So GSH, you are contending that the Amare blocked the shot (prior to the ball being above cylinder) and then Tim's momentum forced Amare's hand above the rim (and eventually touching the rim) and it became a goaltend?
I'm not being a smart ass; I'm just clarifying your point.
There used to be a lot more su ion that the Refs called games to make sure the playoff games were extended. Obviously, the league, TV and teams benefit if more games are played and all the extra game revenues are enhanced.
The Refs used to be paid by the game so they also had a financial interest in more games. I'm not sure if that is true today. Does anyone know?
All that being said, let's just go out and play like Spurs and win this series.
I'm touched...
I assume you are refurring to me. Silly me...should've known better, but for the of it I will repost and link to me first post.
LINK: http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost...5&postcount=80
Are you blind. I clearly conceded what you said.Sorry fella, but the contact with the ball was initiated outside of the cylinder.
Yes, it's true that Duncan's momentum carried Amare's wrist over the cylinder, but what starts out as a clean block, CANNOT end up as goal-tending.
If you want to make a federal case out of this, that's your right. But fact is, the play started out as a clean block and by NO known nor understood rule was changed to a goal-tending.
What if the ball had hit the backboard after initial contact, with Duncan still touching it, instead of going over the cylinder? Would you be calling "goaltend" because Amare was touching the ball after it had hit the backboard? Would you do so even after photo's showed you the initial block was 100% clean?
I posted what I posted because not even you posted the entire story. Your posts make it sound like the entire play goaltending. You never stated that the initial contact was clean...but rather ran around that FACT. Not even you are above the same "weasel" tactics to which I'm now accused.
I posted the pic to prove my point, while at the same time acknowledging part of yours. Yes, the block eventually occurred over the cyclinder, but it didn't start out that way, nor was it done so intentionally.
It was a clean play that turned questionable (at best), but frankly, I don't see it. He blocked the shot clean to start out, had his hand forced over the rim, then followed through with the finish of the block.
It was a great block. Pure and simple.
I'm betting Tim won't take to kindly to it and have a monster game tomorrow. In fact, I propose the vbookie event tomorrow be based on Tim's points or free throws.
Hahaha! Some fan why don't you go whine on your own board. That's all you guys did when you lost the first three!
When did Parker and Manu become MVPs?
Jesus people.....can we let it go?
You have got to be kidding me? He picked up two early ticky-tac calls that TD NEVER would have been called for early in the 1st quarter. He then proceeded to go to have only 6 free throw attempts. Seems to be that if Amare were getting special treatment he would have been at the line as much if not more than TD. Unless you believe he went uncontested in the paint, which would make more sense than the refs blowing it.
For God's sake, he was tied for the most fouls committed last night.
Please for the love of everything Holy, lock this thread
I love how people are upset that Duncan either didn't be more forceful with the dunk or do it two handed. Then I remember about all the stuff I watched about what a trooper he is to be playing with two bad ankles and where most players would be sitting out the entire game. Seems to me if he's that badly hurt (as ABC and ESPN have been portraying), nobody should be questioning his effort. But perhaps ABC and ESPN are just looking for drama...
The block was good people. Lets let amare keep his first real defensive play. Who knows when he'll get another one.
The picture shows the beginning of the play...That's a block. Just because Duncan carried Stoudamire's hand to the cylinder negates your argument....PERIOD!
Give the poster credit. In a court of law, you need evidence....that is photo that everybody has used to say it was a block. Quit being a damn fan for a moment and use a little basketball intelligence.
You're argument was viable but it's wrong.....CyberBob posted the correct rule and a poster gave you the evidence. Now what do you want? A damn e-mail from the league?
I'd like this point clarified as well GSH. Your previous answer was unsatisfactory.
I'd like GSH to get over the fact that he was wrong...He's worse than that guy in the Dodge commercial who can't admit he got the family lost in the desert and the Durango has a DVD NAVIGATION SYSTEM!!!
You are wrong on your point GSH. The rule was applied correctly. If the Spurs got over it, why the can't you?
Like so many have said, if Tim wasn't 11-23 from the line, this would be a moot point. 70% free throws put us in the win column.
Get over it dude.
Actually, the Spurs got A LOT of points off of offensive rebounds from Duncan's misses--one three point basket too, as I remember. I wish there was a stat recorded to see how many actually. I would venture to say it was at least 8--Suns suck on the defensive boards.
It was a clean block.
With the game on the line, did Duncan just assume that he would get a free dunk like that in Amare's face or what? That isn't a matter of physical ability, but decision making.
Duncan should have made a better decision. He could have easily layed it up off the backboard, or thrown a pump fake or something. You can't get a free dunk in Amare's face in the most important play of the game, in the most important game for the suns.
Amare's failed shot block displayed his great athleticism.
But I agree with Rick Von Braun and GSH completely.
That shot was 100% going in the basket if Amare had not bolstered his hand with the rim.
That, my friends, is goaltending.
GSH's picture is the smoking gun.
No, it just discounts that as long as legal contact is made prior to the ball entering the cylinder, it is a legal block. GSH keeps ignoring that.
I find nothing in the NBA rule book that supports your contention. The rule simply says if the defender is touching the ball while it is in the cylinder, the basket is good. If an offensive player touches the ball, it is a turnover, unless the player is dunking the ball.
Theoretically, if Duncan had slammed it with two hands and broken Amare's wrist in the process, it still would have been a goaltend.
But, alas, I think it may just be a technicality. It was technically a goaltend, but no official would ever call it that way. They enforce the rule according to the way you have described it.
No, as rule 11 states, it clearly supports by contention. It is being inferred upon that the rule ONLY applies to offensive players which is false. It applies to both.
Your contention is that all dunks cannot be blocked?
The block was clean and treated as such no matter how much anybody complains.
The rules for goaltending to do NOT say that it shall be considered goaltending when a clean block is made when on offensive player forces the hand of the defensive player to make contact with the rim.
GET OVER IT
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
