Who hates Manu Ginobli and the spurs?

[Extra Stout]

Spurs are a team of three all-stars and a bunch of below mediocre bums. I hate the Spurs. They are not even close to being the best team. They win because they're like that group of old guys you used to play against at the YMCA when you were a kid. You're better and younger and faster, but they know all the cheap tricks. They always beat you because they cheat.

The old guys beat you because they know deep down that you're a gutless pussy who shies away from contact, and that they can intimidate you and throw you off your game.

It makes sense, then, that you're a Suns fan.

[Hemotivo]

Look at the poll now.

Not me 567482 100.00%

[DannyB]

The old guys beat you because they know deep down that you're a gutless pussy who shies away from contact, and that they can intimidate you and throw you off your game.

It makes sense, then, that you're a Suns fan.

Do you even know the rules of the game, or do you just assume that because the Spurs play dirty its the correct way? I'm a pussy because I think the game should be played by the rules? I'm a pussy because I think basketball should be basketball instead of football?

You're stone dumb if you think the way the Spurs play defense is totally kosher and within the rules. The Official NBA Rule Book describes personal fouls as:

"a. A player shall not hold, push, charge into, impede the progress of an opponent by extending a hand, forearm, leg or knee or by bending the body into a position that is not normal. Contact that results in the re-routing of an opponent is a foul which must be called immediately."

"b> Contact initiated by the defensive player guarding a player with the ball is not legal. This contact includes, but is not limited to, forearm, hands, or body check."

So does the above definition of personal fouls pretty much describe the entire Spurs defensive repetoire, or what? I've watched Bruce Bowen tick right down this list of fouls within 30 seconds of tip-off. Go watch football if you like full contact man-on-man love so much.

[Reggie Miller]

Do you even know the rules of the game, or do you just assume that because the Spurs play dirty its the correct way? I'm a pussy because I think the game should be played by the rules? I'm a pussy because I think basketball should be basketball instead of football?

You're stone dumb if you think the way the Spurs play defense is totally kosher and within the rules. The Official NBA Rule Book describes personal fouls as:

"a. A player shall not hold, push, charge into, impede the progress of an opponent by extending a hand, forearm, leg or knee or by bending the body into a position that is not normal. Contact that results in the re-routing of an opponent is a foul which must be called immediately."

"b> Contact initiated by the defensive player guarding a player with the ball is not legal. This contact includes, but is not limited to, forearm, hands, or body check."

So does the above definition of personal fouls pretty much describe the entire Spurs defensive repetoire, or what? I've watched Bruce Bowen tick right down this list of fouls within 30 seconds of tip-off. Go watch football if you like full contact man-on-man love so much.

Are you stupid or merely ignorant?

[DannyB]

Are you stupid or merely ignorant?

Great response. You sure gave me a lot to think about.

[Reggie Miller]

Great response. You sure gave me a lot to think about.

If you are ignorant, I may invest the time in responding. If you are stupid, why waste my time?

[DannyB]

If you are ignorant, I may invest the time in responding. If you are stupid, why waste my time?

Save it. You obviously have no response.

[Reggie Miller]

Save it. You obviously have no response.

You are obviously stupid, since you do not understand the distinction between normative and proscriptive ethics.

For example, fouling is not "cheating," because the rules of the game enable fouls to be ajudicated within said game. In other words, the mere fact that fouls are defined and penalties assessed by the rules transforms these into normative ethics, not proscriptive ethics.

Again, I will make it even more basic for your feeble understanding. The fact that the rules deal with fouls indicates that fouling is not strictly forbidden (proscribed). The rules are normative (descriptive of actual in-game events).

For the last time, are you stupid, or merely ignorant?

[Strike]

Spurs are a team of three all-stars and a bunch of below mediocre bums. I hate the Spurs. They are not even close to being the best team. They win because they're like that group of old guys you used to play against at the YMCA when you were a kid. You're better and younger and faster, but they know all the cheap tricks. They always beat you because they cheat.

Hmmm, I'm experiencing deja vu. Wierd. Wait, I know why.......

BECAUSE THIS IS THE SAME WEAK ASS TAKE READ IN ANOTHER ING THREAD!!!

You could possibly be the biggest ever to post here.

[DannyB]

You, my friend, are obviously quite stupid yourself, since you don't even know the difference between stupidity and ignorance. I dare say that if someone doesn't know the difference between "normative" and "proscriptive" ethics, that would be ignorance rather than stupidity as you said, since those are categories that somebody would only learn in an Ethics class or something. As it happens, I am familiar with ethics; but hey, nice try attempting to sound super-duper smart in your response.

In answer to your example, I've obviously failed to make it clear to you that I said the Spurs are BOTH cheaters and they foul. Fouls can be adjudicated within the game, as you said, but only when the refs can actually spot it. But the Spurs attempt to commit more fouls on any given possession than the officials can see or call. And they have mastered all of the stealth cheats, too. Hip-swivels, holding, moving screens, grabbing the jersey, hitting a guy when the refs turns his head, kicking an opponents ankles, sliding feet under shooters, grabbing a guy's arm and pulling him down on top of you to get a call (my favorite of Duncan's tricks), etc.

So I guess if you're gonna go lawyer and professor on me, and try to pin me down as an idiot because you don't like my use of the word "cheat", then go enjoy yourself.

[Hook Dem]

You, my friend, are obviously quite stupid yourself, since you don't even know the difference between stupidity and ignorance. I dare say that if someone doesn't know the difference between "normative" and "proscriptive" ethics, that would be ignorance rather than stupidity as you said, since those are categories that somebody would only learn in an Ethics class or something. As it happens, I am familiar with ethics; but hey, nice try attempting to sound super-duper smart in your response.

In answer to your example, I've obviously failed to make it clear to you that I said the Spurs are BOTH cheaters and they foul. Fouls can be adjudicated within the game, as you said, but only when the refs can actually spot it. But the Spurs attempt to commit more fouls on any given possession than the officials can see or call. And they have mastered all of the stealth cheats, too. Hip-swivels, holding, moving screens, grabbing the jersey, hitting a guy when the refs turns his head, kicking an opponents ankles, sliding feet under shooters, grabbing a guy's arm and pulling him down on top of you to get a call (my favorite of Duncan's tricks), etc.

So I guess if you're gonna go lawyer and professor on me, and try to pin me down as an idiot because you don't like my use of the word "cheat", then go enjoy yourself.

World's largest crybaby !

[DannyB]

World's largest crybaby !

Wow, I guess I stand corrected, huh? You really told me off. And it was so witty, too.

[sprrs]

Save it. You obviously have no response.

I'm seconding the "Jealous es" option.

[Walter Craparita]

You, my friend, are obviously quite stupid yourself, since you don't even know the difference between stupidity and ignorance. I dare say that if someone doesn't know the difference between "normative" and "proscriptive" ethics, that would be ignorance rather than stupidity as you said, since those are categories that somebody would only learn in an Ethics class or something. As it happens, I am familiar with ethics; but hey, nice try attempting to sound super-duper smart in your response.

In answer to your example, I've obviously failed to make it clear to you that I said the Spurs are BOTH cheaters and they foul. Fouls can be adjudicated within the game, as you said, but only when the refs can actually spot it. But the Spurs attempt to commit more fouls on any given possession than the officials can see or call. And they have mastered all of the stealth cheats, too. Hip-swivels, holding, moving screens, grabbing the jersey, hitting a guy when the refs turns his head, kicking an opponents ankles, sliding feet under shooters, grabbing a guy's arm and pulling him down on top of you to get a call (my favorite of Duncan's tricks), etc.

So I guess if you're gonna go lawyer and professor on me, and try to pin me down as an idiot because you don't like my use of the word "cheat", then go enjoy yourself.

Life's not fair man. Just wait till we introduce the horse collar into the game.

GAME OVER.

[tlongII]

The Spurs are evil.

[Strike]

The Spurs are evil.

Your bitterness is endearing.

[Reggie Miller]

If a person doesn't know certain technical language, that is ignorance.

If a person doesn't grasp intuitively the difference between fouling and cheating, that is stupidity.

Fouling is an activity addressed and penalized within the game context. Cheating is an activity that is considered apart from the game context.

[Hook Dem]

If a person doesn't know certain technical language, that is ignorance.

If a person doesn't grasp intuitively the difference between fouling and cheating, that is stupidity.

Fouling is an activity addressed and penalized within the game context. Cheating is an activity that is considered apart from the game context.

You've got it right but you may never convince that !

[703 Spurz]

Do you even know the rules of the game, or do you just assume that because the Spurs play dirty its the correct way? I'm a pussy because I think the game should be played by the rules? I'm a pussy because I think basketball should be basketball instead of football?

You're stone dumb if you think the way the Spurs play defense is totally kosher and within the rules. The Official NBA Rule Book describes personal fouls as:

"a. A player shall not hold, push, charge into, impede the progress of an opponent by extending a hand, forearm, leg or knee or by bending the body into a position that is not normal. Contact that results in the re-routing of an opponent is a foul which must be called immediately."

"b> Contact initiated by the defensive player guarding a player with the ball is not legal. This contact includes, but is not limited to, forearm, hands, or body check."

So does the above definition of personal fouls pretty much describe the entire Spurs defensive repetoire, or what? I've watched Bruce Bowen tick right down this list of fouls within 30 seconds of tip-off. Go watch football if you like full contact man-on-man love so much.

I'm sure that if the Spurs were as dirty as you're saying that the NBA wouldn't allow them to continuing playing that way. I mean , up until last year they were always considered soft and were the "good guys".

[sa_butta]

Anyone who gets owned by them.

[Soul_Patch]

Lol @ a new season of gaping vagina err phoenix suns fans....

[methionine]

Sun's fans crying over the Spurs physical play is quite hilarious. I would love to see the reaction if they met up with the 'bad boy' Pistons. They would be crying foul and cheaters before the first whistle.

It is not the Spur's fault the Suns are one dimensional. The reason the Spurs are so good is because they can play any style, or they can force their style on their opponent. AND they don't let themselves play the victim!!

[DannyB]

If a person doesn't know certain technical language, that is ignorance.

If a person doesn't grasp intuitively the difference between fouling and cheating, that is stupidity.

Fouling is an activity addressed and penalized within the game context. Cheating is an activity that is considered apart from the game context.

You know, you've really oversimplified the issue to seem clear cut, but it's really a bit more complicated than you seem want to believe. But rather than argue about what cons utes cheating or fouling, let me ask you one question:

In your opinion, if a defensive player flops to draw a foul, and they do call a foul on the offensive player, did the defensive player cheat? Or did the offensive player really foul, just because they called it a foul? Or should the defensive player be called for a foul (a rule change that many people in the league are pushing for)? See, its not so simple ... unless you're a simple-minded Spurs fan, I guess.

[dknights411]

Hey DannyB, It's a new ing season. GET OVER IT!!!

[DarkReign]

Spurs are a team of three all-stars and a bunch of below mediocre bums. I hate the Spurs. They are not even close to being the best team. They win because they're like that group of old guys you used to play against at the YMCA when you were a kid. You're better and younger and faster, but they know all the cheap tricks. They always beat you because they cheat.

Youre an idiot.

I dont like Manu as a player on the opposing team. To me, he travels every time he touches the ball, but he seems like a cool dude IRL.