Reply With Quote
He wasn't good enough to cop that kind of at ude.
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 . Nor does it mean he’s not a whiney 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.
He wasn't good enough to cop that kind of at ude.
This ing Donkey yells at refs and players all the ing time and doesn't get T'd up but he wants to talk about being officiated differently. 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.
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 , 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.
, 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) ing 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.
Exactly. Dad Killer's punching bag acting up.
lol yep
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.
Lol no sympathy given for the most helped team in the league officiating wise.
Stupid s are getting their 4th le in 5 years come June anyway.
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.
Having no angle isn’t a flagrant, having no angle without intent on getting the ball is. And that’s what Draymond did.
Last edited by ambchang; 02-15-2019 at 10:06 PM.
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 la ude.
"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 .
imo the flagrant was a terrible call
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 en led to believe that’s a horse opinion based on your hatred of the player who committed the foul.
How? Arrest was insanely better and not a massive pussy.
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.
on my hatred on Draymond. Where is this coming from? Does everybody have an agenda in your world?
he sure looked like a massive pussy when Ibaka stepped to him......
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
