Back court heat bulls game

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by btaylor64

I won't post much on here at all anymore, but this is not a backcourt violation in the least!!! Even if he did control it we deal with momentum as well. What APG said is right, but one thing he forgot involving positive position is that we allow for momentum... We don't expect a player to gather the ball at the last second and then stop on a dime just for backcourt purposes. If he re-gathers after the deflection but his momentum carries him into the backcourt that is a legal play under NBA rules.

Like it or don't like it, it doesn't matter they applied the rule correctly.

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.

[APG]

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

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

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

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

Peace

[Jay R]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

#1, who is this "we" you speak of? Are you an NBA official?

#2, where can this "momentum rule" be found?

#2, so if this same play happens and he steps OOB instead of backcourt, the "momentum rule" allows his team to keep the ball?

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.

[fullor30]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

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

Interesting and spot on.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by fullor30

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

[CLH]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

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.

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,

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by CLH

Interjecting your opinions does nothing to help people here discuss plays or learn about the NBA if they so desire.

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.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Who are you guys, his press secretaries? He can't answer his own questions?


....

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

[APG]

Originally Posted by fullor30

Interesting and spot on.

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.

[fullor30]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

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

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

[fullor30]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

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.

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

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by fullor30

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

Well there you go.

Peace

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

The rule in question:

Rule 4, Section V

g. Frontcourt/backcourt status is not attained until a player with the ball has established a positive position in either half during (1) a jump ball, (2) a steal by a defensive player, (3) a throw-in in the last two minutes of the fourth period and/or any overtime period or (4) any time the ball is loose

Positive position, as btaylor told you, deals with momentum.

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

Originally Posted by Jay R

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.

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.

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

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

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

[APG]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

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.