Kerr and Warriors throw hissy over ejection of Gaymond

[Fabbs]

https://youtu.be/FXS5lzdhnjA

[Fabbs]

Can't make this ish up:

"I don't know, it's the Draymond rule."

Green, who has been among the league leaders in technical fouls for several years and already has racked up 11 this season, isn't the only one who thinks he is officiated differently than others in the league.
"Honestly, I think that has something to do with it," Warriors guard Stephen Curry said.

* haven't been able to find a postable link of the play yet.

[Fabbs]

https://streamable.com/1crpw

If you have a better angle go for it.

[Will Hunting]

Was Raymond even ejected? I thought they just called a flagrant 1 but not sure.

I didn’t agree with the call but I’ve seen a lot worse, Kerr’s reaction was a joke.

[Chillen]

This is what happens when your team thinks it owns the NBA at this point. They all probably feel unbeatable, so when things don't go their way, the shots don't fall, refs don't swallow the whistle for them they act like a bunch of crybabies. How dare you? we are the Warriors we are elite were better than you, just hand over the trophy ok, lol.

[Fabbs]

Was Raymond even ejected? I thought they just called a flagrant 1 but not sure.

I didn’t agree with the call but I’ve seen a lot worse, Kerr’s reaction was a joke.
BSPN does not list ejections that I am aware of.
Article said Kerr obviously, but no mention of Gaymond being ejected.

Here is a better view of the hack, if this link makes it thru:
https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--JB2h1y19--/c_scale,fl_progressive,q_80,w_800/vpnuquy0ljezzeahmzqi.mp4

[Fabbs]

https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--JB2h1y19--/c_scale,fl_progressive,q_80,w_800/vpnuquy0ljezzeahmzqi.mp4

Gaymond does indeed get plenty of ball, but tons of arm also. F him and his "All ball" bullshit.
Does Gaymonds leg being inside the arc also make it an automatic foul?

Plus the call was unnecessary roughness. And while some may balk at that, it is a good call given that cheapshot faggots history.
We all know he should have had 500+ of these his career.

[Raven]

https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--JB2h1y19--/c_scale,fl_progressive,q_80,w_800/vpnuquy0ljezzeahmzqi.mp4

Gaymond does indeed get plenty of ball, but tons of arm also. F him and his "All ball" bullshit.
Does Gaymonds leg being inside the arc also make it an automatic foul?

Plus the call was unnecessary roughness. And while some may balk at that, it is a good call given that cheapshot faggots history.
We all know he should have had 500+ of these his career.

what was his left arm doing in there anyway..

[Chris Fall]

Gaymond does indeed get plenty of ball, but tons of arm also. F him and his "All ball" bullshit.
Does Gaymonds leg being inside the arc also make it an automatic foul?


No. The restricted defensive arc is there only for charge / block calls where a defender is trying to take a charge as an offensive player is driving into the lane for a lay-up or dunk. Here, Draymond’s action is a swipe at the basketball. The arc is irrelevant.

It was a bad call. Not because it wasn’t a foul, but because there’s nothing flagrant or unnecessarily rough about what happened. Just a bad call.

[Millennial_Messiah]

he's the Artest of this generation

[resistanze]

Seemed excessive to call a flagrant but it seems the refs don't like the way Gaymond hacks. He's already dislocated a thumb doing that this year.

[Mr. Body]

No. The restricted defensive arc is there only for charge / block calls where a defender is trying to take a charge as an offensive player is driving into the lane for a lay-up or dunk. Here, Draymond’s action is a swipe at the basketball. The arc is irrelevant.

It was a bad call. Not because it wasn’t a foul, but because there’s nothing flagrant or unnecessarily rough about what happened. Just a bad call.

It was fine. Draymond had been chippy and needed a technical getting into it earlier. Any shot near the head at that point should have been a flagrant.

He should have already been on a technical, but whateva.

[DMC]

No. The restricted defensive arc is there only for charge / block calls where a defender is trying to take a charge as an offensive player is driving into the lane for a lay-up or dunk. Here, Draymond’s action is a swipe at the basketball. The arc is irrelevant.

It was a bad call. Not because it wasn’t a foul, but because there’s nothing flagrant or unnecessarily rough about what happened. Just a bad call.

It's his new way of disabling players. He's into breaking hands and thumbs now since they squelched his ability to kick people in the nuts.

[Fabbs]

It's his new way of disabling players. He's into breaking hands and thumbs now since they squelched his ability to kick people in the nuts.
Would love to see a player drive the lane, cue Gaymond to attempt his described disabling. Player then abandons shot, but enough so that it still looks like a shot attempt. Elbows Gaymond right in the mouth, taking out teeth.

Will help pay players fine + give a gratuity.

[Fabbs]

It's his new way of disabling players. He's into breaking hands and thumbs now since they squelched his ability to kick people in the nuts.
Would love to see a player drive the lane, cue Gaymond to attempt his described disabling. Player then abandons shot, but enough so that it still looks like a shot attempt. Elbow Gaymond right in the mouth, taking out teeth.

Will help pay players fine + give a gratuity.

[UZER]

It’s funny how much stuff this dude gets away with game after game, season after season. Then, one slightly questionable call happens and they over react with “you see! They’re only out to get draymond! He dindu nothin!”

[BD24]

This was a bad call, should have just been a regular foul.

With that said the faggot gets away with more than anyone else and gets special treatment because he is on the leagues sweethearts. So its hard to feel bad for him. The guy berates the refs all game every game. They don't forget that shit.

[Rusty]

He broke Jonas valuncianus’ fingers and the ref didn’t even call a foul on him

[Mr. Body]

It’s funny how much stuff this dude gets away with game after game, season after season. Then, one slightly questionable call happens and they over react with “you see! They’re only out to get draymond! He dindu nothin!”

They were freaking out that Portland was sticking it to them. Warriors have always had the heart and soul of bratty toddlers.

[Spurtacular]

Why was Kerr never like this as a player? Dude is drugged on ego. He thinks he's top of the coaching pyramid.

[Fabbs]

Why was Kerr never like this as a player? Dude is drugged on ego. He thinks he's top of the coaching pyramid.
Huge. The Gay Area gig has completed his transformation to faggy utter douchebag.

The *miraculous* recovery from back surgery to come on board the Finals for Game 2 (or whatever it was) so he would be the coach of credit and not Potato Head. Unreal.

[Arcadian]

He gets it from Pop.

[hater]

Kerr is an entitled little bitch. Glad Goat Jordan punched the shit out of this pussy back in the day.

Hes a shit coach that would be shining shoes if not landing with Golden Showers. Hell even Luke Walton looked like a HOF coach with these fucks and landed a job in LA only to look like a piece of shit coach :lmao

[Spurs Homer]

Clearly a flagrant foul - but he does this in every game and he gets away with it.

Other players go for a block or keep their hands straight up until the reach for a block at the last instant -

Gaymond just automatically goes for the football-type tackle/body slam to try and send a message and he gets away with this tactic in every game he plays.
He broke that Euros finger/thumb? already with that type of hacking motion this season.

[ambchang]

How could you argue that was not a flagrant. There was no angle. The only reason he got ball is because he already flagrant fouled the guys shoulder and left arm, causing him to lose control of the ball. There was absolutely no angle on that and Draymond didn’t even attempt to jump and go for the ball.

And :lol on the Draymond rules as it that was a negative thing. It benefits him and the warriors immensely.

[Chris Fall]

I’d argue that it was certainly a hard foul, but in the act of fouling, he was making a play at the ball. He didn’t hit him above the shoulders, in the neck or head area. I don’t believe the foul was unnecessary because I believe the foul prevented a good opportunity for a score. If you consider the play in and of itself, without who committed the foul or what events may have happened leading up to the foul, I don’t view the foul flagrant.

Thats not to say Draymond doesn’t generally get away with a lot of shit. Nor does it mean he’s not a whiney bitch or a jackass or any number of other names he gets called. It doesn’t mean it’s ridiculous for him to suggest officials have “Draymond rules” when officiating him. All of that is true. It just means this particular play in and of itself doesn’t look flagrant to me.

It’s also curious that with all of the complaints over the years on these boards about the pussification of the NBA, that so many feel this foul was flagrant. It’s a hard foul. To me, that’s it.

[JoeTait75]

Why was Kerr never like this as a player?

He wasn't good enough to cop that kind of attitude.

[FkLA]

This fucking Donkey yells at refs and players all the fucking time and doesn't get T'd up but he wants to talk about being officiated differently. Fuck outta here. I still remember during the playoffs last year, he literally was at the 3PT land yelling at Bertans who was shooting a technical then went up to his face and clapped after Bertans missed it, and the refs just acted like it was normal.

[Dex]

That was a weak flagrant, but Draymond absolutely deserves any scrutiny he gets from the ref.

For every one of these "bad calls" that go against him, he gets away with dirty shit, bush-league plays, and screaming at the refs ten-fold. I've never seen a player get as long of a leash as he does, and he still wants to act like he is being persecuted.

Hell, on the possession before this, they called Green for an offensive foul for clearly barreling over one of the Blazers, and when he heard the whistle he punched the air toward the official and stepped over the defender (nearly kicking him in the head) bitching at the official all the way.

This was likely a reaction whistle on this hard foul from the refs because after seeing that, they weren't going to let things escalate even more.

[Spurtacular]

He wasn't good enough to cop that kind of attitude.

Exactly. Dad Killer's punching bag acting up.

[Chris]

He dindu nothin!

lol yep

[ambchang]

I’d argue that it was certainly a hard foul, but in the act of fouling, he was making a play at the ball. He didn’t hit him above the shoulders, in the neck or head area. I don’t believe the foul was unnecessary because I believe the foul prevented a good opportunity for a score. If you consider the play in and of itself, without who committed the foul or what events may have happened leading up to the foul, I don’t view the foul flagrant.

Thats not to say Draymond doesn’t generally get away with a lot of shit. Nor does it mean he’s not a whiney bitch or a jackass or any number of other names he gets called. It doesn’t mean it’s ridiculous for him to suggest officials have “Draymond rules” when officiating him. All of that is true. It just means this particular play in and of itself doesn’t look flagrant to me.

It’s also curious that with all of the complaints over the years on these boards about the pussification of the NBA, that so many feel this foul was flagrant. It’s a hard foul. To me, that’s it.

Have to disagree. There was no angle to reasonably get a play at the ball. The player shielded the ball with his body for this particular purpose. Draymond can either let it go or try to draw a charge. He instead chose to swipe at the players arms with no chance of making a basketball play.

[timtonymanu]

Lol no sympathy given for the most helped team in the league officiating wise.

Stupid fucks are getting their 4th title in 5 years come June anyway.

[Chris Fall]

Have to disagree. There was no angle to reasonably get a play at the ball. The player shielded the ball with his body for this particular purpose. Draymond can either let it go or try to draw a charge. He instead chose to swipe at the players arms with no chance of making a basketball play.

You can't say he couldn't reasonably make a play at the ball when he in fact did make a play on the ball. He got his hand ON the ball. Yes, he fouled him in the process. Yes, he had to go through his left arm first. But he made a play on the ball.

It's the second time you've used the term "no angle" to describe the foul as if that's language in some NBA flagrant foul rule. It's not. You can make a play on the ball and foul the player at the same time. It happens all the time. It's a discretionary interpretation by the officials whether the play was unnecessary and in a flagrant foul 2 situation excessive. What does having "no angle" have to do with anything anyway? What language in what rule talks about having an angle? Especially since he actually did get hand on ball in the process if the foul?

I get hating on Draymond and the Warriors. I get that no one should feel bad or sorry for him. But objectively speaking, I don't see what you're seeing. Replace that with any random, no name NBA player with the EXACT same play and not only should it not be a flagrant foul, but no one on these boards would be arguing that it should be.

[ambchang]

You can't say he couldn't reasonably make a play at the ball when he in fact did make a play on the ball. He got his hand ON the ball. Yes, he fouled him in the process. Yes, he had to go through his left arm first. But he made a play on the ball.

It's the second time you've used the term "no angle" to describe the foul as if that's language in some NBA flagrant foul rule. It's not. You can make a play on the ball and foul the player at the same time. It happens all the time. It's a discretionary interpretation by the officials whether the play was unnecessary and in a flagrant foul 2 situation excessive. What does having "no angle" have to do with anything anyway? What language in what rule talks about having an angle? Especially since he actually did get hand on ball in the process if the foul?

I get hating on Draymond and the Warriors. I get that no one should feel bad or sorry for him. But objectively speaking, I don't see what you're seeing. Replace that with any random, no name NBA player with the EXACT same play and not only should it not be a flagrant foul, but no one on these boards would be arguing that it should be.

He got his hand on the ball after he hit the player on the arm and the player lost control of the ball. Watch it again. The entire reason he touched the ball was because he hacked him.

Karl Malone got the ball after he hit zeke. Still a flagrant foul.

P0RGcMhGMk4

Having no angle isn’t a flagrant, having no angle without intent on getting the ball is. And that’s what Draymond did.

[Fabbs]

He got his hand on the ball after he hit the player on the arm and the player lost control of the ball. Watch it again. The entire reason he touched the ball was because he hacked him.
qft

Also watch Gaymonds left hand and arm. Reaching in. He never had any intent of blocking the shot.
Pretty sure intent figures into the call. Refs are given that latitude.

"Ohh ohh it's dangerous to start reading intent." Not with Gaymond.
He should have had his head stuffed up his ass 4 years ago when he started this shit.

[spurraider21]

imo the flagrant was a terrible call

[Chris Fall]

He got his hand on the ball after he hit the player on the arm and the player lost control of the ball. Watch it again. The entire reason he touched the ball was because he hacked him.

Karl Malone got the ball after he hit zeke. Still a flagrant foul.

P0RGcMhGMk4

Having no angle isn’t a flagrant, having no angle without intent on getting the ball is. And that’s what Draymond did.

Honestly don’t know if you’re being serious or not.

Draymond’s foul was essentially simultaneous with him hitting the ball. It was one motion and if you don’t watch a slow motion video clip, you see he got basketball right as he was also fouling. Watch a real time clip of the play, and I’d argue you can’t even call the hitting of the ball “after” the foul. It looks simultaneous. Karl Malone delivers an elbow, to the head mind you, and then smacks the ball “after” not only delivering that elbow but also hip checking Zeke. Two considerations in the modern flagrant foul interpretations include a hit to the head and injury caused, two things you see in the Malone foul BUT don’t see with the Draymond foul. You can even argue that because Zeke was well into the air when he was fouled, that the foul was reckless, another consideration for a flagrant foul that wasn’t part of the Draymond foul.

It’s a poor argument to even compare the two plays imo. But obviously we’re not going to agree. So it is what it is. You have every right to believe it was a legit flagrant foul. I am entitled to believe that’s a horseshit opinion based on your hatred of the player who committed the foul.

[Chucho]

he's the Artest of this generation

How? Arrest was insanely better and not a massive pussy.

[ambchang]

Honestly don’t know if you’re being serious or not.

Draymond’s foul was essentially simultaneous with him hitting the ball. It was one motion and if you don’t watch a slow motion video clip, you see he got basketball right as he was also fouling. Watch a real time clip of the play, and I’d argue you can’t even call the hitting of the ball “after” the foul. It looks simultaneous. Karl Malone delivers an elbow, to the head mind you, and then smacks the ball “after” not only delivering that elbow but also hip checking Zeke. Two considerations in the modern flagrant foul interpretations include a hit to the head and injury caused, two things you see in the Malone foul BUT don’t see with the Draymond foul. You can even argue that because Zeke was well into the air when he was fouled, that the foul was reckless, another consideration for a flagrant foul that wasn’t part of the Draymond foul.

It’s a poor argument to even compare the two plays imo. But obviously we’re not going to agree. So it is what it is. You have every right to believe it was a legit flagrant foul. I am entitled to believe that’s a horseshit opinion based on your hatred of the player who committed the foul.

Not saying the Karl Malone foul and the Draymond foul are comparable, because the Malone foul was way worse, but it is to illustrate the flaws in your argument that if someone touched the ball during the foul it is a play at the ball.

My argument is that there was no way to make the play at the ball and that there was unnecessary contact, which is all that is needed for a flagrant 1.

:lol on my hatred on Draymond. Where is this coming from? Does everybody have an agenda in your world?

[snickles]

How? Arrest was insanely better and not a massive pussy.


he sure looked like a massive pussy when Ibaka stepped to him......