Then shouldn't it have only counted as two and not three?
Yes, but you can not tell for sure if the ball would not hit the rim, the ball was still at rim level, so that is why the ref had to call GT.
It would not have gone in, but that was the call...he made up for it and now he will not do it again...so no harm done.
I understand that Jim, but what they have been trying to clarify in this thread is IF it was not called a goal tend and it was just called a tip-in, would it have been a 2 or a 3?
If I'm interpreting him correctly, FearDaFro is claiming that if (to give an exaggeration) a Cav airballed a three, then Tim didn't touch it until the ball was waist-high and then somehow the ball bounced off his hands into the basket, it would count as a three.
Kori, it would be a 3, if GT was the call, even if the ball was not going in.
As I said, the same thing happened to Detroit earlier, the ball had no chance to go in, but Sheed hit it with his hands trying to reb, and it popped in the basket, it was ruled a 3 pointer.
Jim, you're still missing it.
What if GT was NOT the call?
Jim, the question is IF goaltending was NOT the call.
Everything but "in the cylinder" was correct. Tim deflected the ball just before it hit the rim so technically it wasn't in the cylinder but was on the way down.
I think if Tim doesnt touch the ball it goes for a long rebound, either way Tim should have not touched the ball. I'm just glad he nailed the game winner. Tim was on a mission in the 2nd half. I wonder what set him off. Whatever it was that needs to happen several times a game.
No, you're thinking of REBOUND plays.
If the ball had hit the rim, bounced off, and duncan had tipped it in, the basket would have gone to the nearest cavalier for two.
Its just like a fly ball hitting an outfielder in the head and bouncing over the wall for a home run. Now, the ball wasn't hit far enough to be a real home run, but it counts just the same.
true
________
GLASS WEED PIPE
Last edited by san antonio spurs; 09-17-2011 at 10:21 AM.
Whatever it was, it did sort of remind me of Jose Canseco...
As many others have stated, the shot was NOT a goal tend, but rather a tipped shot that went in. The three points deservedly went to McInnis because it was his shot which was 'almost blocked' by Tim.
It's easier if you look at it like this: If McInnis had shot a three-pointer and someone went for the block but just grazed the shot with their finger, and the shot managed to still go in, it's still a completed three pointer despite the fact that the other team got a touch on it. It happens all the times when players just manage to barely touch a jumper on the way up and it still hits home.
Tim basically did the same thing, instead his touch on the ball tipped it on the way back down and coincidentally, helped it into the basket.
It was a good call, though I still wasn't very happy about it.
This is what I was saying, since the ball had not hit the rim, it was still the original shot shot. Had it hit the rim, and TD tipped it back into the basket on the reb, it would have been two points, awarded to the closest Cav player.As many others have stated, the shot was NOT a goal tend, but rather a tipped shot that went in. The three points deservedly went to McInnis because it was his shot which was 'almost blocked' by Tim.
It's easier if you look at it like this: If McInnis had shot a three-pointer and someone went for the block but just grazed the shot with their finger, and the shot managed to still go in, it's still a completed three pointer despite the fact that the other team got a touch on it. It happens all the times when players just manage to barely touch a jumper on the way up and it still hits home.
Tim basically did the same thing, instead his touch on the ball tipped it on the way back down and coincidentally, helped it into the basket.
It was a good call, though I still wasn't very happy about it.
Kori, I knew what you were asking, but it was never in question, whether it was 3 points or not. According to the rules, it was 3pts.
If however it was tipped in by a teammate, after it was below the rim, it would have been a 2 pt basket.
This rule protects the integrity of the game. It keeps the opponent from ruining 3 pointer, by turning it into a 2 pointer, and it keeps a teammate from turning a missed 3 pointer into a 3 pointer from close range.
\
agreed
unless they are saying Tims hand is part of the rim and bounced of
and went in. BS
\
agreed
unless they are saying Tims hand is part of the rim and bounced of
and went in. BS
Go read the rule book.
g. Touch any live ball from within the playing area that is on its downward flight with an opportunity to touch the basket ring. This is considered to be a "field goal attempt" or trying for a goal.
h. Touch the ball at any time with a hand which is through the basket ring.
i. Vibrate the rim or backboard so as to cause the ball to make an unnatural bounce.
PENALTY: If the violation is at the opponent's basket, the offended team is awarded two points, if the attempt is from the two point zone and three points if it is from the three point zone. The crediting of the score and subsequent procedure is the same as if the awarded score has resulted from the ball having gone through the basket, except that the official shall hand the ball to a player of the team en led to the throw-in. If the violation is at a team's own basket, no points can be scored and the ball is awarded to the offended team at the free throw line extended on either sideline. If there is a violation by both teams, play shall be resumed by a jump ball between any two opponents at the center circle.
All it has to do is have a chance to touch the rim, not go in, but just touch the rim.
I think I get it now
It would be like if someone attempted a shot from beyond
the arc and was blocked or grazes off the hand by the defense and goes in
that would be a three.
makes sense now
thank you for clarification
It wasn't GOING to touch the rim.
God this thread is rediculous.
I'm still not clear on the rule.
If it is not called a goaltend (yes, I know it was) and fell short of the front of the rim and Tim just tipped it in, would it be a two or a three, according to the rules?
It sounds like Dex, FeartheFro, etc are saying that it would be a three. Others are saying it would be a two.
it should of only been a two
TD touched the ball before it hit the rim..it could have grazed the rim...it was not that clear that it would have missed the rim at all...look at the replay...I taped the game and have looked at it a dozen times, it could have touched the rim, that is all it has to do to be called a GT, is have a chance to touch the rim.
Kori, had the ball not had a chance to touch the rim, then GT, if it had no chance and was below level of rim and TD tipped it in, then it would have been only 2 pts.
Okay, that's what I'm clarifying. Because some people in this thread are saying it doesn't matter if it didn't have a chance to hit the rim or not, it's still a three. That's what I knew was wrong. BTW, I don't know what you see on the tape (I haven't re-watched it) but most people who re-watched it say that it had no chance to hit the rim and was way short.Kori, had the ball not had a chance to touch the rim, then GT, if it had no chance and was below level of rim and TD tipped it in, then it would have been only 2 pts
I have the Cav feed on my dish, and from the angle, you could not tell if the ball would have grazed the rim, it had no chance to go in, but it could have touched the front of th erim...part of the ball was still above the rim....hence the questionable chance.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
