Why not a dozen?

bainsey · #1 (**permalink**) Sun Jun 03, 2012, 10:56pm

Even more, Magic & Broussard are saying the D-Wade should have "jumped into" Daniels on the last shot to draw the foul. Granted, Daniels had no LGP whatsoever, and was moving in the air somewhat laterally, but even if D-Wade came into him, shouldn't that still be a no-call?

Camron Rust · #2 (**permalink**) Sun Jun 03, 2012, 11:50pm

Maybe they should just play the games under summer rules...no foul outs and running clock.

APG · #3 (**permalink**) Mon Jun 04, 2012, 12:38am

Dick Vitale has been a proponent of not DQing players for fouls as well.

JRutledge · #4 (**permalink**) Mon Jun 04, 2012, 12:42am

And the game would go to hell in a hand basket if that was the case. There would be no incentive to not foul people constantly and it would be used as a strategy to make the game what these guys cry about, a foul shooting contest.

This is why I have to roll my eyes every time JVG speaks. Because even if they had 7 fouls then people would complain if a player got 7 fouls.

Peace

APG · #5 (**permalink**) Mon Jun 04, 2012, 12:46am

Players don't even foul out that often as it is. You only hear of this when a player fouls out during a playoff game or during the tournament.

JRutledge · #6 (**permalink**) Mon Jun 04, 2012, 01:14am

Shaq used to foul out all the time and people suggested that more fouls should be called on him. People just want it both ways that is all.

Peace

BktBallRef · #7 (**permalink**) Mon Jun 04, 2012, 09:30pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

Players don't even foul out that often as it is. You only hear of this when a SUPERSTAR fouls out during a playoff game or during the tournament.

There. Fixed it for you.

I suppose any player who fouls out during regulation would then be allowed to return in OT, since he he now has another foul to give?

Good grief.

APG · #8 (**permalink**) Mon Jun 04, 2012, 05:02am

Quote:

Originally Posted by bainsey

Even more, Magic & Broussard are saying the D-Wade should have "jumped into" Daniels on the last shot to draw the foul. Granted, Daniels had no LGP whatsoever, and was moving in the air somewhat laterally, but even if D-Wade came into him, shouldn't that still be a no-call?

No...that's a foul call on the defense 99/100 times.

JugglingReferee · #9 (**permalink**) Mon Jun 04, 2012, 08:32am

Fed is (4 * 8) / 5 = 1 foul per 6.4 minutes.

NCAA is (2 * 20) / 5 = 1 foul per 8 minutes.

FIBA is (4 * 10) / 5 = 1 foul per 8 minutes.

NBA is (4 * 12) / 6 = 1 foul per 8 minutes.

But because the NBA does have a very strong entertainment element to the game, I would enjoy (only) a 7th foul for games that go to OT. (4 * 12) + 5) / 7 = 7.6, which is not much of a change.

BillyMac · #10 (**permalink**) Mon Jun 04, 2012, 05:56pm

... and it seems like it only happened yesterday.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

because the NBA does have a very strong entertainment element to the game, I would enjoy (only) a 7th foul for games that go to OT.

What would you do with this game?

ESPN Classic - Celtics in Land of the Suns after triple OT win

Bad Zebra · #11 (**permalink**) Mon Jun 04, 2012, 08:29am

Quote:

Originally Posted by bainsey

Even more, Magic & Broussard are saying the D-Wade should have "jumped into" Daniels on the last shot to draw the foul. Granted, Daniels had no LGP whatsoever, and was moving in the air somewhat laterally, but even if D-Wade came into him, shouldn't that still be a no-call?

I almost hurled the remote at the TV when I heard that one...Instead of getting an OPEN shot with a beautiful fake (which he did), these two geniuses advocate trying to draw a marginal, B.S. foul to win or tie by "jumping into" the defender. Had the shot gone in...these two would be babbling on and on about Wade doing the right thing...a brilliant decision...big time player...blah, blah, blah.

Between them and JVG's complete ignorance of ANYTHING related to the rules, I find myself talking to (yelling at) the TV more and more. My wife thinks I'm losing it. Next game will be watched with the volume off.

stir22 · #12 (**permalink**) Mon Jun 04, 2012, 09:18am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bad Zebra

I Next game will be watched with the volume off.

i'm with everyone on vangundy. What i do is mute the tv, and find a radio station that's broadcasting the game. listen to the radio guys (almost always much better) and watch the game. can almost always find a station that is in sync with the tv. it's a win-win.

MD Longhorn · #13 (**permalink**) Mon Jun 04, 2012, 12:12pm

I like the idea I've heard floated around that you don't foul out the players at all ... but any foul over (5 in college, 6 in NBA) is a technical foul - 2 shots and the ball.

Bad Zebra · #14 (**permalink**) Mon Jun 04, 2012, 02:30pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

I like the idea I've heard floated around that you don't foul out the players at all ... but any foul over (5 in college, 6 in NBA) is a technical foul - 2 shots and the ball.

I works a men's wreck summer league that uses that very rule due to low numbers of players per team. I think it's fine for that scenario, but it is too radical a departure from the fundamental rules of the game for college or the NBE .

I think you would see excessive physical contact increase wherever that rule is applied...just my opinion. The 2 shot T would not be enough to deter some players from excessively hard fouls. Heck, fouling out doesn't even seem to deter some knuckleheads.

dobbers · #15 (**permalink**) Mon Jun 04, 2012, 04:37pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

I like the idea I've heard floated around that you don't foul out the players at all ... but any foul over (5 in college, 6 in NBA) is a technical foul - 2 shots and the ball.

Was that a rule in the 'ole ABA?