09 playoffs thread

clearly making a play on the ball

if you zoom in there's a shiv in his hand

while i appreciate flagrant calls as a deterrent i agree w/ not really calling them in high leverage situations

http://a.espncdn.com/media/apphoto/2c8acf15-f75e-4f3a-b5f4-51b85286a0fa.jpg

doughboy? more like doe boy fresh!

besides the refs had already removed ray allen from the game for no reason

paul pierce is some country strong

I think it's a case by case thing. I think there is a good argument that this foul was egregious enough that a flagrant would not have been a bad call.

"besides the refs had already removed ray allen from the game for no reason"

No reason besides committing a foul.

if you zoom in there's a shiv in his hand

― nah rong (Dr. Phil), Wednesday, April 29, 2009 12:48 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

enhancing... enhancing... enhancing...

http://i41.tinypic.com/zv8uo8.jpg

lol

No reason besides committing a foul.

― Alex in SF, Wednesday, April 29, 2009 12:54 PM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

one super ticky tacky off the ball bullshit call that doesnt get made 95% of the time and then a minute later also off the ball he got run into on a moving pick by the brad miller throws his hands up and gets called for a double foul - so no it wasnt for committing a foul

"the brad miller"

while i appreciate flagrant calls as a deterrent i agree w/ not really calling them in high leverage situations

agree in general but dude was clearly dazed while shooting crucial ft's. this all woulda been avoided if del negro had TYRUS THOMAS IN THE GAME, dude woulda slammed that shit b4 rondo had a chance for the mid-game gilooly.

I think it's a case by case thing. I think there is a good argument that this foul was egregious enough that a flagrant would not have been a bad call.

― Alex in SF, Wednesday, April 29, 2009 12:53 PM (5 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

flagrants are important for protecting players but theyre overly putative and impinge on the gaminess of basketball bringing all sorts of non 48 minutes who score the most concerns to the table and shouldnt be doled out in high leverage situations - so call them liberally during the regular season - not so much at the end of playoff games

I think the result of not calling the flagrant in this case was actually overly putative so I'm not sure there is a good middle ground here.

man up and hit yr free throws

I mean the middle ground is clearly allowing Del Negro someone other than Miller to shoot the two foul shoots and not forcing Miller to leave the game if there is overtime, but the rules don't allow you to get to that point so. . .

or man up and accept the fact you got beat on a play and gave up the game tying hoop, senor rondo

it was great theater at the v least - woozy 7 footer trying to hit an unguarded 15 footer

"man up and hit yr free throws"

Under normal circumstances I think that's a fair answer, but it's less fair when you've been seriously clocked in the head by a guy not making a play on the ball.

the slomo replay from behind the play of miller being WIDE open but having to traverse the seemingly endless 15 ft to the basket while all C's quickly converge on him was priceless

I also have no doubt that all you Celtic and Bulls fans would be arguing the exact opposite positions if the situation was reversed haha.

^^^

that's how all close games should be decided. ok your smallest guy gets to clock our biggest guy, and then we see who can make the most ft's.

well duh, i'm not complaining about ray getting tossed and no c's fans are up in arms about rose never getting a call.

i think the refs wouldve called the flagrant if theyd initially realized how bad the hit was but then the whole thing sort of just meandered along until millers at the free throw line all squinting and in pain

but they were over there reviewing the play the whole time. according to local chi announcers, they went to the monitor once, then went back again.

Del Negro should have just told the trainer to pretend to not have any Stop Bleed or whatever, a la Steve Nash's bloody nose

yeah i didn't even realize he was bleeding at first.

i will fully admit the bulls didn't get some calls in that game (how does perk have 0 fouls for the game??) but also that ray fouled out on some tacky bullshit. in a game that close, as i stated, there's about a million things that could have broken differently and produced another result. that's just how it goes.

Tim Donaghy probably had a lot riding on this game and called in some favors

had there been no blood i dont think people would be as into the idea of this being a flagrant - and the presence of blood doesnt necessarily correlate w/the severity of the hit - could easily just be a weird freak cut

just to be clear by the rule book as rondo was not making a play on the ball and it was a blow to the head that was clearly a flagrant - agree w/it not being called tho

that's how all close games should be decided. ok your smallest guy gets to clock our biggest guy, and then we see who can make the most ft's.

― hope this helps (Granny Dainger), Wednesday, April 29, 2009 1:11 PM (11 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

lool btw

nah it should've been called for sure, absolutely. but whatever, the bulls will just get a couple of extra calls their way tonight.

ok cream, i am a huge stan for rondo, and i'm glad the Cs won, but if you agree that it was a flagrant, wtf? what are these "non 48 minutes who score the most concerns" that are going to destroy the game? we should just let 'em throw punches as long as the clock is winding down?

great series tho huh guys. every game EXCEPT FOR THE ONE I SHELLED OUT $120 FOR.

A flagrant foul-penalty (1) is unnecessary contact committed by a player against an opponent.

the complete flagrant 1 definition from the nba rules, fwiw

ok cream, i am a huge stan for rondo, and i'm glad the Cs won, but if you agree that it was a flagrant, wtf? what are these "non 48 minutes who score the most concerns" that are going to destroy the game? we should just let 'em throw punches as long as the clock is winding down?

― death from abroad (lukas), Wednesday, April 29, 2009 1:29 PM (18 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

well the extra game considerations are protecting player health - its obv important but has nothing to do w/the actual game of basketball

throwing punches is another issue altogether - that an obvious ejection and suspension - the player at that point isnt playing the game of basketball and is endangering people - rondo on the other hand was just trying to keep miller from scoring

should be noted too that rondos play doesnt even register as far as shit they used to let guys get away with in the golden magic/bird/jordan era

rondos play was clearly necessary

yeah that's my thing--seems like the refs called based on rondo's intent, not the result. obv problematic in some sense. it would help if the wording of the rule wasn't retardedly vague.

Esp. taking into account how punchable Brad Miller's face is.

WP 2009

http://a.espncdn.com/i/headshots/nba/players/65/3026.jpg it was necessary for that man to bleed dont u see

And 2008 and 2007 and 2006 and 2005 and 2004 and . . .

http://a.espncdn.com/i/headshots/nba/players/65/3026.jpg i was hoping by messing up his face it would make him more likeable and not scar him two face stylee

Brad Miller is like the whiter even uglier version of Bruce Bowen in terms of punchability.

wow dude you hate yourself some brad miller

Dude anyone who Shaq wants to punch is probably a complete asshole.

it was necessary for that man to bleed dont u see

that's just not fair. how can i call bullshit on that face.

http://www.yardbarker.com/media/c/5/c5b0012fee9934adf40f0816f60700cdedef8e68/xl/CW_201108_RajonRondo_0001.jpg
http://www.yardbarker.com/media/1/f/1f127be97dae37b8b4ffa51b09bb3ec7645e0f52/xl/CW_201108_RajonRondo_0006.jpg