edit: I met Nash a few years ago at a national tournament. Incredibly classy guy. Go Nash! Go Mavericks!

Woodee · #4 (**permalink**) Sat Mar 08, 2003, 02:41pm

Mark,

Why isn't the NBA basketball?

The only thing about the NBA thats entertainment is the
Officiating and thats why the coaches and players get so upset with the Refs. Granted there are knuckleheads in the NBA like Wallace, Artest and Pat Riley.

It bugs me when people refer to the NBA as pure entertainment. If thats the case, players like Russell, MJ, Bird, Magic etc, etc are all singers and dancers.

JugglingReferee · #5 (**permalink**) Sat Mar 08, 2003, 02:49pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Woodee
Mark,

Why isn't the NBA basketball?

The only thing about the NBA thats entertainment is the
Officiating and thats why the coaches and players get so upset with the Refs. Granted there are knuckleheads in the NBA like Wallace, Artest and Pat Riley.

It bugs me when people refer to the NBA as pure entertainment. If thats the case, players like Russell, MJ, Bird, Magic etc, etc are all singers and dancers.

I think the league nowadays is much different from when the players you mentioned played, including Jordan. This is his last year, after all.

If you're going to talk about players playing basketball, let's talk about current players, such as T-Mac, AI when he can, Kobe, and of course Vince. (There are others, too.)

Don't get me wrong, I grew up with the 80s NBA and am a huge Bird fan and loved the Magic/Bird rivalry, but those times are gone.... it's time to move on.

I think Riley has a point.

Mike

Woodee · #6 (**permalink**) Sat Mar 08, 2003, 02:57pm

JR,

The NBA has a lot of legitimate Hoopers.
Shaq
Duncan
Pierce
Garnett
Kidd
Nowitski
Weber
On and On and On!!!

They have game. The only thing I've seen changed since the 80s is that the players are BETTER collectively!

JugglingReferee · #7 (**permalink**) Sat Mar 08, 2003, 03:42pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Woodee
JR,

The NBA has a lot of legitimate Hoopers.
Shaq
Duncan
Pierce
Garnett
Kidd
Nowitski
Weber
On and On and On!!!

They have game. The only thing I've seen changed since the 80s is that the players are BETTER collectively!

I agree with you - see my above post. I mentioned different players than you did; I agree with most of your list. Yes, league is better as a whole, and so is the officiating. Recall: the old 2-person mechanics. (Watching ESPN Classic, I routinely see officials working right under the basket, and leaning. There was one official that always did the little side-step when signalling a block. Who was that anyways? Jurassic, you might know.) But I miss the guys like Rambis, Green, et al...

JRutledge · #8 (**permalink**) Sat Mar 08, 2003, 03:51pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Woodee
Mark,

Why isn't the NBA basketball?

The only thing about the NBA thats entertainment is the
Officiating and thats why the coaches and players get so upset with the Refs. Granted there are knuckleheads in the NBA like Wallace, Artest and Pat Riley.

It bugs me when people refer to the NBA as pure entertainment. If thats the case, players like Russell, MJ, Bird, Magic etc, etc are all singers and dancers.

Well part of the reason the NBA is refered to as Entertainment, is because they make rules that directly affect the way the game is played. Remember the 3 point rule length change a few years ago? Or the 8 second backcourt rule change? Or what about the "under the basket circle?" All these rules are to make the game have more scoring and to induce more fast breaks and higher scores. Do not get me wrong, the NCAA and NF changes it's rules also, but they seem to look for more of a balance. The NBA does everything (not much different than the NFL) to change it's rules to put points on the board and inturn, put fannies in the seats. Hell, the NBA did not even allow any kind of zone defense to be played for years (I am not that old, but it has always been that way from my point of view). I think if they got rid of the 3 second defense rule and go to a pure zone, it might encourage more team defense instead of this one on one philosophy that the NBA seems to love and encourage.

Peace

Tim C · #9 (**permalink**) Sat Mar 08, 2003, 04:21pm

Any time you play any sport with the intent to EARN money (that would be for profit by an owner) then it moves from sport to entertainment.

All professional sports (err, those "professional sports" played by the true best players in the world) would fall into entertainment.

It is a fairly easy definition for me to allow.

(The Original & Ever Slimming)

Tee

canuckrefguy · #10 (**permalink**) Sat Mar 08, 2003, 04:22pm

Back to the original question....

Don't think you really need to have seen this one.

Unless I'm mistaken, the big emphasis in 3-person mechanics now is that the Trail should pick up a play leaving his area, and stay with it right to the hoop. If this was the case, then the Lead should've sucked on it. If it was coming from the other side, it was the center's call.

As for the NBA, there are a lot of great ball players, but the game is nowhere near the same as it was even 15 years ago. Now, it's all about big thugs in the paint and 3-point shots. And the occasional one-on-one magic from someone like Kobe. Very little of anything else.