I don't like it and here's why:

1. the NBA professes to put a product on display featuring some of the most agile, strong, and skilled athletes on the planet.
--So given #1, why does the league need rules about momentum? These fantastic athletes should be able to run, jump, shoot, and stop as needed within the boundaries of the court (or frontcourt and backcourt). If the necessary actions can't be done, then shouldn't that be a turnover and possession awarded to the opposing team?

2. the NBA is an entertainment show first and a competition second.
--in my opinion it ranks somewhere between the Harlem Globetrotters and olympic ice skating. According to everything written by the poster above, it would impossible to state definitively whether a decision was correct or not because there is so much gray area and room for personal judgment in assessing the situation. That means that there really isn't a rule at all. The practical application is that whatever the guys with the whistle choose to allow is fine. Much like whatever score the East German judge wishes to post despite the fact that everyone watching knows it to be bogus. So let's face it, in the end, the league doesn't really care about traveling, backcourt, or basket interference. It just wants to create superstars for marketing and ringing the cash register.

3. the NBA writes its rules to cater to the desires of its paying customers--namely the fans and TV producers. If the fans want more scoring, that is what the league attempts to legislate.
--The restricted area, "upward movement" for block/charge decisions, and "two-count rhythm" which the league uses for establishing a pivot are all examples of this. Why can't these guys avoid defenders near the basket, make a six-foot jumpshot, and come to stop after catching a pass without taking multiple steps?

The "rules" that the NBA writes effectively reduce the game officials to clowns running around the circus. If someone wants to take the money for being part of its show, then that is certainly his choice, but don't try to convince me that these people are doing anything more than stage acting.

All I can say about Nevada's opinion is..."interesting."

http://tpww.net/forums/images/smilies/blah.gif

That is not the first time we have heard that here.

Peace

Why the game? You know exactly who Ben is? Those of us who have been on this forum for a while know who he is.

Interesting and spot on.

If that is the case, then that is pro sports in a nutshell. Everything he suggested is exactly the logic on many levels with every sport. My point is be consistent, say the same thing about the NFL, NHL and MLB, because it is all entertainment and rules are there to entertain.

Peace

If that is your opinion then you are entitled to it and no one here wants to change that. Now, if you are so adamant about how terrible the NBA is, then kindly ignore any threads about NBA Basketball and wait until you find one that piques your interest and you can offer something constructive. Interjecting your opinions does nothing to help people here discuss plays or learn about the NBA if they so desire.

Warmest regards,

Fools Rush In ...
 

The Basketball Forum encourages discussions on rules, and mechanics, for NFHS, NCAAM, NCAAW, FIBA, NBA, and WNBA. Heck, we've even discussed "driveway" basketball here. We will occasionally have problems when we try to compare one rule set, or mechanics set, to another. That's why you will seldom see me post on anything other than two person NFHS. Anything else is "uncharted territory" for me, and if I attempt to do otherwise, I usually end up making a fool out of myself, which for me, isn't very hard to do, even when I stick to NFHS.

Why does it matter, as long as your question is answered?

Then your problem is with professional sports. And if you only want to attribute this to the NBA, then you're not consistent.

And I don't know about you, but personally, I don't like crapping on an entire group of officials...it kind of goes against everything this forum is suppose to be about.

Well, I did reread Nevada's post and I guess I'll retract spot on, although I do agree philosophically with parts.

I disagree with baseball comparison it's either fair or foul, out or safe.

IMHO you will see some wavering on strike zone depending on who is doing what. Only area you can play favorites.

I swear Greg Maddux had 6-8 inches either side

Au contraire, your problem is assuming I have a problem.

Well there you go. ;)

Peace

So where is the rule that defines "a positive position" and how it deals with momentum?

Perhaps you know everybody here but I've been here for over 12 years and I have no idea who he is. I don't follow the careers of NBDL officials. Had I known who he was, I wouldn't have had reason to ask.

It hasn't been. As I asked above, where is the rule that explains "positive player position" and this momentum exception btaylor64 referred to?

You actually won't find "positive position" mentioned anywhere else in the rule book. For whatever reason, the NBA has decided it's not a big deal to further define what positive position is.