LeBron hit on Manu?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Obstructed_View

Kobe got suspended though.

Yep. He got suspended for it.


My point is that, by rule, if it's incidental, then it's NOT a foul. There's no rule that states what Lebron did is an offensive foul in any way. The responsibility to avoid the contact is on Manu once Lebron's head and shoulders are past him. That's in the NBA rulebook. Seriously, what Steve Nash did right before he got slammed into the scorer's table is more likely to be called an offensive foul than what Lebron did, because there's a specific rule that states you are not to attempt to dribble between an opponent and a boundary if there's not enough room for you to avoid contact.*


*Rule 12B, sec 2a.(3)

---

But aren't a lot of the fouls still incidental or in other words, accidental?

Or are all the fouls flat out "on purpose"?

Anyway, I honestly don't know too much about the foul rules. And the NBA rulebook is not exactly something I read on a daily basis. But what then constitutes a foul? Is it always called only when someone "intentionally" tries to hurt the other person?

Cuz I see fouls called a lot of the times for even the smallest things...I think an elbow to the face is pretty harmfull...But then again, I don't know a lot about the NBA rules at all. Just the basic stuff.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greenleo

But aren't a lot of the fouls still incidental or in other words, accidental?

---

The two words don't have the same meaning. Incidental means that it isn't important. In other words, the rules don't cover that particular incident. If I accidentally hit you on the wrist as you go by it's a foul. Kobe's elbow to Manu's face wasn't a natural part of his shooting motion so he got suspended. Lebron was past Manu when the contact occurred so it's not Lebron's responsibility to attempt to avoid it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greenleo

Anyway, I honestly don't know too much about the foul rules. And the NBA rulebook is not exactly something I read on a daily basis. But what then constitutes a foul? Is it always called only when someone "intentionally" tries to hurt the other person?

Cuz I see fouls called a lot of the times for even the smallest things...I think an elbow to the face is pretty harmfull...But then again, I don't know a lot about the NBA rules at all. Just the basic stuff.

---

I think that's why so many people complain about officiating, because they misunderstand what is and is not illegal. Immediately after the elbow to Manu, Duncan got called for a foul on Lebron where there wasn't much contact, but it was a foul because Duncan reached forward and made the contact with his hands. It wasn't much, but it was a clear foul. If Duncan had kept his hands straight up and jumped straight up, even if Lebron had jumped into him it wouldn't have been a foul, even though there would have been a ton of contact. The difference between the two scenarios is that the defender initiated one and not the other.

The NBA rules on personal fouls don't take that long to read, and they are pretty clear. Knowing them makes the game much, much less frustrating to watch. You'll quickly realize that the calls that the officials miss aren't the ones most people complain about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Obstructed_View

The two words don't have the same meaning. Incidental means that it isn't important. In other words, the rules don't cover that particular incident. If I accidentally hit you on the wrist as you go by it's a foul. Kobe's elbow to Manu's face wasn't a natural part of his shooting motion so he got suspended. Lebron was past Manu when the contact occurred so it's not Lebron's responsibility to attempt to avoid it.


I think that's why so many people complain about officiating, because they misunderstand what is and is not illegal. Immediately after the elbow to Manu, Duncan got called for a foul on Lebron where there wasn't much contact, but it was a foul because Duncan reached forward and made the contact with his hands. It wasn't much, but it was a clear foul. If Duncan had kept his hands straight up and jumped straight up, even if Lebron had jumped into him it wouldn't have been a foul, even though there would have been a ton of contact. The difference between the two scenarios is that the defender initiated one and not the other.

The NBA rules on personal fouls don't take that long to read, and they are pretty clear. Knowing them makes the game much, much less frustrating to watch. You'll quickly realize that the calls that the officials miss aren't the ones most people complain about.

---

You know, I also found it interesting that a foul was called on Bruce when he kneed Nash in the groin, accidentally. Later, it was promoted to a flagrant one. But the thing is that I've watched a ton of games where I saw players "boxing out" when they were guarded closely. So I still don't get how that was a flagrant, when it wasn't like Bowen purposely kneed Nash. I mean after all the talk about being dirty by Amare, I don't think Bowen would be stupid enough to add to that by "purposely" kneeing someone, especially Nash, on national tv.

Not to mention that I remember Duncan getting kneed in the groin by one of the Suns players a while back. That player wasn't called for a flagrant or even a foul. It was said to be "incidental contact."

So, I guess, I was just wondering if you thought that Bowen should have gotten a flagrant for that, when another Suns player didn't when he did that to Duncan? Since I don't know much about the exact rules, I was just wondering what you thought about it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greenleo

You know, I also found it interesting that a foul was called on Bruce when he kneed Nash in the groin, accidentally. Later, it was promoted to a flagrant one. But the thing is that I've watched a ton of games where I saw players "boxing out" when they were guarded closely. So I still don't get how that was a flagrant, when it wasn't like Bowen purposely kneed Nash. I mean after all the talk about being dirty by Amare, I don't think Bowen would be stupid enough to add to that by "purposely" kneeing someone, especially Nash, on national tv.

Not to mention that I remember Duncan getting kneed in the groin by one of the Suns players a while back. That player wasn't called for a flagrant or even a foul. It was said to be "incidental contact."

So, I guess, I was just wondering if you thought that Bowen should have gotten a flagrant for that, when another Suns player didn't when he did that to Duncan? Since I don't know much about the exact rules, I was just wondering what you thought about it.

---

Bowen took a jab step. It's fairly common when someone is up on you and you have the ball. There wasn't a single basketball analyst that played in the NBA that I heard say that Bowen did anything wrong. The NBA kicked it up to a flagrant to shut up the complainers and because they knew Bowen wouldn't accrue enough points for it to matter. Unfortunately it validated the complaints at that point and was a big reason everyone on the Suns' bench reacted the way they did when Nash committed the offensive foul on Horry and flopped into the scorer's table in game 4.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Obstructed_View

Bowen took a jab step. It's fairly common when someone is up on you and you have the ball. There wasn't a single basketball analyst that played in the NBA that I heard say that Bowen did anything wrong. The NBA kicked it up to a flagrant to shut up the complainers and because they knew Bowen wouldn't accrue enough points for it to matter. Unfortunately it validated the complaints at that point and was a big reason everyone on the Suns' bench reacted the way they did when Nash committed the offensive foul on Horry and flopped into the scorer's table in game 4.

---

Yeah, I thought so too. That's why I didn't get it. Also, there were commentators talking about "how some have called Bruce dirty even in this series" in reference to the knee to the groin to Nash and the foot thing with Amare. So it seemed the like the knee to the groin was made to look dirty in the eyes of the general public. Several commentators did mention it.

And yes, that was a definite flop there. I mean Horry just crushed into Pop, and Pop got up pretty fast...and the guy is older. So yeah, it was all out of proportion with the Nash thing as well. Cuz Horry was made to look like villain. Even he admitted that Nash flopped...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greenleo

Yeah, I thought so too. That's why I didn't get it. Also, there were commentators talking about "how some have called Bruce dirty even in this series" in reference to the knee to the groin to Nash and the foot thing with Amare. So it seemed the like the knee to the groin was made to look dirty in the eyes of the general public. Several commentators did mention it.

And yes, that was a definite flop there. I mean Horry just crushed into Pop, and Pop got up pretty fast...and the guy is older. So yeah, it was all out of proportion with the Nash thing as well. Cuz Horry was made to look like villain. Even he admitted that Nash flopped...

---

People have called Bruce dirty forever. Spurs fans should have learned to laugh it off when Ray Allen started doing it, because he throws a hundred cheap shots at Bruce every time they play.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Obstructed_View

People have called Bruce dirty forever. Spurs fans should have learned to laugh it off when Ray Allen started doing it, because he throws a hundred cheap shots at Bruce every time they play.

---

LOL! I saw Bruce on Best Damn Sports Show in 2005 playoffs when the Spurs were about to face Sonics. And apparently, Ray Allen had already complained about Bruce BEFORE the series even started! LOL!

So yeah, it is a common knowledge that some players love to refer to Bruce as being dirty. Vince Carter is another one...lol. I just don't think it's all that fair. Bruce works really hard to be the best defender that he can be, and yet instead of getting respect, he gets players complaining about him. I guess we can add Amare at the top of the list, now.

At least the Spurs players/coach/organization knows what he brings to the table...as the fans do too.